Abstract
Contemporary model driven development tools only partially support the abstractions occurring in complex embedded systems development. This article presents an interpretive case study in which architectural concerns important to seven engineers in a large product developing organization were compared to the views actually provided by the organization’s models. The paper’s main finding is an empirically grounded catalogue of architectural concerns for a large, complex embedded systems project, and an assessment of the degree to which the studied organization has managed to realize support for these concerns within economical and organizational constraints. In the studied case, 114 different architectural concerns were found to be important to the interviewed engineers. Of this sample, 75% were documented in models, structured text, or informal documentation, whereas 47% of all documented concerns were modeled. The paper’s conclusion is that current modeling languages and methods inadequately address the full set of concerns that are important to engineers in base station development.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Börjesson, A.: Making software process improvement happen. Doctoral dissertation, Gothenburg University (2006)
Clements P., Bachmann F., Bass L., Garlan D., Ivers J., Little R., Nord R., Stafford J.: Documenting Software Architectures: Views and Beyond. Addison-Wesley, Reading (2003)
Dietz J.G.L.: Enterprise Ontology—Theory and Methodology. Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg (2006)
Greefhorst D., Koning H., van Vliet H.: The many faces of architectural descriptions. Inf. Syst. Front. 8, 103–113 (2006)
Hofmeister C., Kruchten P., Nord R.L., Obbink H., Ran A., America P.: A general model of software architecture design derived from five industrial approaches. J. Syst. Softw. 80, 106–126 (2007)
Hogrefe D., Reed R.: Telecommunications and UML languages. Comput. Netw. 49, 622–626 (2005)
International Organization for Standardization: ISO/IEC 42010—Systems and Software Engineering—Recommended Practice for Architectural Description of Software-Intensive Systems. International Standard, ISO (2007)
Jacobson I.: Object-oriented development in an industrial environment. ACM SIGPLAN Not. 22(12), 183–191 (1987)
Johansson, C., Hall, P.A.V., Coquard, M.: “Talk to Paula and Peter—they are experienced”—the experience engine in a nutshell. In: SEKE ’99 Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering, Learning Software Organizations, Methodology and Applications. Springer-Verlag, London (2000)
Kaaranen H.: UMTS Networks: Architecture, Mobility, and Services. Wiley, New York (2005)
Kruchten P.: Architectural blueprints—the “4+1” view model of software architecture. IEEE Softw. 12(6), 42–50 (1995)
Medvidovic M., Dashofy E.M., Taylor R.N.: Moving architectural description from under the technology lamppost. Inf. Softw. Technol. 49, 12–31 (2007)
Pahl C., Giesecke S., Hasselbring W.: Ontology-based modelling of architectural styles. Inf. Softw. Technol. 51, 1739–1749 (2009)
Pareto, L.: Architectural concerns in base station development. Technical Report, Research Reports in Software Engineering and Management; 2010:01. Gothenburg University Publications Electronic Archive, University of Gothenburg
Pareto, L., Eriksson, P., Ehnebom, S.: Architectural descriptions as boundary objects in system and design work. Model driven engineering languages and systems. LNCS, vol. 6395. Springer, New York (2010)
Rockstrom A.S.R.: SDL-CCITT specification and description language. IEEE Trans. Commun. 30(6), 1310–1318 (1982)
Rozanski N., Woods E.: Software Systems Architecture: Working with Stakeholders Using Viewpoints and Perspectives. Addison-Wesley, Upper Saddle River (2005)
Staron M., Kuzniarz L., Wohlin C.: Empirical assessment of using stereotypes to improve comprehension of UML models: a set of experiments. J. Syst. Softw. 79(5), 727–742 (2006)
Strauss A.L., Corbin J.M.: Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory. Sage, Thousand Oaks (1998)
Tarr, P., Ossher, H., Harrison, W., Sutton, S.M.: N degrees of separation: multi-dimensional separation of concerns. In: 21st International Conference of Software Engineering, ICSE ’99, Los Angeles, CA, USA (1999)
van de Ven A.H.: Engaged Scholarship: A Guide for Organizational and Social Research. Oxford University Press, New York (2007)
Walsham G.: Interpretive case studies in IS research: nature and method. Eur. J. Inf. Syst. 4(2), 74–81 (1995)
Wohlin, C., Höst, M., Henningsson, K.: Empirical research methods in software engineering. In: Empirical Methods and Studies in Software Engineering. LNCS, vol. 2765. Springer, New York (2003)
Yin R.K.: Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Sage, Thousand Oaks (2003)
Zachman J.A.: A framework for information systems architecture. IBM Syst. J. 26(3), 276–292 (1987)
Zachrisson, P.: Managing model based projects. Ericsson Internal Presentation, Ericsson AB (2007)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Communicated by Andy Schürr and Bran Selic.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Pareto, L., Eriksson, P. & Ehnebom, S. Concern coverage in base station development: an empirical investigation. Softw Syst Model 11, 409–429 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-010-0188-2
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10270-010-0188-2