Effort and Cost of Software Engineering: A Comparison of Two Industrial Data Sets

H. HUIJGENS; A. CAN DEURSEN; L. MINKU; C. LOKAN

doi:10.1145/3084226.3084249

Effort and Cost of Software Engineering: A Comparison of Two Industrial Data Sets

H. HUIJGENS, A. CAN DEURSEN, L. MINKU, C. LOKAN

Computer Science

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Conference contribution

4 Citations (Scopus)

137 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Context: The research literature on software development projects usually assumes that effort is a good proxy for cost. Practice, however, suggests that there are circumstances in which costs and effort should be distinguished.

Objectives: We determine similarities and differences between size, effort, cost, duration, and number of defects of software projects. Method: We compare two established repositories (ISBSG and EBSPM) comprising almost 700 projects from industry.

Results: We demonstrate a (log)-linear relation between cost on the one hand, and size, duration and number of defects on the other. This justifies conducting linear regression for cost. We establish that ISBSG is substantially different from EBSPM, in terms of cost (cheaper) and duration (faster), and the relation between cost and effort. We show that while in ISBSG effort is the most important cost factor, this is not the case in other repositories, such as EBSPM in which size is the dominant factor.

Conclusion: Practitioners and researchers alike should be cautious when drawing conclusions from a single repository.

Original language	English
Title of host publication	Proceedings of the Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering Conference (EASE)
Place of Publication	Karlskrona, Sweden
Publisher	ACM/IEEE
Pages	51-60
Number of pages	10
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1145/3084226.3084249
Publication status	Published - 2017

Access to Document

10.1145/3084226.3084249Licence: None: All rights reserved

Hennie_Huijgen_Effort_and_cost_in_software_EASE_2017
Checked for eligibility 24/10/2018 EASE'17 Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering Pages 51-60 Karlskrona, Sweden — June 15 - 16, 2017 ACM New York, NY, USA ©2017
Accepted author manuscript, 987 KBLicence: None: All rights reserved

https://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=3084249Licence: None: All rights reserved

Cite this

@inproceedings{7c67f101940e4d7dbf52e0288991bc33,

title = "Effort and Cost of Software Engineering: A Comparison of Two Industrial Data Sets",

abstract = "Context: The research literature on software development projects usually assumes that effort is a good proxy for cost. Practice, however, suggests that there are circumstances in which costs and effort should be distinguished. Objectives: We determine similarities and differences between size, effort, cost, duration, and number of defects of software projects. Method: We compare two established repositories (ISBSG and EBSPM) comprising almost 700 projects from industry. Results: We demonstrate a (log)-linear relation between cost on the one hand, and size, duration and number of defects on the other. This justifies conducting linear regression for cost. We establish that ISBSG is substantially different from EBSPM, in terms of cost (cheaper) and duration (faster), and the relation between cost and effort. We show that while in ISBSG effort is the most important cost factor, this is not the case in other repositories, such as EBSPM in which size is the dominant factor. Conclusion: Practitioners and researchers alike should be cautious when drawing conclusions from a single repository.",

author = "H. HUIJGENS and {CAN DEURSEN}, A. and L. MINKU and C. LOKAN",

year = "2017",

doi = "10.1145/3084226.3084249",

language = "English",

pages = "51--60",

booktitle = "Proceedings of the Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering Conference (EASE)",

publisher = "ACM/IEEE",

}

TY - GEN

T1 - Effort and Cost of Software Engineering: A Comparison of Two Industrial Data Sets

AU - HUIJGENS, H.

AU - CAN DEURSEN, A.

AU - MINKU, L.

AU - LOKAN, C.

PY - 2017

Y1 - 2017

N2 - Context: The research literature on software development projects usually assumes that effort is a good proxy for cost. Practice, however, suggests that there are circumstances in which costs and effort should be distinguished. Objectives: We determine similarities and differences between size, effort, cost, duration, and number of defects of software projects. Method: We compare two established repositories (ISBSG and EBSPM) comprising almost 700 projects from industry. Results: We demonstrate a (log)-linear relation between cost on the one hand, and size, duration and number of defects on the other. This justifies conducting linear regression for cost. We establish that ISBSG is substantially different from EBSPM, in terms of cost (cheaper) and duration (faster), and the relation between cost and effort. We show that while in ISBSG effort is the most important cost factor, this is not the case in other repositories, such as EBSPM in which size is the dominant factor. Conclusion: Practitioners and researchers alike should be cautious when drawing conclusions from a single repository.

AB - Context: The research literature on software development projects usually assumes that effort is a good proxy for cost. Practice, however, suggests that there are circumstances in which costs and effort should be distinguished. Objectives: We determine similarities and differences between size, effort, cost, duration, and number of defects of software projects. Method: We compare two established repositories (ISBSG and EBSPM) comprising almost 700 projects from industry. Results: We demonstrate a (log)-linear relation between cost on the one hand, and size, duration and number of defects on the other. This justifies conducting linear regression for cost. We establish that ISBSG is substantially different from EBSPM, in terms of cost (cheaper) and duration (faster), and the relation between cost and effort. We show that while in ISBSG effort is the most important cost factor, this is not the case in other repositories, such as EBSPM in which size is the dominant factor. Conclusion: Practitioners and researchers alike should be cautious when drawing conclusions from a single repository.

U2 - 10.1145/3084226.3084249

DO - 10.1145/3084226.3084249

M3 - Conference contribution

SP - 51

EP - 60

BT - Proceedings of the Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering Conference (EASE)

PB - ACM/IEEE

CY - Karlskrona, Sweden

ER -

Effort and Cost of Software Engineering: A Comparison of Two Industrial Data Sets

Abstract

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this