Jessica Díaz

Jessica Díaz, Jorge Pérez, Carolina Gallardo et al.

In recent years, the qualitative research on empirical software engineering that applies Grounded Theory is increasing. Grounded Theory (GT) is a technique for developing theory inductively e iteratively from qualitative data based on theoretical sampling, coding, constant comparison, memoing, and saturation, as main characteristics. Large or controversial GT studies may involve multiple researchers in collaborative coding, which requires a kind of rigor and consensus that an individual coder does not. Although many qualitative researchers reject quantitative measures in favor of other qualitative criteria, many others are committed to measuring consensus through Inter-Rater Reliability (IRR) and/or Inter-Rater Agreement (IRA) techniques to develop a shared understanding of the phenomenon being studied. However, there are no specific guidelines about how and when to apply IRR/IRA during the iterative process of GT, so researchers have been using ad hoc methods for years. This paper presents a process for systematically applying IRR/IRA in GT studies that meets the iterative nature of this qualitative research method, which is supported by a previous systematic literature review on applying IRR/RA in GT studies in software engineering. This process allows researchers to incrementally generate a theory while ensuring consensus on the constructs that support it and, thus, improving the rigor of qualitative research. This formalization helps researchers to apply IRR/IRA to GT studies when various raters are involved in coding. Measuring consensus among raters promotes communicability, transparency, reflexivity, replicability, and trustworthiness of the research.

Daniel López-Fernández, Jessica Díaz, Javier García et al.

Context: DevOps can be defined as a cultural movement to improve and accelerate the delivery of business value by making the collaboration between development and operations effective. Objective: This paper aims to help practitioners and researchers to better understand the organizational structure and characteristics of teams adopting DevOps. Method: We conducted an exploratory study by leveraging in depth, semi-structured interviews to relevant stakeholders of 31 multinational software-intensive companies, together with industrial workshops and observations at organizations' facilities that supported triangulation. We used Grounded Theory as qualitative research method to explore the structure and characteristics of teams, and statistical analysis to discover their implications in software delivery performance. Results: We describe a taxonomy of team structure patterns that shows emerging, stable and consolidated product teams that are classified according to six variables, such as collaboration frequency, product ownership sharing, autonomy, among others, as well as their implications on software delivery performance. These teams are often supported by horizontal teams (DevOps platform teams, Centers of Excellence, and chapters) that provide them with platform technical capability, mentoring and evangelization, and even temporarily facilitate human resources. Conclusion: This study aims to strengthen evidence and support practitioners in making better informed about organizational team structures by analyzing their main characteristics and implications in software delivery performance.

Jorge Pérez, Jessica Díaz, Javier Garcia-Martin et al.

Context: Systematic literature reviews (SLRs) rely on a rigorous and auditable methodology for minimizing biases and ensuring reliability. A common kind of bias arises when selecting studies using a set of inclusion/exclusion criteria. This bias can be decreased through dual revision, which makes the selection process more time-consuming and remains prone to generating bias depending on how each researcher interprets the inclusion/exclusion criteria. Objective: To reduce the bias and time spent in the study selection process, this paper presents a process for selecting studies based on the use of Cohen's Kappa statistic. We have defined an iterative process based on the use of this statistic during which the criteria are refined until obtain almost perfect agreement (k>0.8). At this point, the two researchers interpret the selection criteria in the same way, and thus, the bias is reduced. Starting from this agreement, dual review can be eliminated; consequently, the time spent is drastically shortened. Method: The feasibility of this iterative process for selecting studies is demonstrated through a tertiary study in the area of software engineering on works that were published from 2005 to 2018. Results: The time saved in the study selection process was 28% (for 152 studies) and if the number of studies is sufficiently large, the time saved tend asymptotically to 50%. Conclusions: Researchers and students may take advantage of this iterative process for selecting studies when conducting SLRs to reduce bias in the interpretation of inclusion and exclusion criteria. It is especially useful for research with few resources.

Jessica Díaz, Jorge E. Perez, Agustín Yague et al.

DevOps is a cultural movement that aims the collaboration of all the stakeholders involved in the development, deployment and operation of soft-ware to deliver a quality product or service in the shortest possible time. DevOps is relatively recent, and companies have developed their DevOps prac-tices largely from scratch. Our research aims to conduct an analysis on practic-ing DevOps in +20 software-intensive companies to provide patterns of DevOps practices and identify their benefits and barriers. This paper presents the preliminary analysis of an exploratory case study based on the interviews to relevant stakeholders of two (multinational) companies. The results show the benefits (software delivery performance) and barriers that these companies are dealing with, as well as DevOps team topology they approached during their DevOps transformation. This study aims to help practitioners and researchers to better understand DevOps transformations and the contexts where the practices worked. This, hopefully, will contribute to strengthening the evidence regarding DevOps and supporting practitioners in making better informed decisions about the return of investment when adopting DevOps.