web analytics
Contact me 
Orange D inside a circle

Research details

Evidence of the low adoption of Software Inspection

"Evidence of the low software inspection adoption"

Knowledge - Products - Facts

Aug, 2012

Quoted text

Reference
(inside the source document)

Source document
Inspection repeatedly has been demonstrated to yield up to a 10- to-1 return on investment...depressingly few practitioners know about the 30-year-old tech- nique of software inspection. Wiegers, K. (2006). The more things change. Better Software, 8(1), 30-34. IEEE. Ebert, C., Stewart, R., & Priven, L. (2008). How to Avoid Software Inspection Failure and Achieve Ongoing Benefits. CrossTalk: The Journal for Defense Software Engineering, 23-27.
...inspections never succeeded as well as expected, primarily because these organizations did not learn how to make inspections both effective and low cost. Radice, Ron. High Quality Low Cost Software Inspections. Andover, MA:Paradoxicon Publishing, 200 Ebert, C., Stewart, R., & Priven, L. (2008). How to Avoid Software Inspection Failure and Achieve Ongoing Benefits. CrossTalk: The Journal for Defense Software Engineering, 23-27.
I continue to be amazed at the number of software development organizations that do not use this powerful method [inspections] to improve quality and productivity. Weller, Ed. “Calculating the Economics of Inspections." StickyMinds Jan. 2002 Ebert, C., Stewart, R., & Priven, L. (2008). How to Avoid Software Inspection Failure and Achieve Ongoing Benefits. CrossTalk: The Journal for Defense Software Engineering, 23-27.
...the inspection process has not gained widespread usage according to the Software Engineering Institute. D. O'Neill, National software quality experiment: results 1992–1996, Proceedings of QualityWeek Europe Conference, Brussels, 1997, pp. 1–25. Mishra, D., & Mishra, A. (2009). Simplified software inspection process in compliance with international standards. Computer Standards & Interfaces, 31(4), 763-771. Elsevier B.V. doi: 10.1016/j.csi.2008.09.018.
many software companies perform reviews they do it unsystematically and little knowledge about software inspection is used. Ciolkowski, M., Laitenberger, O., Biffl, S., “Software Reviews: The State of the Practice", IEEE Software 20 (6): 46-51, 2003. Mishra, D., & Mishra, A. (2009). Simplified software inspection process in compliance with international standards. Computer Standards & Interfaces, 31(4), 763-771. Elsevier B.V. doi: 10.1016/j.csi.2008.09.018.
...it is also well known that there is a huge gap between this knowledge and the real state of practice. Kollanus, S. (2009). Experiences from using ICMM in inspection process assessment. Software Quality Journal, 17(2), 177-187. doi: 10.1007/s11219-008-9067-2.
Ciolkowski et al. (2003) found that about 40% of the respondents to their survey regularly review requirements, which is the most typical document type to review. Ciolkowski, M., Laitenberger, O., & Biffl, S. (2003). Software reviews, the state of the practice. IEEE Software, 20(6), 46–51. Kollanus, S. (2009). Experiences from using ICMM in inspection process assessment. Software Quality Journal, 17(2), 177-187. doi: 10.1007/s11219-008-9067-2.
Johnson (1998) reported that 80% of the respondents in his small survey used inspection irregularly or not at all. Johnson, P. (1998). Reengineering inspection. Communications of the ACM, 41(2), 49–52. Kollanus, S. (2009). Experiences from using ICMM in inspection process assessment. Software Quality Journal, 17(2), 177-187. doi: 10.1007/s11219-008-9067-2.
Despite the effort for improving inspections, the relevant problem seems to be the wide adoption of inspections spite the overwhelming evidences of their benefits. C. Denger, and F. Shull. A Practical Approach for Quality- Driven Inspections. In Software, IEEE, vol. 24, no. 2, 2007. Ferreira, A. L., Machado, R. J., Costa, L., & Paulk, M. C. (2010). An Apporach to Improving Software Inspections Performance. Conference On Software Maintenance.
Despite the effort for improving inspections, the relevant problem seems to be the wide adoption of inspections spite the overwhelming evidences of their benefits. J. Remillard. Source code review systems. In Software, IEEE, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 74 - 77, Jan 1, 2005. Ferreira, A. L., Machado, R. J., Costa, L., & Paulk, M. C. (2010). An Apporach to Improving Software Inspections Performance. Conference On Software Maintenance.
According to a survey, about 70 percent of the respondents from software companies produce requirements and design documents [7]. Of those who produce requirements and design documents, fewer than half perform document reviews. Komssi, M., Kauppinen, M., Pyhajarvi, M., Talvio, J., & Mannisto, T. (2010). Persuading Software Development Teams to Document Inspections: Success Factors and Challenges in Practice. 2010 18th IEEE International Requirements Engineering Conference, 283-288. Ieee. doi: 10.1109/RE.2010.40.
inspections have problems Denger, C., & Shull, F. (2007). A Practical Approach for Quality-Driven Inspections. IEEE Software, 24(2), 79-86. doi:10.1109/MS.2007.31
...they cut corners on the process at every opportunity. Denger, C., & Shull, F. (2007). A Practical Approach for Quality-Driven Inspections. IEEE Software, 24(2), 79-86. doi:10.1109/MS.2007.31
...results of a survey [3] show that although many software companies perform reviews they do it unsystematically and little knowledge about software inspections is used. Ciolkowski, M., Laitenberger, O., Biffl, S., “Software Reviews: The State of the Practice", IEEE Software 20 (6): 46-51, 2003. Kalinowski, M., & Travassos, G. H. (2007). ISPIS: From Conception towards Industry Readiness. XXVI International Conference of the Chilean Society of Computer Science (SCCC'07), 132-141. Ieee. doi:10.1109/SCCC.2007.9