Advertisement

Diagnosing

  • Miroslaw Staron
Chapter
  • 442 Downloads

Abstract

The first phase of action research is diagnosing the problem to be addressed. Although it seems to be a straightforward task, diagnosing can be difficult as we need to understand the context of the project and the theories needed to take action. In this chapter, we explore different ways of diagnosing the problem—starting from observational ones like interviews and finishing up with analytical ones like statistical data analysis from experiment systems.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [All17]
    Mike Allen. The SAGE encyclopedia of communication research methods. SAGE Publications, 2017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. [CH10]
    J. Conklin and G. Hayhoe. Focus group workshop. In 2010 IEEE International Professional Comunication Conference, pages 273–274, July 2010.Google Scholar
  3. [CS87]
    David L Cooperrider and Suresh Srivastva. Appreciative inquiry in organizational life. Research in organizational change and development, 1(1):129–169, 1987.Google Scholar
  4. [CW+01]
    David L Cooperrider, Diana Whitney, et al. A positive revolution in change: Appreciative inquiry. Public administration and public policy, 87:611–630, 2001.Google Scholar
  5. [DMG07]
    Paul M Duvall, Steve Matyas, and Andrew Glover. Continuous integration: improving software quality and reducing risk. Pearson Education, 2007.Google Scholar
  6. [FF94]
    William Foddy and William H Foddy. Constructing questions for interviews and questionnaires: Theory and practice in social research. Cambridge university press, 1994.Google Scholar
  7. [HKRA94]
    John Hughes, Val King, Tom Rodden, and Hans Andersen. Moving out from the control room: ethnography in system design. In Proceedings of the 1994 ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work, pages 429–439. ACM, 1994.Google Scholar
  8. [Jor89]
    Danny L Jorgensen. The methodology of participant observation. Thousand Oaks: SAGE, pages 12–26, 1989.Google Scholar
  9. [Jor15]
    Danny L Jorgensen. Participant observation. Emerging trends in the social and behavioral sciences: An interdisciplinary, searchable, and linkable resource, pages 1–15, 2015.Google Scholar
  10. [KLB04]
    J. Kontio, L. Lehtola, and J. Bragge. Using the focus group method in software engineering: obtaining practitioner and user experiences. In Proceedings. 2004 International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering, 2004. ISESE ’04., pages 271–280, Aug 2004.Google Scholar
  11. [KT17]
    Ron Kohavi and Stefan Thomke. The surprising power of online experiments. Harvard Business Review, 95(5):74, 2017.Google Scholar
  12. [MDF+18]
    David Issa Mattos, Pavel Dmitriev, Aleksander Fabijan, Jan Bosch, and Helena Holmström Olsson. An activity and metric model for online controlled experiments. In International Conference on Product-Focused Software Process Improvement, pages 182–198. Springer, 2018.Google Scholar
  13. [SC90]
    Anselm Strauss and Juliet M Corbin. Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Sage Publications, Inc, 1990.Google Scholar
  14. [Sea99]
    Carolyn B Seaman. Qualitative methods in empirical studies of software engineering. IEEE Transactions on software engineering, (4):557–572, 1999.Google Scholar
  15. [Sha02]
    Mary Shaw. What makes good research in software engineering? International Journal on Software Tools for Technology Transfer, 4(1):1–7, 2002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. [SM18]
    Miroslaw Staron and Wilhelm Meding. Software Development Measurement Programs: Development, Management and Evolution. Springer, 2018.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. [SMP12]
    Miroslaw Staron, Wilhelm Meding, and Klas Palm. Release readiness indicator for mature agile and lean software development projects. In International Conference on Agile Software Development, pages 93–107. Springer, 2012.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Miroslaw Staron
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer Science and EngineeringUniversity of GothenburgGothenburgSweden

Personalised recommendations