Understanding Software Testers in the Automotive Industry - A Mixed-method Case Study

Tabata Pérez Rentería y Hernández, Nicola Marsden

2014

Abstract

This paper presents the results of a mixed-method study performed in the software department of a large automotive supplier operating in a global software engineering setting. The aim was to understand the social dimension and human aspects involved in software testing in an intercultural setting. Qualitative and quantitative analyses of testers' perception regarding their day-to-day activities and collaboration with other teams was conducted. The findings suggest the testing team is motivated but recurrently affected by external factors such as late input for testers, improperly or missing requirements, and unrealistic project planning. Testers identified human factors, such as openness and attitude of people, as relevant for effective collaboration. Combining the findings of the quantitative and the qualitative studies, our research suggests that the approach that testers take to their work can be characterized by a silo focus, i.e. rather than focusing on the overall goals their perception revolves around their subunit of the organization.

References

  1. Bernard, H. R. and Ryan, G. W., 2010. Analyzing qualitative data: Systematic approaches. Sage.
  2. Broy, M., 2006. Challenges in automotive software engineering. In ICSE'06 Proceedings of the 28th ACM International Conference on Software Engineering, 33- 42.
  3. Cohen, C. F., Birkin, S. J., Garfield, M. J., and Webb, H.W., 2004. Managing conflict in software testing. Communications of the ACM, 47(1), 76-81.
  4. Creswell, J. W. and Clark, V. L. P., 2007. Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Wiley Online.
  5. Deak, A., 2012. Understanding socio-technical factors influencing testers in software development organizations. In Computer Software and Applications Conference (COMPSAC), 2012 IEEE, 1-4.
  6. Deci, E. L. and Ryan, R. M., 2012. Motivation, Personality, and Development Within Embedded Social Contexts: Overview of self-determination theory. In R. M. Ryan (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Human Motivation. 85-109. New York: Oxford University Press.
  7. Denzin, N. K. and Lincoln, Y. S., 2005. The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research. Sage.
  8. Engström, E. and Runeson, P., 2010. A qualitative survey of regression testing practices. In M. Ali Babar, Matias Vierimaa and Markku Oivo (Eds.), Product-Focused Software Process Improvement (LNCS Vol. 6156), 3- 16. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.
  9. Fernández-Sanz, L., Villalba, M., Hilera, J., and Lacuesta, R., 2009. Factors with negative influence on software testing practice in Spain: A survey. In R. O'Connor, N. Baddoo, J. Cuadrago Gallego, R. Rejas Muslera, K. Smolander, and R. Messnarz (Eds.), Software Process Improvement (Vol. 42), 1-12. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.
  10. Garousi, V., and Zhi, J., 2013. A survey of software testing practices in Canada. Journal of Systems and Software, 86(5), 1354-1376.
  11. Guest, G., Bunce, A., and Johnson, L., 2006. How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field methods, 18(1), 59-82.
  12. Martin, D., Rooksby, J., Rouncefield, M., and Sommerville, I., 2008. Cooperative work in software testing. In Proceedings of the 2008 ACM international workshop on Cooperative and human aspects of software engineering, 93-96.
  13. McLeod, L. and MacDonell, S. G. 2011. Factors that affect software systems development project outcomes: A survey of research. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR), 43(4), 24.
  14. Oz, E. and Sosik, J. J. 2000. Why information systems projects are abandoned: a leadership and communication theory and exploratory study. Journal of Computer Information Systems, 41(1), 66-78.
  15. Patel, H., Pettitt, M., and Wilson, J. R. (2012). Factors of collaborative working: A framework for a collaboration model. Applied Ergonomics, 43(1), 1-26.
  16. Shah, H., Nersessian, N. J., Harrold, M. J., and Newstetter, W., 2012. Studying the influence of culture in global software engineering: thinking in terms of cultural models. In Proceedings of the ACM 4th International Conference on Intercultural Collaboration, 77-86.
  17. Shah, H. and Harrold, M. J., 2013. Culture and testing: What is the relationship? In ICGSE'13, Proceedings of the IEEE 8th International Conference on Global Software Engineering, 51-60.
  18. Sy, T. and D'Annunzio, L., 2005. Challenges and strategies of matrix organizations. Human Resource Planning, 28-39.
  19. Taipale, O. and Smolander, K., 2006. Improving software testing by observing practice. In Proceedings of the 2006 ACM/IEEE International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering, 262-271.
  20. Whittaker, J. A., (2000). What is software testing? and why is it so hard? Software, IEEE, 17(1),70-79.
  21. Zhang, X., Dhaliwal, J., and Gillenson, M. L., 2010. Organizing software testing for improved quality and satisfaction. Journal of Information Technology Management, 21(4),1-12.
  22. 2. What can you say about the training you received? Was this training useful on your day to day job?
  23. 3. What have you learned from other projects that in a current or future you wish to avoid and how?
  24. 4. What are the most recurrent problems that the testing team faces (think of internal factors within your own testing team but also consider other teams)
  25. 5. How would you describe the relationship between testers and other teams?
  26. 6. How do you perceive the collaboration?
  27. 7. How often do you interact or communicate with them?
  28. 8. How do you view and feel about your job as a Tester (self-image, skills, motivation, interest)?
  29. 9. How do you see testing as a profession?
  30. 10. How much responsibility and power do you have regarding the tests you run?
  31. 11. How do managers or seniors relate to your team?
  32. 12. What can you say about adherence to software processes models (V-Model, SPICE)?
Download


Paper Citation


in Harvard Style

Pérez Rentería y Hernández T. and Marsden N. (2014). Understanding Software Testers in the Automotive Industry - A Mixed-method Case Study . In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Software Engineering and Applications - Volume 1: ICSOFT-EA, (ICSOFT 2014) ISBN 978-989-758-036-9, pages 305-314. DOI: 10.5220/0004992503050314


in Bibtex Style

@conference{icsoft-ea14,
author={Tabata Pérez Rentería y Hernández and Nicola Marsden},
title={Understanding Software Testers in the Automotive Industry - A Mixed-method Case Study},
booktitle={Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Software Engineering and Applications - Volume 1: ICSOFT-EA, (ICSOFT 2014)},
year={2014},
pages={305-314},
publisher={SciTePress},
organization={INSTICC},
doi={10.5220/0004992503050314},
isbn={978-989-758-036-9},
}


in EndNote Style

TY - CONF
JO - Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Software Engineering and Applications - Volume 1: ICSOFT-EA, (ICSOFT 2014)
TI - Understanding Software Testers in the Automotive Industry - A Mixed-method Case Study
SN - 978-989-758-036-9
AU - Pérez Rentería y Hernández T.
AU - Marsden N.
PY - 2014
SP - 305
EP - 314
DO - 10.5220/0004992503050314