In Search of Efficient Flexibility: Effects of Software Component Granularity on Development Effort, Defects, and Customization Effort

References

• Adler P. S., Goldoftas B., Levine D. I. Flexibility versus efficiency? A case study of model changeovers in the Toyota production system. Organ. Sci. (1999) 10(1):43–68Link, Google Scholar
• Albrecht A. J. Measuring application development productivity. Proc. Joint SHARE, GUIDE IBM Application Development Sympos. (1979) (IBM Corporation, Monterey, CA) 83–92Google Scholar
• Bachmann F., Bass L., Buhman C., Comella-Dorda S., Long F., Robert J., Seacord R., Wallnau K. Technical concepts of component-based software engineering. (2000) . CMU/SEI Technical Report ESC-TR-2000–007, Carnegie Mellon University, PittsburghGoogle Scholar
• Baldwin C. Y., Clark K. B.Design Rules—The Power of Modularity (2000) (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Banker R. D., Kemerer C. F. Scale of economies in new software development. IEEE Trans. Software Engrg. (1989) 15(10):1199–1205Crossref, Google Scholar
• Banker R. D., Slaughter S. A. The moderating effects of structure on volatility and complexity in software enhancement. Inform. Systems Res. (2000) 11(3):219–240Link, Google Scholar
• Banker R. D., Davis G., Slaughter S. A. Software development practices, software complexity and software maintenance performance: A field study. Management Sci. (1998) 44(4):433–450Link, Google Scholar
• Baron R. M., Kenny D. A. The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic and statistical considerations. J. Personality Soc. Psych. (1986) 51(6):1173–1182Crossref, Google Scholar
• Basili V. R., Perricone B. R. Software errors and complexity. Comm. ACM (1984) 27(1):42–52Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bast W., Kleppe A. G., Warmer J. B.MDA Explained: The Model Driven Architecture: Practice and Promise (2003) (Addison-Wesley, New York) Google Scholar
• Beisiegel M., Booz D., Edwards M., Herness E., Kinder S. Software components: Coarse-grained vs. fine-grained. (2007) . Report (December 6), IBM developerWorks Technical Library, IBM, Armonk, NY. Accessed June 9, 2011, http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/webservices/library/ws-soa-granularity/Google Scholar
• Belsley D., Kuh E., Welsch R.Regression Diagnostics: Identifying Influential Data and Sources of Collinearity (1980) (Wiley, New York) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Blecker T., Abdelkafi N. Complexity and variety in mass customization systems: Analysis and recommendations. Management Decision (2006) 44(7):908–929Crossref, Google Scholar
• Blecker T., Friedrich G., Kaluza B., Abdelkafi N., Kreutler G.Information and Management Systems for Product Customization (2004) (Springer, New York) Google Scholar
• Boehm B. W.Software Engineering Economics (1981) (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ) Google Scholar
• Brereton P., Budgen D. Component-based systems: A classification of issues. IEEE Comput. (2000) 33(11):54–62Crossref, Google Scholar
• Byrd T. A., Turner D. E. Measuring the flexibility of information technology infrastructure: Exploratory analysis of a construct. J. Management Inform. Systems (2000) 17(1):167–208Crossref, Google Scholar
• Card D., Glass R.Measuring Software Design Quality (1990) (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ) Google Scholar
• Chan T. W., Lakhotia A. Debugging program failure exhibited by voluminous data. J. Software Maintenance (1998) 10(2):111–150Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chidamber S. R., Kemerer C. F. A metrics suite for object-oriented design. IEEE Trans. Software Engrg. (1994) 20(6):476–493Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cook R. D., Weisberg S.Residuals and Influence in Regression (1982) (Chapman & Hall, London) Google Scholar
• Darcy D. P., Kemerer C. F., Slaughter S. A., Tomayko J. E. The structural complexity of software: an experimental test. IEEE Trans. Software Engrg. (2005) 31(11):982–995Crossref, Google Scholar
• Duray R., Ward P. T., Milligan G. W., Berry W. L. Approaches to mass customization: Configurations and empirical validation. J. Oper. Management (2000) 18(6):605–625Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fraternali P., Paolini P. Model-driven development of Web applications: The autoweb system. ACM Trans. Inform. Systems (2000) 18(4):323–382Crossref, Google Scholar
• Greene W. H.Econometric Analysis (1997) 3rd ed.(Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ) Google Scholar
• Hailpern B., Tarr P. Model-driven development: The good, the bad, and the ugly. IBM Systems J. (2006) 45(3):451–461Crossref, Google Scholar
• Halstead M.Elements of Software Science (1977) (Elsevier, New York) Google Scholar
• Hamlet D.Composing Software Components: A Software Testing Perspective (2010) (Springer, New York) Crossref, Google Scholar
• Harter D. E., Krishnan M. S., Slaughter S. A. Effects of process maturity on quality, cycle time and effort in software product development. Management Sci. (2000) 46(4):451–466Link, Google Scholar
• Kmenta J.Elements of Econometrics (1986) 2nd ed.(Macmillan, New York) Google Scholar
• Krishnan M. S., Kriebel C. H., Kekre S., Mukhopadhyay T. An empirical analysis of productivity and quality in software products. Management Sci. (2000) 46(6):745–759Link, Google Scholar
• Kulkarni V., Reddy S. Separation of concerns in model-driven development. IEEE Software (2003) 20(5):64–69Crossref, Google Scholar
• Messerschmitt D. G. Rethinking components: From hardware and software to systems. Proc. IEEE (2007) 95(7):1473–1496Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mookerjee V., Chiang I. R. A dynamic coordination policy for software system construction. IEEE Trans. Software Engrg. (2002) 28(7):684–694Crossref, Google Scholar
• OMG Model driven architecture: A technical perspective. (2001) . Report, Architecture Board MDA Drafting Team, OMG, Needham, MA. Accessed May 29, 2007, ftp://ftp.omg.org/pub/docs/ab/01–02-04.pdfGoogle Scholar
• Parnas D. L. On the criteria to be used in decomposing systems into modules. Comm. ACM (1972) 15(12):1053–1058Crossref, Google Scholar
• Parnas D. L. Designing software for ease of extension and contraction. IEEE Trans. Software Engrg (1979) 5(2):128–138Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ravichandran T., Rothenberger M. A. Software reuse strategies and component markets. Comm. ACM (2003) 46(8):109–114Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sambamurthy V., Bharadwaj A., Grover V. Shaping agility through digital options: Reconceptualizing the role of information technology in contemporary firms. MIS Quart. (2003) 27(2):237–263Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sanchez R., Mahoney J. T. Modularity, flexibility, and knowledge management in product and organization design. Strategic Management J. (1996) 17(Winter special issue):63–76Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schmidt D. C. Model-driven engineering. IEEE Comput. (2006) 39(2):25–31Crossref, Google Scholar
• Simon H. A.The Sciences of the Artificial (1996) 3rd ed.(MIT Press, Cambridge, MA) Google Scholar
• Sobel M. E., Leinhardt S. Asymptotic confidence intervals for indirect effects in structural equation models. Sociological Methodology (1982) (American Sociological Association, Washington, DC) 290–312Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stock J. H., Yogo M., Andrews D. W. K., Stock J. H. Testing for weak instruments in linear iv regression. Identification and Inference for Econometric Models: Essays in Honor of Thomas Rothenberg (2005) (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK) 80–108Crossref, Google Scholar
• Subramanyam R., Krishnan M. S. Empirical analysis of CK metrics for object-oriented design complexity: Implications for software defects. IEEE Trans. Software Engrg. (2003) 29(4):297–310Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sullivan K., Notkin D. Reconciling environment integration and component independence. Proc. 4th ACM SIGSOFT Sympos. Software Development Environments (1990) (ACM, New York) 22–33Crossref, Google Scholar
• Szyperski C.Component Software: Beyond Object Oriented Programming (2002) (Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA) Google Scholar
• Thomke S. H. The role of flexibility in the development of new products: An empirical study. Res. Policy (1997) 26(1):105–119Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tu Q., Vonderembse M. A., Ragu-Nathan T. S., Ragu-Nathan B. Measuring modularity-based manufacturing practices and their impact on mass customization capability: A customer-driven perspective. Decision Sci. (2004) 35(2):147–168Crossref, Google Scholar
• von Mayrhauser A., Vans A. M. Identification of dynamic comprehension processes during large scale maintenance. IEEE Trans. Software Engrg. (1996) 22(6):424–437Crossref, Google Scholar
• Weick K. E. Educational organizations as loosely coupled systems. Admin. Sci. Quart. (1976) 21(1):1–19Crossref, Google Scholar
• Whitehead K.Component-Based Development: Principles and Planning for Business Systems (2002) (Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA) Google Scholar
• Yourdon E., Constantine L. L.Structured Design: Fundamentals of a Discipline of Computer Program and Systems Design (1979) (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ) Google Scholar
• Zellner A. An efficient method of estimating seemingly unrelated regression and tests for a regression bias. J. Amer. Stat. Assoc. (1962) 57(June):348–368Crossref, Google Scholar