Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Practical relevance of software engineering research: synthesizing the community’s voice
Queen’s University Belfast, UK.
RISE Research Institutes of Sweden, Digital Systems, Mobility and Systems.ORCID iD: 0000-0001-7879-4371
University of Oulu, Finland.
2020 (English)In: Journal of Empirical Software Engineering, ISSN 1382-3256, E-ISSN 1573-7616Article in journal (Refereed) Epub ahead of print
Abstract [en]

Software engineering (SE) research should be relevant to industrial practice. There have been regular discussions in the SE community on this issue since the 1980’s, led by pioneers such as Robert Glass. As we recently passed the milestone of “50 years of software engineering”, some recent positive efforts have been made in this direction, e.g., establishing “industrial” tracks in several SE conferences. However, many researchers and practitioners believe that we, as a community, are still struggling with research relevance and utility. The goal of this paper is to synthesize the evidence and experience-based opinions shared on this topic so far in the SE community, and to encourage the community to further reflect and act on the research relevance. For this purpose, we have conducted a Multi-vocal Literature Review (MLR) of 54 systematically-selected sources (papers and non peer-reviewed articles). Instead of relying on and considering the individual opinions on research relevance, mentioned in each of the sources, the MLR aims to synthesize and provide the “holistic” view on the topic. The highlights of our MLR findings are as follows. The top three root causes of low relevance, discussed in the community, are: (1) Researchers having simplistic views (or wrong assumptions) about SE in practice; (2) Lack of connection with industry; and (3) Wrong identification of research problems. The top three suggestions for improving research relevance are: (1) Using appropriate research approaches such as action-research; (2) Choosing relevant (practical) research problems; and (3) Collaborating with industry. By synthesizing all the discussions on this important topic so far, this paper aims to encourage further discussions and actions in the community to increase our collective efforts to improve the research relevance. Furthermore, we raise the need for empirically-grounded and rigorous studies on the relevance problem in SE research, as carried out in other fields such as management science. © 2020, The Author(s).

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Springer , 2020.
Keywords [en]
Evidence, Multi-vocal literature review (MLR), Research relevance, Research utility, Software engineering, Utility programs, Action research, Industrial practices, Literature reviews, Research approach, Research problems, Root cause, Industrial research
National Category
Natural Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:ri:diva-44927DOI: 10.1007/s10664-020-09803-0Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85081619988OAI: oai:DiVA.org:ri-44927DiVA, id: diva2:1429749
Note

Funding details: Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, NSERC; Funding details: Horizon 2020; Funding details: European Commission, EC; Funding text 1: Synthesis: Due to the above fundamental short-comings in many national / international funding systems, it is challenging to conduct truly relevant research. Although there are positive policies in the context of certain funding agencies which encourage, or even require,98 IAC for submitting research grants, e.g., the Horizon 2020 funding system of the European Union, the “Engage” and Collaborative Research and Development (CRD) grants in Canada by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC).

Available from: 2020-05-12 Created: 2020-05-12 Last updated: 2020-05-12Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus

Authority records BETA

Borg, Markus

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Borg, Markus
By organisation
Mobility and Systems
In the same journal
Journal of Empirical Software Engineering
Natural Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 2 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
v. 2.35.10