Classification of Design Decisions – An Expert Survey in Practice

  • Cornelia Miesbauer
  • Rainer Weinreich
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7957)


Support for capturing architectural knowledge has been identified as an important research challenge. As the basis for an approach for recovering design decisions and capturing their rationale we have performed an expert survey in practice to gain insights into the different kinds, influence factors, and sources for design decisions and also on how they are currently captured in practice. The survey has been performed with software architects, software team leads, and senior developers from six different companies in Austria with more than 10 years of experience in software development on average. The survey confirms earlier work by other authors on design decision classification and influence factors but also identifies additional kinds of decisions and influence factors not mentioned in this previous work. In addition, we gained insight into the practice of capturing, the relative importance of different decisions and influence factors, and on potential sources for recovering decisions.


Software Architecture Knowledge Management Design Decisions Design Decision Classification Capturing Design Decisions 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Babar, M.A., Dingsøyr, T., Lago, P., van Vliet, H. (eds.): Software Architecture Knowledge Management: Theory and Practice. Springer (2009)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lee, J.: Design rationale systems: Understanding the issues. IEEE Intelligent Systems 12(3), 78–85 (1997)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Capilla, R., Nava, F., Carrillo, C.: Effort estimation in capturing architectural knowledge. In: 23rd IEEE/ACM International Conference on Automated Software Engineering, pp. 208–217 (2008)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lee, L., Kruchten, P.: Capturing software architectural design decisions. In: Canadian Conference on Electrical and Computer Engineering, pp. 686–689 (2007)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Tang, A., Babar, M.A., Gorton, I., Han, J.: A survey of architecture design rationale. J. Syst. Softw. 79(12), 1792–1804 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Capilla, R., Dueñas, J.C., Nava, F.: Viability for codifying and documenting architectural design decisions with tool support. J. Softw. Maint. Evol. 22(2), 81–119 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jansen, A., Bosch, J., Avgeriou, P.: Documenting after the fact: Recovering architectural design decisions. J. Syst. Softw. 81(4), 536–557 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Eloranta, V.P., Koskimies, K.: Agile software architecture knowledge management. In: Babar, M.A., Brown, A.W., Koskimies, K., Mistrik, I. (eds.) Agile Software Architecture: Aligning Agile Processes and Software Architecture. Elsevier (to appear, 2013)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    van Heesch, U., Eloranta, V.P.P., Avgeriou, P., Koskimies, K., Harrison, N.: DCAR - decision-centric architecture reviews. IEEE Softw. Early Access (2013)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Clements, P., Kazman, R., Klein, M.: Evaluating Software Architectures: Methods and Case Studies. Addison-Wesley Professional (2001)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Miesbauer, C., Weinreich, R.: Capturing and maintaining architectural knowledge using context information. In: Joint 10th Working Conf. on Software Architecture & 6th European Conf. on Software Architecture. IEEE (2012)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Weinreich, R., Miesbauer, C., Buchgeher, G., Kriechbaum, T.: Extracting and facilitating architecture in service-oriented software systems. In: Joint 10th Working Conf. on Software Architecture & 6th European Conf. on Software Architecture. IEEE (2012)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kruchten, P.: An ontology of architectural design decisions in software intensive systems. In: 2nd Groningen Workshop on Software Variability, pp. 54–61 (2004)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kruchten, P.: Documentation of software architecture from a knowledge management perspective design representation. In: Ali Babar, M., Dingsøoyr, T., Lago, P., Vliet, H. (eds.) Software Architecture Knowledge Management, pp. 39–57. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kruchten, P., Lago, P., van Vliet, H.: Building up and reasoning about architectural knowledge. In: Hofmeister, C., Crnkovic, I., Reussner, R. (eds.) QoSA 2006. LNCS, vol. 4214, pp. 43–58. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Zimmermann, O., Koehler, J., Leymann, F., Polley, R., Schuster, N.: Managing architectural decision models with dependency relations, integrity constraints, and production rules. Journal of Systems and Software 82(8), 1249–1267 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Buber, R., Holzmüller, H.H. (eds.): Qualitative Marktforschung. Betriebswirtschaftlicher Verlag Dr. Th. Gabler/GWV Fachverlage GmbH, Wiesbaden (2007)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Helfferich, C.: Die Qualität qualitativer Daten Manual für die Durchführung qualitativer Interviews. VS, Verl. für Sozialwiss. Wiesbaden (2011)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Mayring, P.: Einführung in die qualitative Sozialforschung: eine Anleitung zu qualitativem Denken. Beltz, Weinheim (2002)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    de Boer, R.C., van Vliet, H.: Experiences with semantic wikis for architectural knowledge management. In: 2011 Ninth Working IEEE/IFIP Conference on Software Architecture, pp. 32–41 (2011)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Tang, A.: Software designers, are you biased? In: Proceedings of the 6th International Workshop on SHAring and Reusing Architectural Knowledge, SHARK 2011, pp. 1–8. ACM, New York (2011)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Adolph, S., Hall, W., Kruchten, P.: Using grounded theory to study the experience of software development. Empirical Software Engineering 16(4), 487–513 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Gasson, S.: Rigor in grounded theory research: An interpretive perspective on generating theory from qualitative field studies. In: Whitman, M.E., Woszczynski, A.B. (eds.) The Handbook of Information Systems Research. Idea Group Inc. (IGI) (2004)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Cornelia Miesbauer
    • 1
  • Rainer Weinreich
    • 1
  1. 1.Johannes Kepler University LinzAustria

Personalised recommendations