Logo PTI
Polish Information Processing Society
Logo FedCSIS

Annals of Computer Science and Information Systems, Volume 17

Communication Papers of the 2018 Federated Conference on Computer Science and Information Systems

Unintended effects of dependencies in source code on the flexibility of IT in organizations

, ,

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15439/2018F93

Citation: Communication Papers of the 2018 Federated Conference on Computer Science and Information Systems, M. Ganzha, L. Maciaszek, M. Paprzycki (eds). ACSIS, Vol. 17, pages 87–94 ()

Full text

Abstract. This study links business requirements and adaptability of existing software systems. Organizations expect flexibility of IT with regard to business requirements. We hypothesize that the flexibility of business requirements is difficult in IT systems, because of software dependencies in the way domain knowledge is implemented. In this paper, we, therefore, explore how Business requirements have been implemented in the source code of three open source healthcare systems. Outcomes suggest that a tight interdependency of business terminology and functionality in source code hides business requirements from view and thereby hinders IT flexibility on higher levels.

References

  1. J. C. Henderson and H. Venkatraman "Strategic alignment: Leveraging information technology for transforming organizations," Ibm Systems Journal, 1, (1993), 32, pp. 472-484, doi: 10.1147/sj.382.0472
  2. R. Van de Wetering, P. Mikalef and A. Pateli "A strategic alignment model for IT flexibility and dynamic capabilities: toward an assessment tool," Proceedings of the 25th European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS), Guimarães, Portugal(2017), pp. 1468- 1485, doi:
  3. R. van de Wetering, P. Mikalef and R. Helms "Driving organizational sustainability-oriented innovation capabilities: a complex adaptive systems perspective," Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability(2017), 28, pp. 71-79, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2017.08.006.
  4. R. van de Wetering, J. Versendaal and P. Walraven "Examining the relationship between a hospital’s IT infrastructure capability and digital capabilities: a resource-based perspective, doi:
  5. L. Bass, P. Clements and R. Kazman Software architecture in practice. Addison-Wesley Professional, Upper Saddle River, NJ, 2012.
  6. F. Bachmann, L. Bass, D. Garlan, J. Ivers, R. Little, P. Merson, R. Nord and J. Stafford Documenting Software Architectures: Views and Beyond. Addison-Wesley Professional, 2011.
  7. J. Tyree and A. Akerman "Architecture decisions: Demystifying architecture," Ieee Software, 2, (2005), 22, pp. 19-+, doi: 10.1109/ms.2005.27.
  8. TheOpenGroup TOGAF Version 9.1 Evaluation copy. The Open Group, 2011.
  9. M. M. Lehman "Laws of software evolution revisited," European Workshop on Software Process Technology(1996), pp. 108-124, doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0017737.
  10. I. Herraiz, D. Rodriguez, G. Robles and J. M. Gonzalez-Barahona "The evolution of the laws of software evolution: A discussion based on a systematic literature review," ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR), 2, (2013), 46, pp. 28, http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2543581.2543595.
  11. N. Ajienka, A. Capiluppi and S. Counsell. "Managing Hidden Dependencies in OO Software: a Study Based on Open Source Projects." In Proceedings of the Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement (ESEM), 2017 ACM/IEEE International Symposium on, IEEE, 2017, pp. 141-150, http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ESEM.2017.21.
  12. H. Kagdi, M. L. Collard and J. I. Maletic "A survey and taxonomy of approaches for mining software repositories in the context of software evolution," Journal of Software: Evolution and Process, 2, (2007), 19, pp. 77-131, http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/smr.344.
  13. H. Kagdi and D. Poshyvanyk "Who can help me with this change request?," Program Comprehension, 2009. ICPC'09. IEEE 17th International Conference on(2009), pp. 273-277, http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ICPC.2009.5090056.
  14. A. Ahmad, P. Jamshidi and C. Pahl "A framework for acquisition and application of software architecture evolution knowledge: 14," ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes, 5, (2013), 38, pp. 1-7, doi: 10.1145/2507288.2507301.
  15. P. Jamshidi, M. Ghafari, A. Ahmad and C. Pahl. "A framework for classifying and comparing architecture-centric software evolution research." In Proceedings of the Software Maintenance and Reengineering (CSMR), 2013 17th European Conference on, IEEE, 2013, pp. 305-314, doi:
  16. T. Haitzer, E. Navarro and U. Zdun "Reconciling software architecture and source code in support of software evolution," J Syst Softw(2017), 123, pp. 119-144, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2016.10.012.
  17. S. McGinnes. "The Problem of Conceptual Incompatibility." In Proceedings of the International Conference on Availability, Reliability, and Security, Springer, 2011, pp. 69-81, doi:
  18. S. McGinnes and E. Kapros "Conceptual independence: A design principle for the construction of adaptive information systems," Information Systems(2015), 47, pp. 33-50, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.is.2014.06.001.
  19. N. P. Suh Axiomatic Design: Advances and Applications (The Oxford Series on Advanced Manufacturing). Oxford University Press, New York Oxford, 2001.
  20. N. P. Suh "Fundamentals of Design and Deployment of Large Complex Systems: OLEV, MH, and Mixalloy," Journal of Integrated Design & Process Science, 3, (2012), 16, pp. 7-28, http://dx.doi.org/10.3233/jid- 2012-0001.
  21. C. Larman Applying UML and patterns : an introduction to object- oriented analysis and design and iterative development. Prentice Hall PTR Upper Saddle River, N.J., 2005.
  22. F. Buschmann, K. Henney and D. Schmidt Pattern-oriented Software Architecture: on patterns and pattern language. John wiley & sons, 2007.
  23. D. Tarenskeen and R. Bakker. "Applying Axiomatic design and Conceptual independence in the domain of IT systems." In Proceedings of the ICAD 2017 International Conference on Axiomatic Design, Iasi Romania, 2017, doi: https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201712701006.
  24. A. Aryani, F. Perin, M. Lungu, A. N. Mahmood and O. Nierstrasz. "Can we predict dependencies using domain information?." In Proceedings of the Reverse Engineering (WCRE), 2011 18th Working Conference on, IEEE, 2011, pp. 55-64, doi: http://doi.ieeecomputersociety.org/10.1109/WCRE.2011.17.
  25. D. Qiu, B. Li and Z. Su. "An empirical analysis of the co-evolution of schema and code in database applications." In Proceedings of the Proceedings of the 2013 9th Joint Meeting on Foundations of Software Engineering, ACM, 2013, pp. 125-135, doi: 10.1145/2491411.2491431.
  26. A. Cleve, M. Gobert, L. Meurice, J. Maes and J. Weber "Understanding database schema evolution: A case study," Sci. Comput. Program.(2015), 97, pp. 113-121, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scico.2013.11.025.
  27. T. Mens, L. Meurice, M. Goeminne, C. Nagy, A. Decan and A. Cleve "Analyzing the Evolution of Database Usage in Data-Intensive Software Systems, October 14, 2017, (2017), 2017, doi:
  28. I. Object Management Group Meta Object FacilityTM (MOFTM) Core 2.5.1. 2016. http://www.omg.org/spec/MOF/. Retrieved October 9, 2017, Accessed in 2017.
  29. I. Object Management Group Meta-Modeling and the OMG Meta Object Facility (MOF) . 2017. www.omg.org/ocup-2/documents/Meta-ModelingAndtheMOF.pdf. Retrieved October 9, 2017, Accessed in 2017.
  30. J. Bézivin and O. Gerbé. "Towards a precise definition of the OMG/MDA framework." In Proceedings of the Automated Software Engineering. (ASE 2001). 16th Annual International IEEE, 2001, pp. 273-280, http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ASE.2001.989813.
  31. G. Michels, S. Joosten, J. van der Woude and S. Joosten. "Ampersand." In Proceedings of the International Conference on Relational and Algebraic Methods in Computer Science, Springer Verlag, 2011, pp. 280-293, http://dx.doi.org/DOI https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-21070-9_21.
  32. G. Michels, S. Joosten, J. v. d. Woude and S. Joosten. "Ampersand applying relation algebra in practice." In Proceedings of the Proceedings of the 12th international conference on Relational and algebraic methods in computer science, Rotterdam, The Netherlands, Springer-Verlag, 2011, pp. 280-293, doi:
  33. P. Pazos openEHR cabolabs server-v0.9. 2017. https://github.com/ppazos/cabolabs-ehrserver. Retrieved 03/05/2017, Accessed in 2017.
  34. openEMR openEMR-v5.0.0. 2017. https://github.com/openmrs/openmrs-standalone. Retrieved 03/03/2017, Accessed in 2017.
  35. openMRS openMRS Core-v4.0.0. 2017. https://github.com/openmrs/openmrs-core. Retrieved 03/04/2017, Accessed in 2017.
  36. openMRS openMRS Standalone 2.5. 2017. https://github.com/openmrs/openmrs-standalone. Retrieved 03/03/2017, Accessed in 2017.
  37. What is openEHR? 2017. http://www.openehr.org/what_is_openehr#. Retrieved October 14, 2017, Accessed in 2017.
  38. openEMR Database structure openEMR. 2014. http://www.openemr.org/wiki/index.php/Database_Structure. Retrieved October 14, 2017, Accessed in 2017.
  39. B. Mamlin and S. Jindal Introduction to OpenMRS. 2017. https://wiki.openmrs.org/display/docs/Introduction+to+OpenMRS. Retrieved October 14, 2017, Accessed in 2017.