Details

Autor(en) / Beteiligte

• Masso, Jhon
• Pino, Francisco J.
• Pardo, César
• García, Félix
• Piattini, Mario

Titel

Risk management in the software life cycle: A systematic literature review

Ist Teil von

• Computer standards and interfaces, 2020-08, Vol.71, p.103431, Article 103431

Ort / Verlag

Amsterdam: Elsevier B.V

Erscheinungsjahr

2020

Link zum Volltext

Quelle

Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete

Beschreibungen/Notizen

• •The paper presents a review of 45 studies related to software risk in the context of the software life cycle.•A large number of studies reviewed involve other knowledge areas to support decision-making in the risk management activities.•A few proposals for risk management use internationally recognised standards or de facto models to its definition.•It is especially important to define a framework and model for risk management in the software life cycle using an agile approach.•It is important that agile approaches include risk management practices which are in line with the already accepted ones in traditional approaches. Risk management (RM) plays a key role in project management, as it allows identification and prompt management of threats that may arise during project execution. Furthermore, project management within the software industry is evolving rapidly nowadays, a fact that implies new challenges, because the emergence and use of fresh approaches has brought a greater degree of complexity to the RM process. The objective of this paper is to carry out a systematic literature review (SLR) in the field of software risk, in an attempt to characterize and present the state of the art of this field, identifying gaps and opportunities for further research. From the analysis of the results of this SLR it could be observed that interest on the part of the scientific community has turned away from the definition of research work that addressed an integrated risk management process, to pay attention to work that concentrates on specific activities of this process. It was also possible to see that there is a clear lack of scientific rigour as regards the process of validation in the different studies, and a deficiency in the use of standards or of de facto models to define these.