An Empirical Study of Software Reuse with Special Attention to Ada
IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering
Success factors for software reuse that are applicable across domains and businesses
SAC '97 Proceedings of the 1997 ACM symposium on Applied computing
Success and Failure Factors in Software Reuse
IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering
An association-based management of reusable software components
Annals of Software Engineering
Three empirical evaluations of a software reuse reference model
Annals of Software Engineering
Managing Domain-Specific, Product-Line Development
IEEE Software
A quantitative risk assessment model for the management of software projects
Practicing software engineering in the 21st century
Towards an effective integrated reuse environment
Proceedings of the 5th international conference on Generative programming and component engineering
Information Technology and Management
Communications of the ACM - Amir Pnueli: Ahead of His Time
| Hi-index | 0.00 |
Research, forecasts and government studies consistently show that reuse technology has the greatest potential to reduce the cost of software. Some reuse programs have succeeded, achieving anywhere from 30 to 80 percent reuse. Yet other programs have failed to show any clear return. How can such an obvious winner fail? Our experience as promoters and supporters of reuse and as measurers of its effectiveness suggests that two fundamental mistakes contribute to failure. The first mistake is that organizations treat reuse as a technology-acquisition problem instead of a technology-transition problem. Plenty of reuse technology is now mature enough for industrial use (although some problems remain). However, just buying technology usually does not lead to extensive reuse. The second mistake is that organizations fail to approach reuse as a business strategy. Even organizations that recognize reuse as a technology-transition issue may fail to address the business implications of reuse. We consider how the most important obstacles to reuse are economic and cultural not technological.