Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Software quality and group performance

  • Open Forum
  • Published:
AI & SOCIETY Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Software quality is one of the important elements of project management. Software review is one of the most cost effective techniques for detect and remove defects for improving software quality during software development life cycle. Literature suggests that experience and training have positive effect on software review performance. However, there is no empirical study conducted to analysis the important relationships between, experience, training and performance. A laboratory study was conducted with 192 volunteer university students to examining the above relationships in a software review task. The results suggests that (1) there is positive relationships between role experience and performance, (2) training has no impact on performance, (3) working experience has an positive effect on performance (4) working experience has an impact and (5) role experience has no impact on performance.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

We’re sorry, something doesn't seem to be working properly.

Please try refreshing the page. If that doesn't work, please contact support so we can address the problem.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ackerman FA, Buchwald LS, Lewski FH (1989) Software inspection: an effective verification process. IEEE Softw 6(3): 31–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boehm BW, Basili BR (2001) Software defect reduction top 10 list. IEEE Comput 34(1):135–137

    Google Scholar 

  • Brodbeck FC, Greitemeyer T (2000) Effects of individual versus mixed individual and group experience in rule induction on group member learning and group performance. J Exp Soc Psychol 36(6):621–648

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell JP (1990) Modelling the performance prediction problem in industrial and organizational psychology. In: Dunnette MD, Hough LM (eds) Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology, 2nd edn. Consulting Psychologists Press Inc., Palo Alto, pp 87–732

    Google Scholar 

  • Carli LL (1989) Gender differences in interaction style and influence. J Pers Soc Psychol 56:565–576

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cronbach LJ, Show RE (1977) Aptitudes and instructional methods: a handbook for research on interactions. Irvington, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Czaja SJ, Sharit J, Ownby R (2001) Examining age differences in performance of a complex information search and retrieval task. Psychol Aging 16(4):564–579

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doolan EP (1992) Experience with Fagan’s Inspection Method. Software-Practice Experience. IEEE Software 22(3):173–182

    Google Scholar 

  • Fagan ME (1976) Design and code inspections to reduce errors in program development. IBM Syst J 15(3):182–211

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fagan ME (1986) Advances in software inspections. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 12(7):744–751

    Google Scholar 

  • Fowler PJ (1986) In-process inspection software products at AT&T. AT&T Tech J 65(2):744–751

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilb T, Graham D (1993) Software inspection. Addison Wesley Publishing Company, Reading

  • Gless RL (1999) Evolving a new theory of project success. Commun ACM 45(11):7

    Google Scholar 

  • Hacker ME, Kleiner BM (1999) A study of the effects of procedural structure and anonymity on process improvement work groups. Eng Manage J 11(4):26–30

    Google Scholar 

  • Harmon J, Schneer JA, Hoffman LR (1995) Electronic meeting and established decision groups: audio conferencing effects on performance and structural stability. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 61(2):138–147

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herold DM (1979) The effectiveness of work groups. In: Kerr S (ed) Organizational behavior. Grid Publishing, Columbus. Reprinted in Nadler DA, Tushman ML, Hatvany ND (eds) (1982) Managing organizations: readings and cases. Little Brown, Boston

  • Hollenbeck JR, Ilgen DR, LePine JA, Colquitt JA, Hedlund J (1998) Extending the multilevel theory of team decision making: effects of feedback and experience in hierarchical teams. Acad Manage J 41(3):269–282

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holton EF (1996) The flawed four level evaluation model. Hum Resour Dev Q 7(1):5–21

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim PH (1997) When, What You Know Can Hurt You: A Study of Experiential Effects on Group Discussion and Performance. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 69(2):165–177

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirkatrick D (1993) Making it all worker-friendly. Fortune 128(7):44–53

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirkpatrick DL (1967) Evaluation of training. In: Craig RL, Bittel LR (eds) Training and development handbook. McGraw-Hill, New York, pp 87–112

    Google Scholar 

  • Korman AK (1977) Organizational behavior. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs

    Google Scholar 

  • Littlepage G, Robison W, Reddington K (1997) Effects of task experience and group experience on group performance, member ability, and recognition of expertise. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 69(2):133–147

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • London M (1989) Managing the training enterprise: hight-quality. Cost-effective employee training in organizations. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco

    Google Scholar 

  • Lyytinen K, Hirschheim R (1987) Information systems failure: a survey and classification of the empirical literature. Oxf Surv Inf Technol 4:257–309

    Google Scholar 

  • Motowidlo SJ, Van Scotter JR (1994) Evidence that task performance should be distinguished from contextual performance. J Appl Psychol 79(4):475–480

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nonaka I, Takeuchi H (1995) The knowledge-creating company: how Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Sauer C, Jeffery R, Land L, Yetton P (2000) Understanding and improving the effectiveness of software development technical reviews: a behaviorally motivated programme of research. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 26(1):1–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shirey GC (1992) How inspections fail. Proceeding of 9th, international conference on testing computer software, pp 151–159

  • Sommerville I (1995) Software engineering, 5th edn. Addison-Wesley, England, p 66

    Google Scholar 

  • Stevens AM, (1994) Theoretical model of on-the-job training with imperfect competition. Oxf Econ Pap New Ser 46(4):537–562

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Stone J, Watson V (2007) Evaluation of training. ISIP, accessed 4 July. http://www.ispi.org/ispi-cpc/resrcs/Evaluatn.doc

  • Strauss SH, Ebenau RG (1994) Software inspection process. McGraw-Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Vecchio RP, Hearn G, Southey G (1992) Organizational behaviour: lift at work in Australia. First Australian Edition, HBJ, Sydney

    Google Scholar 

  • Wong YK (2002) The impact of inspection inputs on software inspection: an empirical investigation. In: Proceedings of doctoral workshop of international conference on software engineering, Orlando, 2002. Use of software inspection in practice. Proceedings of international conference on software engineering ICSE’02, 19–24 May 2002

  • Wong YK (2003) An exploratory study of software review in practice. In: Proceeding of Portland international conference on management of engineering and technology PICMET’03, 20–24 July 2003

  • Wong YK (2006) Modern software review: techniques and technologies. Idea Group Inc., Hershey

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Griffith Business School, Griffith University, Nathan Campus, Brisbane, QLD, Australia

    Yuk Kuen Wong

Authors
  1. Yuk Kuen Wong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yuk Kuen Wong.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Wong, Y.K. Software quality and group performance. AI & Soc 23, 559–573 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-007-0174-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-007-0174-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation