An instrument for measuring perception about social and human factors that influence software development productivity

15Citations
Citations of this article
42Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

In terms of productivity in software development, there is specific interest in identifying its influencing factors. For this purpose, several classification approaches have been previously used, which have already recognized technical factors, organizational factors, product factors, project factors, and personal factors. However, these approaches often focus on technical factors over social and human factors (SHFs). Nevertheless, in addition to the obvious technical aspects, the software development process involves problem-solving skills and cognitive aspects and social interaction. In this sense, determining SHFs can lead to software organizations designing strategies for improving team productivity. In this study, we first conducted a preliminary classification of the SHFs identified in the literature. Because this study seeks to assess the factors from the standpoint of software development professionals, we developed and validated an instrument to measure the perception of software development team members about SHFs that may be affecting their productivity. For this purpose, the first four stages of survey-based research were followed: objective definition, survey design, instrument construction, instrument validity, and reliability assessment. The instrument included 79 items assessing 13 different SHFs. After assessing both their validity and reliability, the results demonstrated that the instrument is a valid and reliable tool for measuring SHFs perception among software development team members.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Machuca-Villegas, L., Gasca-Hurtado, G. P., Puente, S. M., & Tamayo, L. M. R. (2021). An instrument for measuring perception about social and human factors that influence software development productivity. Journal of Universal Computer Science, 27(2), 111–134. https://doi.org/10.3897/jucs.65102

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free