CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 451Software Engineering Techniques and PracticesSoftware Engineering ResearchAdvanced Software Engineering Methodologies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Software development in startup companies: A systematic mapping study

Open access
Paternoster, Nicolò, Giardino, Carmine, Unterkalmsteiner, Michael, Gorschek, Tony, Abrahamsson, Pekka·2014·Information and Software Technology
DOI 10.1016/j.infsof.2014.04.014
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.infsof.2014.04.014

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Prototyping is used as a means to learn about the user and the market, and to increase the chances of business success.

    “Thus, prototyping is used as a means to learn about the user and the market (Giardino et al. 2015;Paternoster et al. 2014), and to increase the chances of business success.”

    From An empirically based model of software prototyping: a mapping study and a multi-case study (2023) · cites this paper as Paternoster et al. 2014

  • This cost-benefit aspects is especially important to software startups who operate under very uncertain and resource-constraint conditions with the aim of exploring new business opportunities and develop innovative products.

    “This cost-benefit aspects is especially important to software startups who operate under very uncertain and resource-constraint conditions with the aim of exploring new business opportunities and develop innovative products (Giardino et al. 2014;Paternoster et al. 2014).”

    From An empirically based model of software prototyping: a mapping study and a multi-case study (2023) · cites this paper as Paternoster et al. 2014

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 88

  1. Kitchenham, 2009, Systematic literature reviews in software engineering – a systematic literature review, Inf. Softw. Technol., 51, 7, 10.1016/j.infsof.2008.09.009 · DOI · Paper page
  2. da Silva, 2011, Six years of systematic literature reviews in software engineering: an updated tertiary study, Inf. Softw. Technol., 53, 899, 10.1016/j.infsof.2011.04.004 · DOI
  3. Sutton, 2000, The role of process in software start-up, IEEE Softw., 17, 33, 10.1109/52.854066 · DOI
  4. D. Budgen, M. Turner, P. Brereton, B. Kitchenham, Using Mapping Studies in Software Engineering, in: Proceedings of the 20th Annual Meeting of the Psychology of Programming Interest Group (PPIG), 2008, pp. 195–204.
  5. Zhang, 2013, Systematic reviews in software engineering: an empirical investigation, Inf. Softw. Technol., 55, 1341, 10.1016/j.infsof.2012.09.008 · DOI
  6. T. Kane, The Importance of Startups in Job Creation and Job Destruction, Tech. rep., Kauffman Foundation, July 2010. · DOI
  7. M. Crowne, Why software product startups fail and what to do about it, in: Proceedings of the International Engineering Management Conference (IEMC), 2002, pp. 338–343. · DOI
  8. Maccormack, 2001, How internet companies build software, MIT Sloan Manage. Rev., 42, 75
  9. Eisenhardt, 1998, Time pacing: competing in markets that won’t stand still, Harvard Bus. Rev., 76, 59
  10. Coleman, 2008, An investigation into software development process formation in software start-ups, J. Enterprise Inf. Manage., 21, 633, 10.1108/17410390810911221 · DOI
  11. M. Kajko-Mattsson, N. Nikitina, From knowing nothing to knowing a little: experiences gained from process improvement in a start-up company, in: Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer Science and Software Engineering (CSSE), 2008, pp. 617–621. · DOI
  12. G. Coleman, An empirical study of software process in practice, in: Proceedings of the 38th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS), 2005, pp. 315c. · DOI
  13. E. Carmel, Time-to-completion in software package startups, Proceedings of the 27th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS), 1994, pp. 498–507. · DOI
  14. Blank, 2011, Embrace failure to start up success, Nature, 477, 133, 10.1038/477133a · DOI
  15. Bach, 1998, Microdynamics of process evolution, Computer, 31, 111, 10.1109/2.652976 · DOI
  16. I. Heitlager, R. Helms, S. Brinkkemper, A tentative technique for the study and planning of co-evolution in product software startups, in: Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop on Software Evolvability, 2007, pp. 42–47. · DOI
  17. Martin, 2007, An open source approach to developing software in a small organization, IEEE Softw., 24, 46, 10.1109/MS.2007.5 · DOI
  18. M. Tanabian, Building high-performance team through effective job design for an early stage software start-up, in: Proceedings of the International Engineering Management Conference (IEMC), 2005, pp. 789–792. · DOI
  19. Chorev, 2006, Success in Israeli high-tech start-ups; critical factors and process, Technovation, 26, 162, 10.1016/j.technovation.2005.06.014 · DOI
  20. Kakati, 2003, Success criteria in high-tech new ventures, Technovation, 23, 447, 10.1016/S0166-4972(02)00014-7 · DOI
  21. Blank, 2013, Why the lean start-up changes everything, Harvard Bus. Rev., 91, 64+
  22. J. Natt Och Dag, Elicitation and Management of User Requirements in Market-Driven Software Development, Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Communication Systems Lund Institute of Technology, 2002.
  23. P. Sawyer, I. Sommerville, G. Kotonya, Improving market-driven re processes, in: Proceedings of the International Conference on Product-Focused Software Process Improvement (PROFES), 1999.
  24. C. Potts, Invented requirements and imagined customers: requirements engineering for off-the-shelf software, in: Proceedings of the 2nd International Symposium on Requirements Engineering (RE), 1995, pp. 128–130. · DOI
  25. L. Karlsson, Å. G. Dahlstedt, J. Natt Och Dag, B. Regnell, A. Persson, Challenges in market-driven requirements engineering – an industrial interview study, in: Proceedings of the 8th International Workshop on Requirements Engineering: Foundation for Software Quality (REFSQ), 2002.
  26. A. Dahlstedt, Study of current practices in marketdriven requirements engineering, in: Proceedings of the 3rd Conference for the Promotion of Research in IT, 2003.
  27. Keil, 1995, Customer–developer links in software development, Commun. ACM, 38, 33, 10.1145/203356.203363 · DOI
  28. Dit, 2011, Feature location in source code: a taxonomy and survey, J. Softw. Maint. Evol.: Res. Pract., 25, 53, 10.1002/smr.567 · DOI
  29. Afzal, 2009, A systematic review of search-based testing for non-functional system properties, Inf. Softw. Technol., 51, 957, 10.1016/j.infsof.2008.12.005 · DOI
  30. Kamsties, 1998, Requirements engineering in small and medium enterprises, Requirements Eng., 3, 84, 10.1007/BF02919967 · DOI
  31. Laporte, 2008, A software engineering lifecycle standard for very small enterprises, vol. 16, 129
  32. Pino, 2008, Software process improvement in small and medium software enterprises: a systematic review, Softw. Qual. J., 16, 237, 10.1007/s11219-007-9038-z · DOI
  33. Richardson, 2007, Guest editors’ introduction: why are small software organizations different?, IEEE Softw., 24, 18, 10.1109/MS.2007.12 · DOI
  34. Staples, 2007, An exploratory study of why organizations do not adopt {CMMI}, J. Syst. Softw., 80, 883, 10.1016/j.jss.2006.09.008 · DOI
  35. Taticchi, 2010, Performance measurement and management: a literature review and a research agenda, Meas. Bus. Excell., 14, 4, 10.1108/13683041011027418 · DOI
  36. Thorpe, 2005, Using knowledge within small and medium-sized firms: a systematic review of the evidence, Int. J. Manage. Rev., 7, 257, 10.1111/j.1468-2370.2005.00116.x · DOI
  37. Rosenbusch, 2011, Is innovation always beneficial? A meta-analysis of the relationship between innovation and performance in {SMEs}, J. Bus. Venturing, 26, 441, 10.1016/j.jbusvent.2009.12.002 · DOI
  38. Ivarsson, 2010, A method for evaluating rigor and industrial relevance of technology evaluations, Empirical Softw. Eng., 16, 365, 10.1007/s10664-010-9146-4 · DOI
  39. Barney, 2012, Software quality trade-offs: a systematic map, Inf. Softw. Technol., 54, 651, 10.1016/j.infsof.2012.01.008 · DOI
  40. Jorgensen, 2007, A systematic review of software development cost estimation studies, Trans. Softw. Eng., 33, 33, 10.1109/TSE.2007.256943 · DOI
  41. Sayers, 2007, Tips and tricks in performing a systematic review, Brit. J. Gen. Pract., 1, 542
  42. Ivarsson, 2009, Technology transfer decision support in requirements engineering research: a systematic review of REj, Requirements Eng., 14, 155, 10.1007/s00766-009-0080-1 · DOI
  43. Unterkalmsteiner, 2012, Evaluation and measurement of software process improvement – a systematic literature review, Trans. Softw. Eng., 38, 398, 10.1109/TSE.2011.26 · DOI
  44. T. Saracevic, Evaluation of evaluation in information retrieval, in: Proceedings of the 18th Annual International ACM SIGIR Conference on Research and Development in Information Retrieval, 1995, pp. 138–146. · DOI
  45. R. Deias, G. Mugheddu, O. Murru, Introducing xp in a start-up, in: Proceedings 3rd International Conference on eXtreme Programming and Agile Processes in Software Engineering (XP), 2002, pp. 62–65.
  46. Wieringa, 2005, Requirements engineering paper classification and evaluation criteria: a proposal and a discussion, Requirements Eng., 11, 102, 10.1007/s00766-005-0021-6 · DOI · Paper page
  47. M. Shaw, Writing good software engineering research papers, in: Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE), 2003, pp. 726–736. · DOI
  48. K. Kuvinka, Scrum and the single writer, in: Proceedings of Technical Communication Summit, 2011, pp. 18–19.
  49. da Silva, 2005, Xp south of the equator: an experience implementing XP in Brazil, Extreme Program. Agile Process., 10, 10.1007/11499053_2 · DOI
  50. J. Mater, B. Subramanian, Solving the software quality management problem in Internet startups, in: Proceedings of the 18th Annual Pacific Northwest Software Quality Conference, 2000, pp. 297–306.
  51. Häsel, 2010, IT competence in internet founder teams an analysis of preferences and product innovativity, Bus. Inf. Syst. Eng., 52, 210
  52. Hanna, 2010, Information technology acquisition in the service sector, Int. J. Serv. Sci., 3, 21
  53. E. Kim, S. Tadisina, Factors impacting customers’ initial trust in e-businesses: an empirical study, in: Proceedings of the 38th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS), 2005, pp. 1–10.
  54. Midler, 2008, Managing robust development process for high-tech startups through multi-project learning: the case of two European start-ups, Int. J. Project Manage., 26, 479, 10.1016/j.ijproman.2008.05.003 · DOI
  55. S. Yogendra, Aligning business and technology strategies: a comparison of established and start-up business contexts, in: Proceedings of the Internal Engineering Management Conference (IEMC), 2002, pp. 2–7. · DOI
  56. Yoffie, 1999, Building a company on Internet time: lessons from Netscape, California Management Review, 4, 10.2307/41165995 · DOI
  57. Jansen, 2008, Pragmatic and opportunistic reuse in innovative start-up companies, IEEE Softw., 42, 10.1109/MS.2008.155 · DOI
  58. H.-J. Steenhuis, E. de Bruijn, Innovation and technology based economic development: are there short-cuts? in: Proceedings of the International Conference on Management of Innovation and Technology (ICMIT), 2008, pp. 837–841. · DOI
  59. Lai, 2010, Chinese entrepreneurship in the internet age: lessons from Alibaba.com, World Acad. Sci. Eng. Technol., 72, 405
  60. P. Tingling, Extreme programming in action: a longitudinal case study, in: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Human–computer Interaction: Interaction Design and Usability (HCI), 2007, pp. 242–251. · DOI
  61. S.-C. Li, The role of value proposition and value co-production in new internet startups: how new venture e-businesses achieve competitive advantage, in: Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), 2007, pp. 1126–1132. · DOI
  62. Mirel, 2000, Product, process, and profit: the politics of usability in a software venture, ACM J. Comput. Doc. (JCD), 24, 185, 10.1145/353927.353928 · DOI
  63. R. Stanfill, T. Astleford, Improving entrepreneurship team performance through market feasibility analysis, early identification of technical requirements, and intellectual property support, in: Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference & Exposition, 2007.
  64. Hilmola, 2003, The value of product development lead time in software startup, Syst. Dyn. Rev., 19, 75, 10.1002/sdr.255 · DOI
  65. Yoo, 2012, Key value drivers of startup companies in the new media industry – the case of online games in Korea, J. Media Econ., 25, 244, 10.1080/08997764.2012.729546 · DOI
  66. Y.-W. Yu, Y.-S. Chang, Y.-F. Chen, L.-S. Chu, Entrepreneurial success for high-tech start-ups – case study of taiwan high-tech companies, Palermo, Italy, 2012, pp. 933 – 937. · DOI
  67. Fayad, 1997, Process assessment considered wasteful, Commun. ACM, 40, 125, 10.1145/265684.265701 · DOI
  68. Bean, 2005, Wiki: a speedy new tool to manage projects, J. Corp. Account. Financ., 16, 3, 10.1002/jcaf.20128 · DOI
  69. Deakins, 2005, A helical model for managing innovative product and service initiatives in volatile commercial environments, Int. J. Project Manage., 23, 65, 10.1016/j.ijproman.2004.05.007 · DOI
  70. Ambler, 2002, Lessons in agility from internet-based development, IEEE Softw., 66, 10.1109/52.991334 · DOI
  71. B. May, Applying lean startup: an experience report – lean and lean ux by a ux veteran: Lessons learned in creating and launching a complex consumer app, in: Agile Conference (AGILE), 2012, 2012, pp. 141–147. · DOI
  72. M. Taipale, Huitale – a story of a Finnish lean startup, in: Lean Enterprise Software and Systems, vol. 65, Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, 2010, pp. 111–114. · DOI
  73. Wall, 2001, Using open source for a profitable startup, Computer, 34, 158, 10.1109/2.970592 · DOI
  74. Clark, 2012, Exploiting model driven technology: a tale of two startups, Softw. Syst. Model., 11, 481, 10.1007/s10270-012-0260-1 · DOI
  75. Šmite, 2009, Empirical evidence in global software engineering: a systematic review, Empirical Softw. Eng., 15, 91, 10.1007/s10664-009-9123-y · DOI
  76. Dybå, 2006, A systematic review of statistical power in software engineering experiments, Inf. Softw. Technol., 48, 745, 10.1016/j.infsof.2005.08.009 · DOI
  77. N. Ali, H. Edison, Towards Innovation Measurement in Software Industry, Master’s thesis, Blekinge Institute of Technology, May 2010.
  78. Dybå, 2005, Evidence-based software engineering for practitioners, IEEE Softw., 22, 58, 10.1109/MS.2005.6 · DOI
  79. B. Kitchenham, T. Dybå, M. Jorgensen, Evidence-based software engineering, in: Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE), 2004, pp. 273–281. · DOI
  80. Kurtz, 2003, The new dynamics of strategy: sense-making in a complex and complicated world, IBM Syst. J., 42, 462, 10.1147/sj.423.0462 · DOI
  81. D. Adebanjo, Challenges and approaches to customer development in co-located high-tech start-ups, in: Proceedings of the International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management (IEEM), 2010, pp. 163–167. · DOI
  82. E. Gamma, R. Helm, R.E. Johnson, J.M. Vlissides, Design patterns: Abstraction and reuse of object-oriented design, in: Proceedings of the 7th European Conference on Object-Oriented Programming (ECOOP), 1993, pp. 406–431. · DOI
  83. N. Paspallis, R. Rouvoy, P. Barone, G. Papadopoulos, F. Eliassen, A. Mamelli, A pluggable and reconfigurable architecture for a context-aware enabling middleware system, in: Proceedings of the OTM 2008 Confederated International Conferences, 2008, pp. 553–570. · DOI
  84. Basili, 2010, Linking software development and business strategy through measurement, Computer, 43, 57, 10.1109/MC.2010.108 · DOI
  85. C. Liu, J. Yang, L. Tan, M. Hafiz, R2fix: Automatically generating bug fixes from bug reports, in: Sixth International Conference on Software Testing, Verification and Validation (ICST), 2013, pp. 282–291. · DOI
  86. Banerjee, 2013, Graphical user interface (gui) testing: systematic mapping and repository, Inf. Softw. Technol., 55, 1679, 10.1016/j.infsof.2013.03.004 · DOI
  87. D. Kuhn, Selecting and effectively using a computer aided software engineering tool, in: Annual Westinghouse Computer Symposium, 1989.
  88. P. Smutny, Mobile development tools and cross-platform solutions, in: 13th International Carpathian Control Conference (ICCC), 2012, pp. 653–656. · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Paternoster, N., Giardino, C., Unterkalmsteiner, M., Gorschek, T., & Abrahamsson, P.
Affiliations
  • Blekinge Institute of Technology (SE)
  • Free University of Bozen-Bolzano (IT)
Corresponding author
Unterkalmsteiner, Michael
ORCID
Venue
Information and Software Technology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2014-10
Volume
56
Issue
10
Pages
1200-1218
ISSN
0950-5849 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.infsof.2014.04.014
OpenAlex
W2036625200
Cited by
451
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 25 · 2025: 24 · 2024: 31 · 2023: 41 · 2022: 49 · 2021: 55 · 2020: 50 · 2019: 37 · 2018: 48 · 2017: 40 · 2016: 26 · 2015: 20 · 2014: 5
FWCI
52.46
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Information and Software Technology (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • KTH Publication Database DiVA (KTH Royal Institute of Technology) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Lund University Publications (Lund University) (submittedVersion)
  • Open Research (University of Surrey) (submittedVersion)
  • Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
  • Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) (cc-by)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Software Engineering Techniques and Practices
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Software Engineering Research
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Software › Advanced Software Engineering Methodologies
Keywords
software startups, software engineering practices, resource constraints, technology transfer

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review