Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Empirical Validation of Software Integration Practices in Global Software Development

  • Original Research
  • Published:
SN Computer Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Software complexity accrues, as modern societies are highly dependent on large-scale, software-intensive systems that increasingly operate within an environment of continuous availability. Global software development (GSD) vendors strive to reduce this complexity by decomposing the target software product into various components that are developed in-house, outsourced or purchased as commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) components. Subsequently, these components are integrated into a final working product. However, there is a lack of specific practices to be followed by GSD vendors in the software integration phase. In our previous study, we identified a list of nine software integration critical success factors (CSFs) for GSD vendors. In order to assist GSD vendors in adoption of the identified CSFs, we conducted another Systematic Literature Review (SLR) for identification of practices and validated the results using questionnaire survey. We identified 116 software integration practices/solutions that will help GSD vendors in trimming down the complexity of their software integration process.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Agerfalk PJ, Fitzgerald B, Olsson HH, Conchuir EO. Benefits of global software development: the known and unknown. In: Making globally distributed software development a success story. Springer; 2008, p. 1–9.

  2. Khan RA, Khan SU, Niazi M. Communication and coordination challenges mitigation in offshore software development outsourcing relationships: findings from systematic literature review. In: The tenth international conference on software engineering advances (ICSEA 2015), Barcelona, Spain; 2015, p. 45–51.

  3. Jimenez M, Piattini M, Vizcaino A. Challenges and improvements in distributed software development: a systematic review. Adv Softw Eng. 2009;2009:1–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Agerfalk PJ, Fitzgerald B, Holmstrom Olsson H, Lings B, Lundell B, ConchAir EA. A framework for considering opportunities and threats in distributed software development. In: Proceedings of the international workshop on distributed software development, Paris, 2005, p. 47–61.

  5. Khan AW, Khan SU. Solutions for critical challenges in offshore software outsourcing contract. Pak Acad Sci. 2015;52:331–44.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Niazi M, Mahmood S, Alshayeb M, Hroub A. Empirical investigation of the challenges of the existing tools used in global software development projects. IET Softw. 2015;9:135–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Larsson S. Key elements of the product integration process. Ph.D. Thesis Proposal, Department of Computer science and Electronics, Malardalen University Sweden, Malardalen, 2007.

  8. Van Moll J, Ammerlaan R. Identifying pitfalls of system integration-an exploratory study. In: IEEE international conference on software testing verification and validation workshop (ICSTW), Lillehammer, 2008, p. 331–338.

  9. Ilyas M, Khan SU. Software integration in global software development: success factors for GSD vendors. In: 16th IEEE/ACIS international conference on software engineering, artificial intelligence, networking and parallel/distributed computing (SNPD 2015), Takamatsu, Japan, 2015, p. 119–124.

  10. Ilyas M, Khan SU. Software integration challenges in global software development environment: a systematic literature review protocol. IOSR J Comput Eng. 2012;1:29–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Ilyas M, Khan SU. An empirical investigation of the software integration success factors in GSD environment. In: 15th ACIS international conference on software engineering research, management and applications (SERA 2017), London, UK, 2017, p. 255–262.

  12. Ilyas M, Khan SU. Practices for software integration success factors in GSD environment. In: 15th international conference on computer and information science (ICIS), 2016 IEEE/ACIS, Okayama, Japan, 2016, p. 1–6.

  13. Ilyas M, Khan SU. An exploratory study of success factors in software integration for GSD vendors. Proc Pak Acad Sci. 2016;53:239–53.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Cox K, Niazi M, Verner J. Empirical study of Sommerville and Sawyer’s requirements engineering practices. IET Softw J. 2009;3:339–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Khan RA, Khan SU. Empirical exploration of communication and coordination practices in offshore software development outsourcing. Proc Pak Acad Sci. 2017;54:41–54.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Herbsleb JD, Grinter RE. Splitting the organization and integrating the code: Conway’s Law revisited. In: Proceedings of the 21st international conference on software engineering (ICSE), NY USA, 1999, p. 85–95.

  17. McConnel S. Code complete 2. Redmond: Microsoft Press; 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Szyperski C. Component software: beyond object-oriented programming. 2nd ed. London: Addison-Wesley and ACM Press; 2002.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  19. Zafar AA, Saif S, Khan M, Iqbal J, Akhunzada A, Wadood A, et al. Taxonomy of factors causing integration failureduring global software development. IEEE Access. 2018;6:22228–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Saleem N. Empirical analysis of critical success factors for project management in global software development. Presented at the 14th international conference on global software engineering (ICGSE), Montreal, QC, Canada, 2019.

  21. Rashid N, Khan SU. Agile practices for global software development vendors in the development of green and sustainable software. J Softw Evol Process. 2018;30:1–25.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Paloheimo. H. Feasibility of SW Architecture Integration in a Distributed R&D Environment. HUT/SoberIT 2003, Fall T-76.6512003.

  23. Cataldo M, Herbsleb JD. Factors leading to integration failures in global feature-oriented development: an empirical analysis. In: 33rd international conference on software engineering (ICSE), Waikiki, Honolulu, HI, USA, 2011, p. 161–170.

  24. Tekumalla B. Status of empirical research in component based software engineering. Master of Science Thesis in Software Engineering and Management, Department of Computer Science and Engineering, University of Gothenburg, Sweden, 2012.

  25. Guimaraes ML, Silva AR. Making software integration really continuous. In: Fundamental approaches to software engineering, vol. 7212, ed Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, 2012, p. 332–346.

  26. Vasilescu B, Van Schuylenburg S, Wulms J, Serebrenik A, van den Brand MG. Continuous integration in a social-coding world: empirical evidence from GitHub. In: International conference on software maintenance and evolution (ICSME), BC, Canada, 2014, p. 401–405.

  27. Nachiyappan S, Justus S. Cloud testing tools and its challenges: a comparative study. Science Direct. 2015;50:482–9.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Adams B, Kavanagh R, Hassan AE, German DM. An empirical study of integration activities in distributions of open source software. Empir Softw Eng. 2015;2015:1–42.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Ali S, Khan SU. Practices for implementation of the critical success factors in software outsourcing partnership from vendors’ perspective: a literature review. Proc Pak Acad Sci. 2016;53:145–62.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Kitchenham B, Charters S. Guidelines for performing systematic literature reviews in software engineering. UK: Keele University; 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Niazi M. Do systematic literature reviews outperform informal literature reviews in the software engineering domain? An initial case study. Arab J Sci Eng. 2015;40:845–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Niazi M, Mahmood S, Alshayeb M, Riaz MR, Faisal K, Cerpa N, et al. Challenges of project management in global software development: a client-vendor analysis. Inf Softw Technol. 2016;80:1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Nguyen-Duc A, Cruzes DS, Conradi R. The impact of global dispersion on coordination, team performance and software quality—a systematic literature review. Inf Softw Technol. 2015;57:277–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Schneider S, Torkar R, Gorschek T. Solutions in global software engineering: a systematic literature review. Int J Inf Manag. 2013;33:119–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Mohammed NM, Niazi M, Alshayeb M, Mahmood S. Exploring software security approaches in software development lifecycle: a systematic mapping study. Comput Stand Interfaces. 2017;50:107–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Ilyas M, Younas M, Khan SU. Software integration practices for GSD vendors—a systematic literature review protocol. In: 4th international multi-topic coference (IMTIC,15), Hyderabad Pakistan, 2015, p. 429–438.

  37. Wohlin C, Höst M, Henningsson K.. Empirical research methods in software engineering. In: Empirical methods and studies in software engineering. Springer; 2003, p. 7–23.

  38. Ambreen T, Ikram N, Usman M, Niazi M. Empirical research in requirements engineering: trends and opportunities. Requir Eng. 2016;21:1–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Alshayeb M. Empirical investigation of refactoring effect on software quality. Inf Softw Technol. 2009;51:1319–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Gill AQ, Henderson-Sellers B, Niazi M. Scaling for agility: a reference model for hybrid traditional-agile software development methodologies. Inf Syst Front. 2018;20:315–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Creswell JW. Educational research: planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. 4th ed. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall; 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Kitchenham B, Pickard L, Pfleeger SL. Case studies for method and tool evaluation. IEEE Softw. 1995;12:52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Shivakumar P, Kanth Vijapurapu K. Tacit knowledge preservation at vendor organizations in offshore outsourcing software development. Master Thesis, School of Computing, Blekinge Institute of Technology, Karlskrona, Sweden, 2014.

  44. Niazi M, Wilson D, Zowghi D. A framework for assisting the design of effective software process improvement implementation strategies. J Syst Softw. 2004;78:204–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Patton MQ. Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Thousands Oaks: SAGE; 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Oza NV, Hall T, Rainer A, Grey S. Trust in software outsourcing relationships: an empirical investigation of Indian software companies. Inf Softw Technol. 2006;48:345–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Sauer J. Architecture-centric development in globally distributed projects. In: Agility across time and space. Springer Berlin Heidelberg; 2010, p. 321–329.

  48. Kommeren R, Parviainen PI. Philips experiences in global distributed software development. Empir Softw Eng. 2007;12:647–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Dunn L. An investigation of the factors affecting the lifecycle costs of COTS-based systems. PhD Thesis, University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth, UK, 2011.

  50. Wolf T, Schroter A, Damian D, Nguyen T. Predicting build failures using social network analysis on developer communication. In: Proceedings of the 31st international conference on software engineering (ICSE), 2009, p. 1–11.

  51. Haikonen P. Distributed Agile software development and the requirements for Information Technology. Master’s Thesis, Helsinki University of Technology, Finland, 2009.

  52. Hyysalo J, Parviainen P, Tihinen M. Collaborative development: Industrial experiences and needs for further research. In: Profes2005 workshop, 2005, p. 13–15.

  53. Koroorian S, Kajko-Mattsson M. A tale of two daily build projects. In: International conference on software engineering advances (ICSEA), Sliema, Malta, 2008, p. 245–251.

  54. Stol K-J, Babar MA, Avgeriou P, Fitzgerald B. A comparative study of challenges in integrating Open Source Software and Inner Source Software. Inf Softw Technol. 2011;53:1319–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Bosch J, Bosch-Sijtsema P. From integration to composition: on the impact of software product lines, global development and ecosystems. J Syst Softw. 2010;83:67–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Gotel O, Kulkarni V, Scharff C, Neak L. Integration starts on day one in global software development projects. In: IEEE international conference on global software engineering (ICGSE), Bangalore, India, 2008, p. 244–248.

  57. Land R, Crnkovic I. Software systems in-house integration: architecture, process practices, and strategy selection. Inf Softw Technol. 2006;49:419–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Ramasubbu N, Mehra A, Mookerjee VS. Modeling coordination in offshore software development. In: Asia Pacific conference on information systems, Hyderabad, India, 2009, p. 102–113.

  59. Li J, Slyngstad O, Torchiano M, Morisio M, Bunse C. A state-of-the-practice survey of risk management in development with off-the-shelf software components. IEEE Trans Softw Eng. 2008;34:271–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Li J, Conradi R, Bunse C, Torchiano M, Slyngstad OPN, Morisio M. Development with off-the-shelf components: 10 facts. IEEE Softw. 2009;26:80–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Stol K, Babar MA, Avgeriou P. The importance of architectural knowledge in integrating open source software. In: Open source systems: grounding research. Springer, 2011, p. 142–158.

  62. Yu-Hong W, Shuang-Hua Y, Alan G, Julian J. A DDS based framework for remote integration over the Internet. In: 7th Annual conference on systems engineering research (CSER), Loughborough University, 2009.

  63. Hintikka A, Hyysalo J. ROOSTER project task 2: Cluster processes. Helsinki: Rooster Smartphone Innovation Cluster; 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  64. Fowler M, Foemmel M. Continuous integration. Thought-Works http://www.thoughtworks.com/ContinuousIntegration.pdf, 2006.

  65. Syvertsen MM. Selection and use of third-party software components: study of a IT consultancy firm. Master of Science in Informatics, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Norway, 2011.

  66. Larsson S, Myllyperkio P, Ekdahl F, Crnkovic I. Software product integration: a case study-based synthesis of reference models. Inf Softw Technol. 2009;51:1066–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Klaas-Jan S. Supporting product development with software from the bazaar. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Limerick, Limerick, 2011.

  68. Kitchenham BA, Pfleeger SL, Pickard LM, Jones PW, Hoaglin DC, El Emam K, et al. Preliminary guidelines for empirical research in software engineering. IEEE Trans Softw Eng. 2002;28:721–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. Ilyas M, Khan SU. Software integration model for global software development. In: 15th international multitopic conference (INMIC), Islamabad, Pakistan, 2012, p. 452–457.

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to the anonymous reviewers of the IEEE conference, ACIS 2016 at Japan, for their constructive feedback and publishing the preliminary version of this paper [12]. We are also grateful to all participants of the questionnaire survey. We are also thankful to all members of the Software Engineering Research Group (SERG-UOM) at the University of Malakand for reviewing the SLR protocol and piloting of the questionnaire.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Software Engineering Research Group (SERG_UOM), Department of Computer Science & IT, University of Malakand, Chakdara, Lower Dir District, KPK, Pakistan

    Muhammad Ilyas, Siffat Ullah Khan & Nasir Rashid

Authors
  1. Muhammad Ilyas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Siffat Ullah Khan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Nasir Rashid
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Muhammad Ilyas.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendices

Appendix 1

List of finally selected papers in the SLR for data extraction.

  1. 1.

    N. Ramasubbu, M. Cataldo, R. K. Balan, and J. D. Herbsleb, “Configuring global software teams: a multi-company analysis of project productivity, quality, and profits,” in Proceedings of the 33rd international conference on Software engineering, 2011, pp. 261–270.

  2. 2.

    R. Land, I. Crnkovic, and S. Larsson, “Process patterns for software systems in-house integration and merge-experiences from industry,” presented at 31st EUROMICRO Conference on Software Engineering and Advanced Applications, Sweden, 2005.

  3. 3.

    R. Land and I. Crnkovic, “Software systems in-house integration: Architecture, process practices, and strategy selection,” Information and Software Technology (IST), vol. 49, pp. 419–444, 2006.

  4. 4.

    O. Gotel, V. Kulkarni, C. Scharff, and L. Neak, “Integration starts on day one in global software development projects,” presented at IEEE International Conference on Global Software Engineering (ICGSE), Bangalore, India, 2008.

  5. 5.

    J. Gao, F. Itaru, and Y. Toyoshima, “Managing Problems for Global Software Production - Experience and Lessons,” Information Technology and Management, vol. 3, pp. 85–112 LA - English, 2002.

  6. 6.

    J. Bosch and P. Bosch-Sijtsema, “From integration to composition: On the impact of software product lines, global development and ecosystems,” Journal of System and Software (JSS), vol. 83, pp. 67–76, 2010.

  7. 7.

    D. Stayhl and J. Bosch, “Modeling continuous integration practice differences in industry software development,” Journal of Systems and Software (JSS), vol. 87, pp. 48–59, 2014.

  8. 8.

    A. Hernández-López, R. Colomo-Palacios, Á. García-Crespo, and P. Soto-Acosta, “Team Software Process in GSD Teams: A Study of New Work Practices and Models,” International Journal of Human Capital and Information Technology Professionals, vol. 1, pp. 32–53, 2010.

  9. 9.

    A. Avritzer, D. Paulish, Y. Cai, and K. Sethi, “Coordination implications of software architecture in a global software development project,” Journal of Systems and Software, vol. 83, pp. 1881–1895, 2010.

  10. 10.

    M. A. Chauhan, “A reference architecture for providing tools as a service to support global software development,” Proceedings of the WICSA 2014 Companion Volume, pp. 16, 2014.

  11. 11.

    R. Kommeren and P. i. Parviainen, “Philips experiences in global distributed software development,” Empirical Software Engineering, vol. 12, pp. 647–660, 2007.

  12. 12.

    M. L. Guimaraes and A. R. Silva, “Making software integration really continuous,” in Fundamental Approaches to Software Engineering: Springer, 2012, pp. 332–346.

  13. 13.

    C. Dellarocas, “Toward a design handbook for integrating software components,” presented at Fifth International Symposium on Assessment of Software Tools and Technologies (SAST97), Pittsburgh, 1997.

  14. 14.

    M. De Jonge, “Package-based software development,” presented at 29th Euromicro Conference, 2003. Proceedings, Sweden, 2003.

  15. 15.

    S. Larsson, I. Crnkovic, and F. Ekdahl, “On the expected synergies between component-based software engineering and best practices in product integration,” presented at 30th Euromicro Conference, Sweden, 2004.

  16. 16.

    J. Merilinna and M. Matinlassi, “State of the Art and Practice of OpenSource Component Integration,” presented at 32nd EUROMICRO Conference on Software Engineering and Advanced Applications (SEAA), Cavtat, Dubrovnik, 2006.

  17. 17.

    I. Kuzmina, “Practical realization of software integration process during the development of complex hardware-software systems,” presented at 6th Central and Eastern European Software Engineering Conference (CEE-SECR), Moscow, 2010.

  18. 18.

    A. Avritzer, W. Hasling, and D. Paulish, “Process investigations for the global studio project version 3.0,” presented at Second IEEE International Conference on Global Software Engineering (ICGSE), Munich, Germany, 2007.

  19. 19.

    S. Larsson, P. Myllyperkio, F. Ekdahl, and I. Crnkovic, “Software product integration: A case study-based synthesis of reference models,” Information and Software Technology (IST), vol. 51, pp. 1066–1080, 2009.

  20. 20.

    C. Ayala, Ã. y. Hauge, R. Conradi, X. Franch, and J. Li, “Selection of third party software in Off-The-Shelf-based software development-An interview study with industrial practitioners,” Journal of Systems and Software, vol. 84, pp. 620–637, 2011.

  21. 21.

    H. Hartmann, M. Keren, A. Matsinger, J. Rubin, T. Trew, and T. Yatzkar-Haham, “Using MDA for integration of heterogeneous components in software supply chains,” in Software Product Lines: Going Beyond: Springer, 2010, pp. 361–376.

  22. 22.

    K.-J. Stol, M. A. Babar, P. Avgeriou, and B. Fitzgerald, “A comparative study of challenges in integrating Open Source Software and Inner Source Software,” Information and Software Technology (IST), vol. 53, pp. 1319–1336, 2011.

  23. 23.

    H.-G. Gross, M. Melideo, and A. Sillitti, “Self-certification and trust in component procurement,” Science of Computer Programming, vol. 56, pp. 141–156, 2005.

  24. 24.

    I. Crnkovic and M. Larsson, “Challenges of component-based development,” Journal of Systems and Software, vol. 61, pp. 201–212, 2002.

  25. 25.

    M. Hepner, R. Gamble, M. Kelkar, L. Davis, and D. Flagg, “Patterns of conflict among software components,” Journal of Systems and Software, vol. 79, pp. 537–551, 2006.

  26. 26.

    L. Davis, R. F. Gamble, and J. Payton, “The impact of component architectures on interoperability,” Journal of Systems and Software, vol. 61, pp. 31–45, 2002.

  27. 27.

    R. S. Sangwan and P. A. Laplante, “Test-driven development in large projects,” IT Professional, vol. 8, pp. 25–29, 2006.

  28. 28.

    A. Avritzer and D. J. Paulish, “A comparison of commonly used processes for multi-site software development,” in Collaborative Software Engineering: Springer, 2010, pp. 285–302.

  29. 29.

    J. Holck and N. Jørgensen, “Continuous integration and quality assurance: A case study of two open source projects,” Australasian Journal of Information Systems, vol. 11, 2003.

  30. 30.

    30 S. Larsson, “Key Elements of the Product Integration Process,” in Department of Computer science and Electronics. Malardalen: Malardalen University Sweden, 2007, pp. 78.

  31. 31.

    S. Klaas-Jan, “Supporting Product Development with Software from the Bazaar.” Limerick: University of Limerick, 2011, pp. 336.

  32. 32.

    B. Adams, R. Kavanagh, A. E. Hassan, and D. M. German, “An empirical study of integration activities in distributions of open source software,” Empirical Software Engineering, pp. 1–42, 2015.

  33. 33.

    M.-E. Begin and L. Merifield, “Software Integration Final Report,” Members of the StratusLab collaboration: Centre National de la Recherche Scientique, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Greek Research and Technology Network S.A, Brussels, Belgium 2012.

  34. 34.

    J. van Gurp, C. Prehofer, and J. Bosch, “Comparing practices for reuse in integration oriented software product lines and large open source software projects,” Software: Practice and Experience, vol. 40, pp. 285–312, 2010.

  35. 35.

    J. Kotlarsky, “Management of Globally Distributed Component-Based Software Development,” RSM Erasmus University Rotterdam, The Netherlands, 2005, pp. 391.

  36. 36.

    J. R. Callahan and J. M. Purtilo, “Using an architectural approach to integrate heterogeneous, distributed software components,” West Virginia University 1995.

  37. 37.

    B. Tekumalla, “Status of Empirical Research in Component-Based Software Engineering,” in Department of Computer Science and Engineering. Sweden: University of Gothenburg, 2012, pp. 52.

  38. 38.

    S. Bourgeois, T. De Baets, A. Ide, D. Parewijck, T. Schaeps, S. Souffriau, W. Van Isterdael, F. Wegge, and F. Gielen, “Architectural design of a continuous integration environment,” Faculty of Engineering, Department of Information technology, University GENT 2008.

  39. 39.

    J. Sauer, “Architecture-Centric Development in Globally Distributed Projects,” in Agility Across Time and Space, Agility Across Time and Space: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2010, pp. 321–329.

  40. 40.

    R. Sundarraj and S. Talluri, “A multi-period optimization model for the procurement of component-based enterprise information technologies,” European Journal of Operational Research, vol. 146, pp. 339–351, 2003.

Appendix 2

figure a
figure b
figure c

Section Four

Empirical Investigation of Software Integration Practices for Critical Success Factors (CSFs) and Critical Barriers (CBs)

We have identified, through SLR, practices/solutions to implement the CSFs and address the CBs listed in section two and section three, respectively. In this section, we are validating whether or not these practices can be used to implement the CSFs and/or address the CBs. Based on your experience, please check the appropriate box, given in front of each practice horizontally in the following table. Further you can suggest any other practice at the bottom of the list, if any.

figure d
figure e

Please note that due to space limitations, the rest of 8 Tables for the remaining practices of the 8 CSFs have been truncated in this paper.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ilyas, M., Khan, S.U. & Rashid, N. Empirical Validation of Software Integration Practices in Global Software Development. SN COMPUT. SCI. 1, 157 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42979-020-00175-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42979-020-00175-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation