An Analysis of Gamification Elements for a Solving Proposal of

Software Process Improvement Problems

Elziane Monteiro Soares

and Sandro Ronaldo Bezerra Oliveira

Graduate Program in Computer Sciense, Institute of Exact and Natural Sciences,

Federal University of Pará, Belém, Pará, Brazil

Keywords: Software Process Improvement, Gamification, Problems and Difficulties.

Abstract: As seen in the specialized literature, during the implementations of a Software Process Improvement (SPI)

program, many cases of failure occur, caused on a recurring basis by problems and difficulties in SPI. In

view of this, the need to adopt strategies and approaches to support the implementation of such initiatives is

noticeable. Thus, the use of gamification in the context addressed can allow us to define mechanisms that

drive people's motivation and commitment to the development of tasks in order to stimulate and accelerate

the acceptance of an SPI initiative. In this context, this work aims to present strategies for using elements of

gamification, present in the Octalysis Framework, regarding the treatment of the problems and difficulties

evidenced. The strategies developed must be seen as possible solutions to be used by organizations to assist

them when they encounter situations, in which SPI problems occur.

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3408-8640

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8929-5145

1 INTRODUCTION

Software process improvement (SPI) is seen as the

fundamental approach to improving software

products in software development organizations

(Shih and Huang, 2010), being used to improve the

quality and reliability of the software, employee and

customer satisfaction and return on investment,

among other factors (Gibson et al., 2006; Travassos

and Kalinowski, 2009).

For García et al. (2012), the software sector is

constantly changing, as innovative technologies are

continually developed, new customers and demands

arise, competitors enter to compete for market space.

With this, the authors point out that an important

factor to guarantee the survival of software

organizations is the ability to implement

improvements in their processes, to meet the

growing needs of software.

In this context, studies report cases of failure in

improvement initiatives and basically point out a set

of critical issues that characterize the organizational

environment in which the initiatives are conducted.

Among the existing factors are issues related to

individuals' attitudes, for example, lack of

motivation and resistance to change by members of

organizations and lack of support and commitment

from top management in the improvement initiative

(Baddoo and Hall, 2002; Niazi et al., 2006).

In this sense, it is important that every SPI

initiative considers methods and techniques in the

proposed processes to facilitate implementation and,

thus, minimize the negative effects perceived by

those involved in the process (Merriam, 2009).

Given the above, it is noticeable the need to use

mechanisms to treat or minimize the problems or

difficulties pointed out in the SPI implementations.

Thus, a strategy that can help in this problem, consists

in the use of elements of gamification, since it

encompasses the use of mechanisms and systematic

games to solve problems and to motivate and engage

a certain audience (Hamari, Koivisto, Sarsa, 2014).

Ribeiro (2018) states that gamification emerges

as an emerging phenomenon and with great potential

for application in many fields of human activity,

since the methodology of games is quite popular,

effective in solving problems and is accepted by

current generations that grew up with this type of

entertainment, that is, because they have been used

294

Soares, E. and Oliveira, S.

An Analysis of Gamiﬁcation Elements for a Solving Proposal of Software Process Improvement Problems.

DOI: 10.5220/0010584702940301

In Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Software Technologies (ICSOFT 2021), pages 294-301

ISBN: 978-989-758-523-4

by people for a long time as a form of entertainment,

it becomes easier to accept the use of game

mechanics applying to a context outside of a virtual

game, to engage people to perform day-to-day

processes in different areas of knowledge.

For Hamari and Koivisto (2015), gamification in

an organizational environment promotes intrinsic

changes that cause the individual to participate in the

application of the method. Therefore, over and

above any reward offered in this type of method,

gamification seeks to value the personal factor, be it

in the relationship with the team, as well as the

valuation of the individual himself in engaging him

to achieve his goals.

Some studies were found in the literature

regarding the problems of Systematic Review of the

Literature (SRL) and the use of Gamification, which

highlights the importance of applying this study.

Herranz et al. (2013) present an approach to

change management in SPI initiatives, based on the

use of gamification techniques to support SPI

processes. The authors highlight change management

as one of the important areas to be controlled. In this

way, they direct greater care to managers, since their

actions are essential in improving the software

process and their commitment and support are

essential to obtain the benefits of a software process.

However, the authors present a gamified approach

more focused on top management, without

addressing other gaps that are perceived during the

implementation of the improvement.

In the work of Herranz et al. (2014) a

gamification structure was defined, oriented to the

needs of the organization and the groups of software

professionals involved in an SPI initiative. To

establish an adequate gamification structure, the

authors emphasized the need to adapt the

motivational factors of each of the professional

software groups. Although the authors built a

gamified structure to assist different groups of

professionals, the approach did not specify elements

that should be used as possible solutions to the

problems that professionals would face, since the

structure to be used depends primarily on the initial

study of the people who will be involved

improvement initiative.

The study by Herranz et al. (2018) aimed to

bridge the gap between gamification in SPI and

empirical evidence by presenting the implementation

of the SPI gamification structure in a real

environment. The structure validated in the authors'

previous work was adjusted and implemented in a

small Spanish software development organization, in

a controlled experiment, with a focus on a team

competition (experimental group) to validate its

effectiveness. The results of the implementation

show that the application of the structure does not

increase the motivation of the staff in the tasks of

SPI, although it contributes to improve their

performance. Therefore, the authors point out that

the results obtained are a consequence of the use of

the competitive mechanics of the game, which may

have caused tension among the participants and this

fact can reduce motivation and fun.

As can be seen, none of the works presented

addresses a strategy with elements of gamification

directed to each problem of SPI, as they address the

problem with the mechanism of gamification in a

more general way to involve the participants.

Another point perceived in the works is the absence

of a more in-depth description of the mechanics and

gamification components that were used, which can

make it difficult to replicate the proposal and

negatively impact the results of applying the

structure in other organizations.

In this context, the present work differs from the

others approached in that it presents as a goal a

strategy for the use of gamified elements, present in

the Octalysis Framework (Chou, 2016), being an

author of great importance in the context of

gamification, where the greatest contribution that the

methodology can offer to society is the opposition to

the traditional model of Design Focused on

Functionality for Design Focused on the Human

Aspect (Vianna et al., 2013).

Thus, in this work, the elements of the

framework are used in relation to SPI problems,

interrelating the description of use of each element

to the context of the problems.

In addition to this introductory section, this paper

is structured as follows: Section 2 presents the

research methodology, Section 3 presents the

problems found in the SRL, Section 4 presents the

relationship of the problems with the gamification

elements, Section 5 presents the proposal to use the

gamification elements to solve the problems, Section

6 presents an evaluative discussion on the

information described in this paper, and Section 7

presents the conclusions and future work.

2 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

The methodology carried out in this work comprises

the steps described below.

Initially, the “Identifying SPI problems” step was

carried out, where the problems and difficulties were

An Analysis of Gamiﬁcation Elements for a Solving Proposal of Software Process Improvement Problems

295

identified from analyzes carried out on the results

obtained in the literature review and in the

application of a survey, evidenced in the work of

Soares and Oliveira (2020a).

Subsequently, the "Identifying the Gamification

Elements " step was developed, where the elements

of gamification that could be used to minimize or

treat each SPI problem found in the previous step

were identified and correlated (Soares and Oliveira,

2020b).

Thus, the identification of the elements made it

possible to carry out the “Elaborating Dynamics of

Use of the Gamification Elements” step, where

targeted solutions for the use of the elements to

address the problems were developed.

With the completion of the previous step, there

was a need to perform the “Performing Peer

Review” step, in which there was a more careful

analysis and review by an expert on the strategies

developed and the use of the predefined gamified

elements.

The future steps of this research involve the

definition of a detailed dynamic that addresses how

the practical application of gamified elements should

occur in relation to the SPI problems. From this

definition, there will be the application of the

dynamics developed in a real scenario

(organizational context), by means of case study, in

order to collect and analyze data in relation to

performance and possible problems that may occur

with its application.

3 SPI PROBLEMS

The SPI problems, shown in Table 1, were identified

in the work of Soares and Oliveira (2020a), who

carried out a survey of the problems from two

perspectives: analyzes carried out in the literature

and another based on analysis of results obtained

with the application of a survey.

In total, twenty problems were identified, eight

of which were evidenced with the analysis in the

literature and twelve of the survey application. The

literature review allowed identifying problems and

difficulties existing in the literature that occur during

the implementation of SPI. With the application of

the survey, it was possible to obtain information on

the impact (occurrence) that the problems detected

in the review caused, in the perception of the

participants, according to their experience in SPI,

and also contributed to obtain new existing problems

according to reports from the participants.

4 RELATION OF PROBLEMS

WITH THE ELEMENTS

It is noteworthy that in (Soares and Oliveira, 2020b)

there were activities focused on the elaboration of

the mapping of gamification elements, present in the

Octalysis Framework of Chou (2016), eligible to

meet the SPI problems identified in the literature and

in the survey. It is important to emphasize that this

framework addresses a broad context of application

the gamification concepts, while in the work carried

out it was correlated to the problems faced in the SPI

initiatives. In addition, forms of treatment (possible

solutions) were identified in the literature for such

problems and correlated with established

gamification elements, in order to support the

application of the element in the SPI context.

Table 1: Problems identified in the literature and reported

in the survey.

Research

Perspective

Problems Identified

Review of

the

Literature

anizational culture chan

Lack of Knowledge in Software

Engineering

Lack of understanding of the

responsibilities of those involved

Lack of su

ort tools

Lack of / little commitment from senior

management

Little su

ort from em

ees

Turnove

of staff involve

Lack of / little qualified human

resources

Survey

Focus on certification instead of

focusing on improvement

Lack of government incentive

Reduction in consulting hours as a way

to reduce costs

Lack of knowledge of the importance of

uali

standards b

the market

Lack of / little projects to validate an

improvement progra

Bureaucrac

in im

rovement

rams

Continuity of team engagement in the

defined process

Lack of / little knowledge of the quality

standards b

ees

Different interpretations in relation to

the

ualit

standards

Lack of consistent project portfolio

lanning

Lack of consistent planning by the

organization's senior management

Lack of flexibility of quality standards

ICSOFT 2021 - 16th International Conference on Software Technologies

296

Table 2 shows the mapping performed, where for

each problem one or more elements to be used were

identified.

It is also important to mention that the mapping

carried out sought justifications in the literature, in

order to verify whether the solutions proposed in the

literature addressed in a gamified way or raised

arguments that resembled some game element

prescribed in the Octalysis Framework. Thus, the

mapping of the gamification element to the SPI

problem was based on two perspectives: i)

justification of solutions based on the Octalysis

Framework and in ii) justifications for solutions

evidenced in literature.

The results obtained with the correlation

between element and problem made it possible to

describe strategies of solutions directed to the

problems, which will be described in the following

section.

Table 2: Mapping problems to gamification elements.

SPI Problems Gamifcation Elements

Organizational culture

change

- Narrative

- Free Lunch

- Rockstar effect

- Building from scratch

- On-boarding / Step-by-

Step Tutorials

- Appointment Dynamics

- Brilliant Choice

Lack of Knowledge in

Software Engineering

- Progress Bars

- On-boarding / Step-by-

Step Tutorials

- Brilliant Choice

Lack of understanding of

the responsibilities of

those involved people

- Narrative

- On-boarding / Step-by-

Step Tutorials

- Brilliant Choi

Lack of support tools - Building from scratch

- On-boarding / Step-by-

Step Tutorials

- Brilliant Choice

Lack of / little

commitment from senior

management

- Narrative

- On-boarding / Step-by-

Step Tutorials

Little support from

employees

- Narrative

- Free Lunch

- Badges / Achievements

- Mentoring

Turnover of staff

involved

- Free Lunch

- Rockstar effect

- On-boarding / Step-by-

Step Tutorials

- List of Rewards / Lotter

Lack of / little qualified

human resources

- Progress Bars

- On-boarding / Step-by-

Ste

Tutorials

SPI Problems Gamifcation Elements

- Brilliant Choice

Focus on certification

instead of focusing on

improvement

- Narrative

- Building from scratch

Lack of government

incentive

- Elitism

Reduction in consulting

hours as a way to reduce

costs

- Narrative

Lack of knowledge of the

importance of qualiy

standards b

the market

- Elitism

Lack of / little projects to

validate an improvement

- On-boarding / Step-by-

Step Tutorials

Bureaucracy in

improvement programs

- Narrative

- Building from scratch

- On-boarding / Step-by-

Step Tutorials

- Mystery Boxes / Random

Rewards

Continuity of team

engagement in the

defined

rocess

- On-boarding / Step-by-

Step Tutorials

- A

ointment D

namics

Lack of / little

knowledge of the quality

standards by employees

- Narrative

- On-boarding / Step-by-

Step Tutorials

- Brilliant Choice

Different interpretations

in relation to the quality

standards

- Narrative

- On-boarding / Step-by-

Ste

Tutorials

Lack of consistent

roject portfolio planning

- On-boarding / Step-by-

Step Tutorials

Lack of consistent

planning by the

organization's senior

management

- Building from scratch

- On-boarding / Step-by-

Step Tutorials

Lack of flexibility of

ualit

standards

- Narrative

5 PROPOSAL FOR THE USE OF

GAMIFICATION ELEMENTS

TO SOLVE SPI PROBLEMS

In order to guarantee the proposed use of this work,

this section discusses the strategies for applying the

gamification elements. These strategies should be

seen as possible solutions to be used by

organizations to assist them when they encounter

situations, in which SPI problems occur.

The occurrence of these problems in

organizations is due to the lack of an effective

strategy to successfully implement the quality

standards and models. Thus, it is important to

highlight that the software process improvement

An Analysis of Gamiﬁcation Elements for a Solving Proposal of Software Process Improvement Problems

297

initiatives cause changes to be effectively

established in the development process; therefore,

the implantation rarely occurs spontaneously (Niazi,

2009).

Therefore, it is important to maintain the

engagement and motivation of those involved

people. For Vianna et al. (2013) the level of

engagement of the individual in the scenario is

influenced by the degree of dedication of the

individual to the designated tasks. This dedication,

in turn, can be achieved with the proposed solutions

with the elements of gamification as it is applied to

stimulate the individual's behavior.

It should also be noted that the gamified

elements were related to the problems that occur in

SPI implementations, with the development of

strategies directed to use in the organization, in order

to minimize the occurrence of these problems.

Therefore, these strategies were not developed to be

applied to a specific improvement model ou

standard, and it is not possible in the proposal to

consider a process area or an activity directed to the

application, since the purpose of the application is

precisely to be applicable to any model or standard,

favoring a substantive dynamic for organizations.

In view of the above, the following subsection

will describe how the elements of gamification

should be applied.

5.1 Narrative

The application of this element should involve

explaining the purpose of implementing the

improvement process, including the needs, reasons

and expected results. As well as, to present to

collaborators the dynamic way that the process must

be applied, involving all activities and approaches to

the execution of tasks and communication.

It is also important to involve the employee in a

playful context, with different profile assignments

than those they exercise in the initiatives, such as the

name of heroes, characters from films or cartoons,

but with the evidence of their due responsibilities,

according to the scenario used by the organization.

5.2 Building from Scratch

The application of this element requires the

involvement of employees in a more active way, in

the structuring of the process in the organization,

since they must contribute with suggestions and

opinions in relation to what will be developed to

provide a collaborative environment of creation and

participation in the improvement process.

5.3 On-boarding / Step-by-Step

Tutorials

The application takes place in the assignments,

guidelines and information provided to those

involved people, by a person whose competence is

to be an expert in the area of SPI and / or to be an

expert in the area of Gamification, in order to

answer questions and promote knowledge,

commitment and support the actions and strategies

created to achieve a better performance in its

activities.

5.4 Progress Bars

This element must be applied when creating a Track

of actions for the learning of those involved people,

and from this must be given to those involved people

a way of visualizing their progress according to the

fulfillment of the actions established for their

training.

5.5 Free Lunch

The application of this element must occur with the

provision of rewards to employees related to the

delivery of demands that are their responsibility in

the SPI journey.

5.6 Rockstar Effect

This element is applied with the creation of a context

of recognition of the work performed to the

employee from the perspective of the team itself

(internal perspective), based on the dynamics of

delivering something symbolic of recognition to

highlight the importance of the employee in the

improvement initiative.

5.7 Brilliant Choice

This element is applied when it is possible for

employees to request faster and more targeted

guidance from another employee when they

experience difficulties in carrying out their activities

/ demands, since if they were to resort to training

cases, it would be more time consuming and costly.

5.8 Elitism

It should be applied to promote strategies, internally

and externally, of the benefits of adopting an

improvement program in the organization, clarifying

to those involved people the importance of

ICSOFT 2021 - 16th International Conference on Software Technologies

298

contributing and participating in this

implementation, which provides the feeling of pride

in acting in the context of SPI and also from an

external perspective, the disclosure of benefits can

lead to a competitive advantage in the market by the

organization.

5.9 Badges / Achievements

The application of this element is conditioned to the

application of a strategy similar to that promoted

with the loyalty card, where each completed action

must have a series of rewards / awards to employees

who effectively fulfill the deliveries necessary for

the success of the improvement program.

This strategy should also be similar to a scoring

system, where the more the person completes his

demands, the more points he accumulates to have his

rewards / prizes.

5.10 List of Rewards / Lottery

It is applied with the availability of rewards

delivered to those involved when they complete their

demands, using a digital roulette wheel, where the

reward is linked to luck, a factor that is impossible to

control. So the employee spins the roulette wheel

with the possible rewards and waits to find out what

reward he got.

5.11 Mystery Boxes / Random Rewards

The use of this element must be provided to the

employee when he manages to maintain an excellent

performance in the deliveries established in relation

to his demands, the permanence in this state must

guarantee a bonus. This bonus is a secret reward and

without a predetermined time.

5.12 Appointment Dynamics

The use of this element occurs when employees are

established to use a tool, for example, Trello,

Taskboard, Habitica, Slack, among others, to help

them to remember in a recurring way what must be

developed of actions to achieve the expected results,

as well as monitoring and management of these

actions.

6 EVALUATIVE DISCUSSION

In the solutions proposed with the gamification

elements, a more careful analysis took place by an

expert in the area of software engineering, in the

strategies developed and the use of the predefined

gamified elements to the SPI problems. This

analysis took place with the peer review technique.

Peer review can be implemented with a simple

review, where only one person reviews the work

product, provided that: the reviewer is not the author

of the document itself, who has knowledge of the

document to review its content, and that objective

criteria be used for the review (SOFTEX, 2016).

It is emphasized that the definitions of the

strategies were constantly reviewed and evaluated

by an expert with the objective of achieving /

guaranteeing the expected purpose of applying the

element in the context of gamification. For

Deterding and Dixon (2016), gamification means

using elements of game design in other contexts not

related to games in order to engage people to

achieve a goal. In this study, the application context

is the SPI initiatives.

Thus, the expert's considerations were based on

the Octalysis Framework, which has its structure

organized in eight Core Drivers and their

corresponding correlated game elements. Core

Drivers represent basic and fundamental factors in

games that provide the motivation to perform a

variety of activities and discussions. In addition,

depending on the game strategy and scenario used,

there are the elements or techniques to engage the

participants, which in this case are the game

elements, which are factors capable of boosting the

participant differently, where some strategies

stimulate the from inspiration and empowerment and

others from obsession and manipulation (Chou,

2016).

In Core Drive 1 (Epic Meaning & Calling), the

use of the elements Narrative, Free lunch, Elitism,

substantiates what was expected by this drive, as it

makes the involved person believes that he is

participating or contributing with something bigger,

that is, of great relevance, which generates to the

involved feelings of recognition, of being a

fundamental person to execute the necessary actions.

In Core Drive 2 (Development &

Accomplishment) the use of the elements Rockstar

effect, Progress bars, Badges / achievements,

confirms the development of internal motivation in

those involved people in relation to progressions, in

the development of skills, in the achievement of

mastery and, eventually, in overcoming challenges,

with the representation of points, badges and

leaderboards, and thus guaranteeing what is

expected in this core drive.

An Analysis of Gamiﬁcation Elements for a Solving Proposal of Software Process Improvement Problems

299

From the Core Drive 4 (Ownership &

Possession), only the Building from scratch was

used, this was justified by providing those involved

people with the motivation to own something and,

consequently, contribute to improvements, because

when the person feels ownership over something,

they wants to improve what you have.

In Core Drive 5 (Social Influence &

Relatedness), application of the On-boarding / step-

by-step tutorials element supports what was

expected by this core drive, as it involves activities

inspired by what other people think, do or say. In

other words, it incorporates all the social elements

that motivate people, which include guidelines,

social acceptance, social feedback and

companionship.

As for Core Drive 6 (Scarcity & Impatience), the

Appointment dynamics element was used, which

confirms what is expected by this core drive, as it is

a form of impulse that motivates to want, and directs

the search for results, in contexts that have great

difficulties.

From the last Core Drive 7 (Unpredictability &

Curiosity) the elements used were: Brilliant choice,

List of rewards / lottery and Mystery boxes /

Random Rewards. These elements guarantee what is

expected by this drive, as it is the drive of constant

involvement, because when something does not fit

into its regular pattern recognition cycles, its brain

kicks in and pays attention to the unexpected.

Therefore, it is also the main force behind our

affection for experiences that are uncertain and

involve chance.

It should also be noted that only the Drivers and

elements that were used in the strategies developed

in the context of SPI were justified, in terms of the

expected result, in this work.

7 CONCLUSION

For Montoni (2010), the success in implementing

Software Process Improvement depends

fundamentally on strategies and approaches adopted

to support the execution of such initiatives. Thus, the

absence or inadequacy of these approaches is one of

the most common reasons for the failure of

improvement initiatives.

Although there are studies that address the

problems evidenced in the improvement programs,

few studies still seek to identify practices in order to

mitigate the negative effects of critical factors

(Mendes et al., 2007).

In this context, this work aimed to present

strategies for using elements of gamification, present

in the Octalysis Framework by Chou (2016). These

strategies should be seen as possible solutions to be

used by organizations to assist them when they

encounter situations, in which SPI problems occur.

The use of gamification is justified because it

aims to transform activities and make them more

attractive and fun by the use of techniques and

elements of games, so as to increase people's

motivation when performing tasks (Menezes et al.,

2016). Thus, it is expected that with the use of the

elements of gamification the problems will be

treated or minimized in an appropriate, efficient and

effective way, where those involved people can

obtain a great performance by interacting in a

motivated and engaged way in the SPI. According to

Muzeka and Marquardt (2017), with gamification

the individual has the possibility to get into tasks and

solve problems and achieve goals.

In view of the above, it is intended as future

work to: a) describe in a structured and playful way,

a dynamics of application of the elements of

gamification in a context of SPI, with the necessary

specifications of procedures and necessary

resources, adequate for the treatment of problems or

recurring difficulties in implementing

improvements, and b) apply the gamified solutions

in a real scenario, aiming to collect and analyze data

in relation to performance and possible problems

that may occur with its application.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors would like to thank the Coordination for

the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel

(CAPES) in Brazil for the financial support for

granting an institutional PhD scholarship to PPGCC

(Graduate Program in Computer Science) / UFPA

(Federal University of Pará. This work belongs to

the SPIDER (Software Process Improvement:

DEvelopment and Research) / UFPA project

(http://www.spider.ufpa.br).

REFERENCES

Baddoo, N., Hall, T. (2002). Motivators of Software

Process Improvement: an analysis of practitioners’

views. The Journal of Systems and Software, 62, 2.

Chou, Y. (2016). Actionable Gamification - Beyond

Points, Badges, and Leaderboards. Octalysis Media.

ICSOFT 2021 - 16th International Conference on Software Technologies

300

Deterding, S., Dixon, D. (2016). From game design

elements to gamefulness: Defining "gamification".

15th MindTrek Conference, ACM.

García, I., Pacheco, C., Mendoza, E., Calvo-Manzano, J.

A., Cuevas, G., San Feliu, T. (2012). Managing the

software process with a software process improvement

tool in a small enterprise. Journal of Software:

Evolution and Process. 24, 5, 481–491.

Gibson, D. L., Goldenson, D. R., Kost, K., (2006).

Performance Results of CMMI-Based Process

Improvement, CMU/SEI-2006-TR-004, Software

Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon.

Hamari, J., Koivisto, J., Sarsa, H. (2014). Does

Gamification Work? – A Literature Review of

Empirical Studies on Gamification. In proceedings of

the 47th HICSS, Hawaii, USA.

Hamari, J., Koivisto, J. (2015). Why do people use

gamification services? International Journal of

Information Management. 35. 419–431.

Herranz, E., Colomo-Palacios, R., de Amescua Seco, A.

(2013). Towards a New Approach to Supporting Top

Managers in SPI Organizational Change Management.

In Proceedings of CENTERIS / ProjMAN 2013.

Procedia Technology, Volume 9.

Herranz, E., Colomo-Palacios, R., de Amescua-Seco, A.,

Yilmaz, M. (2014). Gamification as a disruptive factor

in software process improvement initiatives. Journal

of Universal Computer Science, 20(6), 885–906.

Herranz, E., Guzman, J., de Amescua-Seco, A., Larrucea,

X. (2018). Gamification for software process

improvement: A practical approach. IET Software, vol.

13, no. 2, pp. 112–121.

Mendes, F. F., Oliveira, J. L., Fernandes, P. G., Souza, A.

S. (2007). Análise de Riscos na Implantação de

Melhorias de Processos de Software. In: ProQualiti-

Qualidade na Produção de Software, v. 3, nro. 3.

Menezes, C. C. N., de Oliveira, L. B. (2016).

Gamificação: uma revisão sistemática. ENFOPE /

FOPIE, v. 9, n. 1.

Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative Research: a Guide to

Design and Implementation. San Francisco, CA:

Jossey-Bass.

Montoni, M. (2010). Uma investigação sobre os fatores

críticos de sucesso em iniciativas de melhoria de

processos de software. Tese de D.Sc., Universidade

Federal do Rio de Janeiro-UFRJ, Rio de janeiro, RJ,

Brasil.

Muzeka, I., Marquardt, E. (2017). Gamificação e o

Desenvolvimento das Inteligências Múltiplas no

Ensino Superior. Revista FSA, v. 14, n. 6.

Niazi, M. (2006). Software process improvement: a road

to success. In Product-Focused Software Process

Improvement. 395–401.

Niazi, M. (2009). Software Process Improvement

Implementation: Avoiding Critical Barriers. CrossTalk

- The Journal of Defense Software Engineering, 24-27.

Ribeiro, K. A. (2018). Uso de gamificação em ambientes

educacionais. Trabalho de Conclusão de Curso. UFJF.

Minas Gerais.

Shih, C. C., Huang, S. J. (2010). Exploring the

relationship between organizational culture and

software process improvement deployment.

Information & Management, Vol. 47.

Soares, E. M., Oliveira, S. R. B. (2020a). An Analysis of

Problems in the Implementation of Software Process

Improvement: a Literature Review and Survey. In:

17th CONTECSI, Brazil.

Soares, E. M., Oliveira, S. R. B. (2020b). A Solution

Proposal for Software Process Improvement Problems

from the Use of Gamification. In: 17th CONTECSI,

Brazil.

SOFTEX (2016). Melhoria do Processo de Software

Brasileiro (MPS.BR) - Guia Geral, Brazil.

Travassos, G. H., Kalinowski, M. (2009). iMPS 2009:

caracterização e variação de desempenho de

organizações que adotaram o modelo MPS. SOFTEX,

Campinas, SP.

Vianna, Y., Vianna, M., Medina, B., Tanaka, S. (2013).

Gamification, Inc.: como reinventar empresas a partir

de jogos. MJV Press: Rio de Janeiro.

An Analysis of Gamiﬁcation Elements for a Solving Proposal of Software Process Improvement Problems

301