The DOI matches its Crossref record; the references it cites are not checked yet.
Understanding Similarities and Differences in Software Development Practices Across Domains
Abstract
Since software engineering is globalized and not a homogeneous whole, we expect that development practices are differently adopted across domains. However, little is known about how practices are followed in different software domains (e.g., healthcare, banking, and Oil and gas). In this paper, we report the results of an exploratory and inductive research, in which we seek differences and similarities regarding the adoption of several widespread practices across 13 domains. We interviewed 19 worldwide developers with experience in multiple domains (i.e., cross-domain developers) from large multinational companies, such as Facebook, Google, and Macy's. We also run a Web survey to confirm (or not) the interview results. Our findings show that, in fact, different domains adopt practices in a different fashion. We identified that continuous integration practices are interrupted during important commerce periods (e.g., Black Friday) in the financial domains. We also noticed the company's culture and policies strongly influence the adopted practices, instead of the domain itself. Our study also has important implications for global software engineering practices. For instance, companies should provide targeted training for their development teams and new interdisciplinary courses in software engineering and other domains, such as healthcare, are highly recommended.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
In the citing paper
“Paper S2-ACM-05 (Viggiato et al., 2019) presents an exploratory and inductive research study to identify similarities and differences of GSE practices from different domains.”
From Identifying the primary dimensions of DevSecOps: A multi-vocal literature review (2024) · cites this paper as Viggiato et al., 2019
In the citing paper
“(d) Social network domain typically has no dedicated test team, tests are conducted by developers, relying on modern architectures, such as micro-services.”
From Identifying the primary dimensions of DevSecOps: A multi-vocal literature review (2024) · cites this paper as Viggiato et al., 2019
In the citing paper
“(b) the E-commerce domain particularly values UX and non-functional requirements (performance, usability, security), so they are accustomed to conduct extensive tests instead of frequent continuous delivery;”
From Identifying the primary dimensions of DevSecOps: A multi-vocal literature review (2024) · cites this paper as Viggiato et al., 2019
In the citing paper
“(a) Continuous integration is not always a homogeneous GSE practice in some domains, e.g. banking and ecommerce domains usually interrupt continuous integration during critical commerce periods (like Black Friday), aiming at avoiding inserting bugs in systems;”
From Identifying the primary dimensions of DevSecOps: A multi-vocal literature review (2024) · cites this paper as Viggiato et al., 2019
In the citing paper
“(c) Healthcare domains give high priority to reliability, privacy and security, so more security practices are needed;”
From Identifying the primary dimensions of DevSecOps: A multi-vocal literature review (2024) · cites this paper as Viggiato et al., 2019
Citations
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 43 · Cited by 15
Research works printed but not linked: 37
- 10.1145/2950290.2950325 · DOI
- 10.1177/1077800405284363 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1145/2970276.2970358 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1145/3106237.3106270 · DOI
- 10.1145/2635868.2635910 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.jss.2013.08.032 · DOI
- 10.1145/2786805.2786809 · DOI
- 10.1145/2568225.2568233 · DOI
- 10.1145/2884781.2884789 · DOI
- 10.1109/MS.2018.2141039 · DOI
- 10.1109/MS.2018.2141038 · DOI
- 10.1145/2568225.2568226 · DOI
- mori, 2018, Evaluating Domain-Specific Metric Thresholds: An Empirical Study, Proceedings of the 2018 International Conference on Technical Debt - TechDebt '18, 41, 10.1145/3194164.3194173 · DOI
- 10.1145/2897683.2897686 · DOI
- strauss, 1990, Basics of Qualitative Research Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques
- 10.1007/978-3-642-29044-2 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1111/j.1365-2575.2007.00273.x · DOI
- 10.1016/j.lrp.2011.09.003 · DOI
- 10.1109/HICSS.2011.475 · DOI
- 10.1145/2785592.2785617 · DOI
- 10.1109/ASE.2017.8115622 · DOI
- 10.1109/MSR.2015.23 · DOI
- 10.1109/2.947100 · DOI
- 10.1145/2786805.2786850 · DOI · Paper page
- gamma, 1995, Design Patterns Elements of Reusable Object-Oriented Software
- 10.1016/j.jss.2015.06.063 · DOI
- duvall, 2007, Continuous Integration Improving Software Quality and Reducing Risk
- 10.1109/ICSE.2012.6227099 · DOI
- 10.1109/MS.2015.27 · DOI
- 10.1145/2961111.2962614 · DOI
- 10.1145/1882291.1882312 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1109/ICSE-SEIP.2017.10 · DOI
- 10.1145/2642937.2642939 · DOI
- 10.1145/2597008.2597144 · DOI
- 10.1145/1176617.1176729 · DOI
- 10.1002/9781405165518.wbeosg070 · DOI
- 10.1109/TSE.2002.1027796 · DOI
Metadata
- Authors
- Viggiato, M., Oliveira, J., Figueiredo, E., Jamshidi, P., & Kastner, C.
- Affiliations
- University of Alberta (CA)
- Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais (BR)
- University of South Carolina (US)
- Venue
- 2019 ACM/IEEE 14th International Conference on Global Software Engineering (ICGSE)
- Publisher
- IEEE
- Published
- 2019-05
- Pages
- 84-94
- OpenAlex
- W2964477267
- Cited by
- 15
- References
- 43
- Citations by year
- 2024: 1 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 3 · 2019: 1
- FWCI
- 1.19
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- Locations
- IEEE International Conference on Global Software Engineering (ICGSE) (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Petrobras
- 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 development practices, continuous integration, organizational culture, organizational policy, global software engineering, developer training, medical software, financial software
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Understanding Similarities and Differences in Software Development Practices Across Domains. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/icgse.2019.00013
- The paper
- Viggiato, M., Oliveira, J., Figueiredo, E., Jamshidi, P., & Kastner, C. (2019). Understanding Similarities and Differences in Software Development Practices Across Domains. 2019 ACM/IEEE 14th International Conference on Global Software Engineering (ICGSE). https://doi.org/10.1109/icgse.2019.00013
