@inproceedings {43165,
	title = {Projects VS Continuous Product Development - Does it Affect Benefits Realization?},
	journal = {The Ninth International Conference on Advances and Trends in Software Engineering (SOFTENG)},
	year = {2023},
	month = {04/2023},
	pages = {20-25},
	publisher = {Xpert Publishing Services (XPS)},
	abstract = {Software investments are traditionally implemented using project organization, which often leads project participants to focus on time, cost and scope, rather than the intended benefits of the investment. We conducted a survey to compare work organized as projects against work organized as Continuous Product Development (CPD). Our results indicate that: 1. Both project organization and CPD are commonly used in practice. 2. Agile is very popular, but DevOps and the use of linear models for organizing work are also frequent. 3. CPD is perceived to outperform projects in realization of benefits. 4. We found no difference in perceived realization of benefits between those using or not using a set of ways of organizing work (including linear models, agile, DevOps, BizDev or program organization). We conclude that organizing work using CPD is a viable alternative to project organization, especially in situations where failure must be avoided. Also, we suggest that more research should be conducted to better understand what factors of the different ways of organizing work affects the realization of benefits.},
	author = {Sinan Sigurd {Tanilkan} and Jo Erskine {Hannay}},
	editor = {Lavazza, Luigi}
}
@inproceedings {43344,
	title = {A Survey on the Perception of Opportunities and Limitations of Generative AI in the Public Sector},
	journal = {2nd World Conference on Information Systems for Business Management (ISBM 2023)},
	year = {2023},
	month = {09/2023},
	publisher = { Springer},
	abstract = {Recent breakthroughs in Artificial Intelligence (AI) have increased the interest in applications of AI in general and Generative AI in particular. This interest is manifest in public debate on the promise and limitations of AI in various sectors, but also on the risks of relying upon such technology. However, little is known about the interest in and perceptions of Generative AI among Information Technology (IT) professionals likely to take responsibility for developing and implementing AI-based solutions in the public sector. We present findings from a survey we developed (with help from ChatGPT) and conducted among IT practitioners in the Norwegian public sector. Through this survey, we investigated how opportunities and limitations of the use Generative AI were perceived and understood. We found ambivalent attitudes: while the interest in Generative AI is high, the level of perceived knowledge is low; there is considerable optimism about the value of AI, but an equivalent level of concern about threats this technology represents; and although respondents suspected AI had helped generate the survey, they found the survey questions relevant and fully context-oriented. These findings provide background and context for further research into the adoption of AI and help practitioners establish a baseline for efforts to build and manage AI-based solutions in public institutions.},
	keywords = {artificial intelligence, ChatGPT, Digitalization, Generative AI, Public sector, survey},
	author = {Knutsen, Leif and Jose David {Pat{\'o}n-Romero} and Jo Erskine {Hannay} and Sinan Sigurd {Tanilkan}}
}
@inproceedings {43091,
	title = {A Survey on the Use and Effects of Goal Hierarchies in Digitalization Efforts},
	journal = {Portland International Conference on Management of Engineering and Technology: Managing Technology, Engineering and Manufacturing for a Sustainable World (PICMET 2023)},
	year = {2023},
	month = {07/2023},
	publisher = { IEEE},
	abstract = {Digitalization has become a primary goal for organizations. Successfully adopting the digital context both in daily operations and in business management and strategy entails great benefits at different levels (organizational,\&nbsp;economic, social, environmental...).\&nbsp;Thus, it is very important that practitioners have clear conceptions of the goals in this regard and that those goals are {\textquotedblleft}alive{\textquotedblright} in organizations.For this reason, in this study we present a survey that we performed among practitioners related to the management of Information Technology (IT) from both the private and public sectors in Norway. Through this survey we have tried to find out how organizations understand and translate the current context of digitalization from different goal levels. For that, we asked respondents to relate to one of three goal hierarchies: A) a classical governance approach; B) an organizational tier approach; and C) an effects-based approach.Among the results obtained we found that the first two are the most used and the goal achievement is slightly higher for the classical governance approach than for the organizational tier approach. Likewise, we identified that while top level management has a good understanding of the goals, this understanding deteriorates as one moves down the organizational hierarchy.},
	keywords = {Digitalization, information technology, Management, strategy, sustainability},
	author = {Sinan Sigurd {Tanilkan} and Knutsen, Leif and Jose David {Pat{\'o}n-Romero} and Jo Erskine {Hannay}}
}
@inproceedings {42770,
	title = {Benefit Considerations in Project Decisions},
	journal = {International Conference on Product-Focused Software Process Improvement. PROFES 2022},
	year = {2022},
	month = {11/2022},
	pages = {217-234},
	publisher = {Springer, Cham},
	edition = {23},
	abstract = {Software project success is often characterized in terms of time, cost and scope {\textendash} despite that delivering benefit is the main purpose of a project. In this paper, we explore 1) to what degree benefit considerations influence major project decisions, 2) to what degree a specific set of benefits management challenge are handled and influence major project decisions and 3) if there is any realization (over time) that benefit considerations should receive greater attention. We investigate influence in projects with four types of problem severity: completed projects with only minor problems, completed projects with major problems, projects that were disrupted but completed, and projects that were terminated before completion. We asked 45 software professionals to what degree time, cost, scope, benefit and benefit/cost, as well as benefits management challenges, influence major  roject decisions. Our findings indicate that time, cost and scope have a significantly higher degree of influence on project decisions than benefit and benefit/cost. However, practitioners think that benefit and benefit/cost should have significantly more influence on decisions than cost. The benefits management challenges are found to have less influence in the more severe projects. We argue that giving benefits considerations a stronger voice in project decisions would be in line with the desire of practitioners and the prime objective of delivering benefit to stakeholders. We conclude that it is important to understand how to handle benefits management challenges at different stages of project life and that handling such challenges should be integrated with other prime drivers of project success.},
	keywords = {Benefit, Benefits management challenges, Cost, Scope, Software project severity, Time},
	isbn = {978-3-031-21388-5},
	doi = {https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-21388-5_15},
	author = {Sinan Sigurd {Tanilkan} and Jo Erskine {Hannay}},
	editor = {Taibi, Davide and Kuhrmann, Marco and Mikkonen, Tommi and Kl{\"u}nder, Jil and Abrahamsson, Pekka}
}
@inproceedings {42484,
	title = {Perceived Challenges in Benefits Management - A Study of Public Sector Information Systems Engineering Projects},
	journal = {Conference on Business Informatics (CBI)},
	year = {2022},
	month = {06/2022},
	pages = {156-165},
	publisher = {IEEE Computer Society Digital Library},
	edition = {24},
	abstract = {The field of benefits management gives guidelines on how to plan and realize benefits\&nbsp; throughout the life-cycle of a system. However, realizing benefits from information systems projects has proven to be challenging in practice. In this paper, we investigate specific benefits management challenges as perceived by practitioners involved in information systems engineering projects. We conducted 22 interviews with respondents representing nine public sector projects, where challenges in managing benefits were elicited and identified. We elicited six specific benefits management challenges: A - Identifying and describing benefits, B - Alignment of work with planned benefits, C - Reception and acceptance of the planned benefits, D - Organizational issues, E - Alternative or competing solutions, F - Measuring and evaluating benefits. Overlaying these challenges with current normative models on benefits management, we find\&nbsp; that: 1. Normative models on benefits management lack sufficient guidance on operative work on how to create information systems fit for realizing benefits and how to introduce these solutions to ensure benefits realization, and 2. Normative models on benefits management do not explicitly leverage the\&nbsp; rapid project learning promoted by modern engineering methods. We conclude that more specific benefits management models should be elaborated, which are integrated into modern information systems engineering practices. This will enable best practices on the continuous adjustments of cost and scope according to evolving knowledge in projects to also be adapted to the management of benefits.},
	keywords = {Benefits management challenges, Benefits management models, Information systems engineering, Public sector},
	doi = {10.1109/CBI54897.2022.00024},
	author = {Sinan Sigurd {Tanilkan} and Jo Erskine {Hannay}}
}
@inproceedings {SE.5.Moloekken-Oestvold.2004.b,
	title = {Does Use of Development Model Affect Estimation Accuracy and Bias?},
	journal = {Product Focused Software Process Improvement: 5th International Conference (PROFES 2004)},
	year = {2004},
	note = {ISBN: 3-540-21421-6},
	month = {April 5-8},
	pages = {17-29},
	publisher = {Springer-Verlag},
	type = {1},
	address = {Kansai Science City, Japan},
	abstract = {Objective. To investigate how the use of incremental and evolutionary development models affects the accuracy and bias of effort and schedule estimates of software projects. Rationale. Advocates of incremental and evolutionary development models often claim that use of these models results in improved estimation accuracy. Design of study. We conducted an in-depth survey, where information was collected through structured interviews with 22 software project managers in 10 different companies. We collected and analyzed information about estimation approach, effort estimation accuracy and bias, schedule estimation accuracy and bias, completeness of delivered functionality and other estimation related information. Results. We found no impact from the development model on the estimation approach. However, we found that incremental and evolutionary projects were less prone to effort overruns. The degree of delivered functionality and schedule estimation accuracy, on the other hand, were seemingly independent of development model. Conclusion. The use of incremental and evolutionary development models may reduce the chance of effort overruns.},
	author = {Kjetil Johan {Mol{\o}kken-{\O}stvold} and A. C. {Lien} and J{\o}rgensen, Magne and Sinan Sigurd {Tanilkan} and Gallis, H. and S. E. {Hove}}
}
@techreport {SE.7.Moloekken-Oestvold.2004,
	title = {Project Estimation in the Norwegian Software Industry - a Summary},
	number = {2004-03},
	year = {2004},
	note = {Results from the BEST-Pro (Better Estimation of Software Tasks and Process Improvement) survey},
	publisher = {Simula Research Laboratory},
	abstract = {This report provides an overview of the results obtained from a survey on project estimation in Norwegian software companies. The survey was conducted between February and November 2003. The main results are: {\textbullet} We observed that 76\% of the projects used more effort than estimated, while 19\% used less. The average effort overrun was 41\%. {\textbullet} Average effort overrun was 67\% in projects with a public client, compared to an average effort overrun of 21\% for projects with a private client. {\textbullet} Projects that used an incremental or evolutionary development approach had an average effort overrun of 24\%, as opposed to the average 55\% overrun for projects that used a waterfall-based development approach. The frequency and magnitude of effort overruns found in this survey seems to be similar to results reported from surveys conducted in other countries in the past 20 years. The observed differences in effort overruns between private and public projects may be caused by differences in bidding procedures, level of client involvement or acceptance procedures. In order to reduce the risk of effort overruns, software companies should: {\textbullet} Focus on analyzing their own estimation performance, and invest in estimation improvement (for instance through experience databases or work breakdown structures). {\textbullet} Differentiate risk buffers based on the type of the customer, development approach and the size of the project. {\textbullet} Try to establish an {\textquotedblleft}as close as possible{\textquotedblright} dialogue with the customers (e.g. through an incremental development approach). All companies should analyse completed projects, in order to benchmark their performance. This allows for improvement efforts to be identified.},
	author = {Kjetil Johan {Mol{\o}kken-{\O}stvold} and J{\o}rgensen, Magne and Sinan Sigurd {Tanilkan} and Gallis, H. and A. C. {Lien} and S. E. {Hove}}
}
@inproceedings {SE.5.Moloekken-Oestvold.2004.a,
	title = {A Survey on Software Estimation in the Norwegian Industry},
	journal = {10th International Software Metrics Symposium (METRICS 2004)},
	year = {2004},
	month = {September 16-18},
	pages = {208-219},
	publisher = {IEEE Computer Society Press},
	type = {1},
	address = {Chicago, USA},
	abstract = {This paper seeks to provide an overview of the estimation methods that software companies apply to estimate their projects, why those methods are chosen, and how accurate they are. In order to improve software estimation accuracy, such knowledge is essential. We conducted an in-depth survey, where information was collected through structured interviews with senior managers from 18 different companies and project managers of 52 different projects. We collected and analyzed information about estimation approach, effort estimation accuracy and bias, schedule estimation accuracy and bias, completeness of delivered functionality and other estimation related information. Our results suggest, for example, that average effort overruns are 41\%, that the software estimation performance has not changed much the last 10-20 years, that expert estimation is the dominating estimation method, that estimation accuracy is not much impacted by use of formal estimation models, and that software managers tend to believe that the estimation accuracy of their company is better than it actually is.},
	author = {Kjetil Johan {Mol{\o}kken-{\O}stvold} and J{\o}rgensen, Magne and Sinan Sigurd {Tanilkan} and Gallis, H. and A. C. {Lien} and S. E. {Hove}}
}
