Advertisement

Novel Approach for Mobile Based App Development Incorporating MAAF

  • Mamta Pandey
  • Ratnesh LitoriyaEmail author
  • Prateek Pandey
Article
  • 27 Downloads

Abstract

Increased dominance of mobile applications (henceforth, app) over conventional software applications is quite apparent; however, there is a lack of structured mechanisms for efficient mobile application development. Classical software development models were successfully used with conventional applications with or without adaptations, but due to the distinctive characteristics of apps, these development models are not suitable to rely upon. Agile development models proved themselves worthy of using in different development environments and team traits irrespective of the software application size. It is evident that incorporating agility in the software development paradigm not only speeds up the development process, but it also eases the communication flow between the client and the development team. It is also observed that peculiar characteristic of an app development project is the constant negotiations between the client and the team. Thus, agile and mobile forms a ridge-and-groove formation and deem fit to fulfill various parameters of mobile application development—if applied appropriately. The objective of this paper is to determine the agility of an app project in the subject and to propose a recommendation framework based on this agility and other project characteristics. For convenience, we call this framework as MAAF—Mobile Application Agility Framework. This framework is validated by assigning the same project to be built by four different agile teams. Out of the four agile teams, one team used the technique recommended by the proposed framework, and the other three teams adopted agile methods of their choice. This process is repeated for five different mobile app projects. The developed apps were later presented to the user community for ratings. The rating reports suggest that the proposed recommendation framework based on agility indeed works satisfactorily. The outcome of this work will help app developers and project managers deliver solutions in time and with utmost customer satisfaction.

Keywords

Agile methodology Agility Fuzzy AHP Mobile application development MCDM Recommendation framework 

Notes

References

  1. 1.
    Android and google play statistics (2019). https://www.appbrain.com/stats. Accessed 15 Mar 2019.
  2. 2.
    Google play store buries low quality android apps (2019). https://www.mobilemarketer.com/news/google-play-store-buries-low-quality-android-apps/448601/. Accessed 15 Mar 2019.
  3. 3.
    Pandey, M., Litoriya, R., & Pandey, P. (2018). An ISM approach for modelling the issues and factors of mobile APP development. International Journal of Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering, 28(7), 937–953.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
  5. 5.
    Morris, B., & Cheng, M. B. (2010). Introduction to bada: A developer’s guide. Hoboken: Wiley.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Pandey, M., Litoriya, R., & Pandey, P. (2018). Mobile APP development based on agility function. Ingénierie des Systèmes d’Information, 23(6), 19–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Abrahamsson, P., Hanhineva, A., Hulkko, H., Ihme, T., Jäälinoja, J., Korkala, M., Koskela, J., Kyllönen, P. & Salo, O. (2004). Mobile-D: An agile approach for mobile application development. In Proceeding of OOPSLA ‘04 Companion to the 19th annual ACM SIGPLAN conference on Object-oriented programming systems, languages, and applications (pp. 174–175).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sultan, A. K. M. & Olademeji, E. (2018). Requirements engineering approaches for mobile apps development, Available from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/329322823. Accessed 15 Mar 2019.
  9. 9.
    The state of software quality, part 2: The challenge of building quality into the development life c. https://searchsoftwarequality.techtarget.com/news/1244653/The-state-of-software-quality-part-2-The-challenge-of-building-quality-into-the-development-life-c. Accessed 15 Mar 2019.
  10. 10.
    Agile framework comparison: Scrum vs kanban vs lean vs XP (2019). https://dzone.com/articles/agile-framework-comparison-scrum-vs-kanban-vs-lean. Accessed 15 Mar 2019.
  11. 11.
    Differences between scrum and extreme programming (2019). https://www.mountaingoatsoftware.com/blog/differences-between-scrum-and-extreme-programming. Accessed 17 Mar 2019.
  12. 12.
    Agile framework comparison: Scrum vs kanban vs lean vs XP (2019). https://www.objectstyle.com/agile/agile-scrum-kanban-lean-xp-comparison. Accessed 19 Mar 2019.
  13. 13.
    Litoriya, R., & Kothari, A. (2013). An efficient approach for agile web based project estimation: AgileMOW. Journal of Software Engineering and Applications (Scientific Research USA), 6(6), 297–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Islam, N., & Want, R. (2014). Smartphones: past, present, and future. IEEE Pervasive Computing, 13(4), 89–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Pandey, M., Litoriya, R., & Pandey, P. (2016). Mobile applications in context of big data: A survey. In Symposium on Colossal Data Analysis and Networking (CDAN).  https://doi.org/10.1109/cdan.2016.7570942.
  16. 16.
    Data from net market share (2019). https://www.netmarketshare.com/. Accessed 21 Mar 2019.
  17. 17.
    Corral, L., Sillitti, A. & Succi, G. (2013). Software development processes for mobile systems: Is agile really taking over the business. In 2013 1st International Workshop on the Engineering of Mobile-Enabled Systems (MOBS) (pp.19–24).Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Patil, V., Panicker, S., & Maitreyi, K. V. (2016). Use of agile methodology for mobile applications. International Journal of Latest Technology in Engineering, Management & Applied Science., 5(10), 73–77.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Jeong, Y. J., Lee, J. H. & Shin, G. S. (2008). Development process of mobile application SW based on agile methodology. In 10th International Conference on Advanced Communication Technology, Gangwon-Do, South Korea (pp. 362–366).Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Rahimian, V. & Ramsin, R. (2007). Designing an agile methodology for mobile software development: a hybrid method engineering approach. In Second International Conference on Research Challenges in Information Science, Marrakech, Morocco (pp. 351–356).Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Scharff, C. & Verma, R. (2010). Scrum to support mobile application development projects in a just-in-time learning context. In Proceedings of the 2010 ICSE Workshop on Cooperative and Human Aspects of Software Engineering (pp. 25–31). New York, NY, USA.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Cunha, T. F. V., & Dantas, V. L. L. (2011). SLeSS: A scrum and lean six sigma integration approach for the development of software customization for mobile phones. In 25th Brazilian Symposium on Software Engineering, Sao Paulo, Brazil (pp. 283–292).Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Zhang, D. B., & Adipat, B. (2009). Challenges, methodologies, and issues in the usability testing of mobile applications. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 18(3), 293–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Gasimov, A., Tan, C. H., Phang C. W., & Sutanto, J. (2010). Visiting mobile application development: what, how and where. In Proceedings of 2010 ninth international conference on mobile business and global mobility roundtable, Athens, Greece (pp. 74–81).Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kamthan, P. (2008). Towards high-quality mobile applications by a systematic integration of patterns. Journal of Mobile Multimedia, 4(3), 165–184.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Sa, D.M., & Carrigo, L. (2008). Lessons from early stages design of mobile applications. In Proceeding of the 2008, 10th international conference on Human computer interaction with mobile devices and services, Amsterdam, The Netherlands (pp. 127–136).Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Scharff, C. & Verma, R. (2010). Scrum to support mobile application development projects in a just-in-time learning context. In Proceeding of the 2010 ICSE workshop on cooperative and human aspects of software engineering (pp. 25–31). Amsterdam, Netherlands.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Liu, Z., Gao, X., & Long, X. (2010). Adaptive random testing of mobile application. In Proceeding of the 2010, 2nd International conference on computer engineering and technology, Chengdu, China (pp. 297–301).Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Kim, Y., & Park, G. (2011). The 4-tier design pattern for the development of an Android application. In Proceeding of the 2016 international conference on data and software engineering, Berlin, Heidelberg (pp. 196–203).Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Amalfitano, D., Fasilino, A. R., Tramontana, P., Amatucci, N. (2013). Considering context events in event based testing of mobile applications. In Proceeding of the 2013, sixth international conference on software testing verification and validation workshops (pp. 126–133). Luxembourg, Luxembourg.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Flora, D., & Wang, X. (2014). Adopting an agile approach for the development of mobile applications. Journal of Computer Applications, 94(17), 43–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Vallon, R. (2015). An agile and lean process model for mobile APP development: Case study into austrian industry. Journal of Software, 10(11), 1245–1264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Pandey, P., & Litoriya, R. (2019). An activity vigilance system for elderly based on fuzzy probability transformations. Journal of Intelligent and Fuzzy Systems, 36(3), 2481–2494.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Almasri, A. K. (2016). A proposed hybrid agile framework model for mobile apps development. International Journal of Software Engineering & Applications, 7(2), 1–9.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Baktha, K. (2017). Mobile application development: All the steps and guidelines for successful creation of mobile app. International Journal of Computer Science and Mobile Computing, 6(6), 15–20.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Ahmad, A., Li, K., Feng, C., Asim, S. M., Yousif, A., & Ge, S. (2018). An empirical study of investigating mobile applications development challenges. IEEE Access, 6, 17711–17728.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Hansen, A. B., Grønli, T. M., Ghinea, G., & Alouneh, S. (2019). An empirical study of cross-platform mobile development in industry. Wireless Communications and Mobile Computing.  https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/5743892.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Scacchi, W. (2011). Process models in software engineering. Encyclopaedia of software engineering.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Rajput, G. S., & Litoriya, R. (2014). Corad agile method for agile software cost estimation. Open Access Library Journal, 1, e579.  https://doi.org/10.4236/oalib.1100579.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Litoriya, R., Sharma, N., & Kothari, A. (2012). Incorporating cost driver substitution to improve the effort using agile COCOMO II. In CSI Sixth International Conference on Software Engineering (CONSEG).  https://doi.org/10.1109/conseg.2012.6349494.
  41. 41.
    Pressmen, R. (2014). Software engineering: A practitioner’s perspectiven (7th ed., pp. 769–798). New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Boehm, B. W. (1988). A spiral model of software development and enhancement. Computer, 21(5), 61–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Matharu, G. S., Mishra, A., Singh, H., & Upadhyay, P. (2015). Empirical study of agile software development methodologies: A comparative analysis. ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes, 40, 1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Litoriya, R., & Kothari, A. (2013). Cost estimation of web projects in context with Agile paradigm: Improvements and validation. International Journal of Software Engineering (A Publication of Software Engineering Competence Center Egypt)., 6(2), 91–114.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Hwang, C. L., & Yoon, K. (1981). Multiple attribute decision making. In Y. J. Lai & C. L. Hwang (Eds.), Lecture notes in economics and mathematical systems. Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Chen, C. T. (2000). Extensions of the TOPSİS for group decision making under fuzzy environment. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 114(1), 1–9.CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Olson, D. L. (2004). Comparison of weights in TOPSIS models. Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 40(7–8), 721–727.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Saaty, T. L. (1980). The analytic hierarchy process. New York: McGra Hill.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Csutora, R., & Buckley, J. J. (2001). Fuzzy hierarchical analysis: The lambda-max method. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 120(2), 181–195.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Deng, H. (1999). Multicriteria analysis with fuzzy pairwise comparison. International Journal of Approximate Reasoning, 21(3), 215–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Chen, C. T. (2000). Extensions of the TOPSİS for group decision making under fuzzy environment. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 114(1), 1–9.CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Pandey, P., Litoriya, R., & Tiwari, A. (2018). A framework for fuzzy modelling in agricultural diagnostics. Journal Européen des Systèmes Automatisés, 51(4), 203–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Olson, D. L. (2004). Comparison of weights in TOPSIS models. Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 1, 1–7.MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Pandey, M., Litoriya, R., & Pandey, P. (2019). Perception-based classification of mobile apps: A critical review. In A. K. Luhach, K. B. Hawari, I. C. Mihai, P. A. Hsiung, & R. B. Mishra (Eds.), Smart computational strategies: Theoretical and practical aspects (pp. 121–133). Singapore: Springer.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-6295-8_11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    What are the popular types and categories of apps? https://thinkmobiles.com/blog/popular-types-of-apps/. Accessed 15 Mar 2019.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Jaypee University of Engineering and TechnologyGunaIndia

Personalised recommendations