Use of Gamification as Implementation Approach for Software

Process Improvement: Trends and Gaps

Adolfo Francesco de Oliveira Colares

, Julio Cezar Costa Furtado

and

Sandro Ronaldo Bezerra Oliveira

Graduate Program in Computer Sciense, Institute of Exact and Natural Sciences, Federal University of Pará,

Belém, Pará, Brazil

Department of Exact and Technological Sciences, Federal University of Amapá, Macapá, Amapá, Brazil

Keywords: Software Process Improvement, Gamification, Systematic Literature Review.

Abstract: Studies carried out in the context of software process improvement (SPI) report problems and difficulties

that organizations face to implement process models and standards, mainly related to the inability to

overcome some critical factors. Thus, properly conducting SPI can facilitate the development of more

efficient processes to overcome such difficulties, using gamification elements. Therefore, this paper aims to

identify problems in the implementation phase of an SPI effort and use gamification as a tool to mitigate

barriers during SPI implementation in a company that opted for an SPI program such as CMMI (Capability

Maturity Model Integration) and / or MR-MPS-SW (Reference Model for Brazilian Software Process

Improvement) and create the applicability guide using gamification in SPI that can be used by software

organizations. The search string returned 499 (four hundred and ninety-nine) studies, of which 07 (seven)

were selected according to the Systematic Literature Review presented in this paper.

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3402-6113

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1984-9587

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8929-5145

1 INTRODUCTION

Public and/or private companies that develop

software use methodologies, approaches and / or

strategies for Software Process Improvement (SPI),

otherwise, according to Montoni (2010), the absence

or realization of these approaches without maturity

are the main factors of failure of SPI.

For Montoni (2010), successful implementation

of SPI initiatives essentially depends on strategies

and approaches adopted to support the execution of

such initiatives. Thus, the absence or lack of

adequacy of these approaches is one of the most

common reasons for the failure of improvement

initiatives. In addition, Bayona (2012) states that

other factors are also identified as causing failures in

the conduct of these initiatives, such as

organizational and technical management factors,

lack of communication, motivation and top

management support.

Companies aim to improve their software

development processes to maximize performance

related to cost, schedule, productivity, quality,

customer satisfaction and return on investment

(Goldenson and Gibson, 2003). To achieve this

objective, they seek to implement national and / or

international models, already consolidated, which

define the requirements for the SPI, in addition to

evaluating and certifying the company's level of

maturity to the chosen model (Soares and Oliveira,

2020a).

Two models used in the SPI initiative can be

highlighted, the Capability Maturity Model

Integration - CMMI (CMMI Institute, 2018) and

Brazilian Software Porcess Improvement - MPS.BR

(SOFTEX, 2021). At the initial levels of these

improvement programs, organizations adopt

measurements that consist of collecting project

execution data and comparing these with the planned

values. While this is a sufficient approach, it is not

Colares, A., Furtado, J. and Oliveira, S.

Use of Gamiﬁcation as Implementation Approach for Software Process Improvement: Trends and Gaps.

DOI: 10.5220/0011106400003176

In Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Evaluation of Novel Approaches to Software Engineering (ENASE 2022), pages 561-567

ISBN: 978-989-758-568-5; ISSN: 2184-4895

561

suitable for organizations seeking high maturity,

evaluating and evolving their processes.

For the development of this work, a Systematic

Literature Review (SLR) was carried out. This

research methodology allows, in a fair way, an

evaluation and interpretation of the available

literature, with the objective of answering one or

several questions in a study area, in a systematic

way and under the control of the researcher

(Kitchenham et al., 2015).

In view of the above, this work presents a

Systematic Literature Review with the objective of

investigating which problems exist in the

implementation phase of an improvement effort

based on models as CMMI and / or MPS.BR and

how the Gamification can help to reduce / remedie

these difficulties.

The next sections of this work are organized as

follows: Section 2 presents some concepts on the

topic of this research, Section 3 details the study

design, Section 4 brings the results, Section 5

presents the discussions, Section 6 addresses some

threats to the validity of this work, Section 7 brings

some related works and Section 8 closes this work

by presenting the conclusions.

2 BACKGROUND

This section introduces concepts related to two

topics treated in this paper: SPI and gamification.

Software Process Improvement is defined as a

set of partially ordered steps intended to achieve an

objective within the context of software

development (Feiler and Humphrey, 1993). This

concept allows framing and organizing different

activities related to a software organization.

The SPI consists of a set of coherent policies,

organizational structures, technologies, procedures

and work products, necessary to conceive, develop,

implement and maintain a software product

(Fuggeta, 2000).

Software development is inserted in a very

dynamic context, presenting a very fast pace (Wang

and King, 2000). Therefore, developer companies

define their software processes in order to increase

product quality, strengthen their competitive

position in the market (Komi-Sirvö, 2004) and meet

customer requirements within the specified time and

budget (Greenwood et al., 1996). However, human-

centered processes can exhibit unexpected or

unwanted performance and behaviors, so they need

to be continually evaluated and improved (Fuggeta,

2000; Unterkalmsteiner et al., 2012).

This environment of continuous change and

refinements motivates the creation of quality models

and methods for SPI, a program of activities

designed to improve the performance and maturity

of the organization's processes (CMMI Institute,

2018). According to Hall et al. (2002), software

organizations that implement SPI through the

adoption of standards or models report significant

benefits.

As a second topic discussed in this paper,

Gamification can be defined as a practice that uses

game elements and mechanics to spread teachings

and even training to the participants of the practice

(Mcgonical, 2011). As the current generation grew

up in the contemporary age of gaming, this closeness

and familiarity has positive aspects in learning.

The purpose of gamification is not to create an

electronic game, but to use the same methods,

techniques and thoughts used in virtual games for

situations that occur in the real world. Thus, there is

the emergence of gamification, which consists of the

use of game elements out of context, with the purpose

of mobilizing subjects to action, assisting in problem

solving and promoting learning (Kapp, 2012).

For Kapp (2012), gamification can motivate

individuals to action, assist in problem solving and

promote learning. In the educational environment, the

main challenge of gamification is to involve students

within the gamified context of learning, so that they

can master the material that is being taught to them.

3 STUDY DESIGN

This section presents the objectives of the work, the

research questions and the method used.

3.1 Goal and Research Question

The present study aims to investigate what problems

exist in the implementation phase of a model-based

improvement effort based on the CMMI and / or

MPS.BR models and how gamification can help to

reduce / remedie these difficulties.

Thus, we propose the following research

questions (RQ):

• RQ1: What gamification practices can help in

SPI?

• RQ2: What are the problems and / or difficulties

of a company in the implementation of SPI?

• RQ3: What types of approaches have been used

to implement SPI in a company / organization?

ENASE 2022 - 17th International Conference on Evaluation of Novel Approaches to Software Engineering

562

3.2 Method

To achieve the objective of this study, a Systematic

Literature Review (SLR) was carried out. RSL is a

scientific research methodology that has been

applied in the most diverse areas of knowledge. This

methodology allows, in a fair way, an evaluation and

interpretation of the available literature, with the

objective of answering certain questions about an

area of study. Thus, the evaluation is carried out

systematically, under the control of the researcher

(Kitchenham et al., 2015).

Planning for this SLR includes the following

steps: planning, conducting and presenting

(Kitchenham et al, 2015). Planning takes place

through the definition of objectives, research

sources, evaluation criteria of primary studies,

quality criteria, extraction and analysis of data from

primary studies, analysis of sources, planning of data

analysis and search string.

Three researchers participated in the planning and

execution of the work: a PhD student in graduate

studies in Computer Science and two professors /

researchers with a PhD in Software Engineering.

3.3 Search Strategy

The search occurred in an automated way through a

string formed by a series of keywords and their

respective synonyms. These keywords were defined

based on the research questions, following the

PICOC (Population, Intervention, Comparison,

Outcomes and Context) structure suggested by

Kitchenham and Charters (2007).

However, the objective of this research is to

identify gamification practices to assist in SPI,

applicable in the context of organizations

(companies, institutions, centers and groups) that

work on software projects (Population), in the form

of process models, techniques, methodologies, and

gamification practices (Outcomes).

In this way, the string was formulated with terms

related to (i) population, (ii) intervention, (iii)

comparison, (iv) outcome and (v) context. The terms

used were:

• Population: Software organizations and software

improvement projects,

• Intervention: Identify gamification practices that

can help in SPI,

• Comparison: Approaches to traditional

improvement models,

• Result: Process models, improvement

methodology, techniques, methodologies, tools,

standards, methods, techniques, guide and

gamification practices to solve/reduce problems

in an SPI effort,

• Context: Software industry.

The search string (as can be seen in Table 1) was

applied to the IEEEExplore and ACM DL databases,

as they meet the aforementioned criteria, have an

expressive base of articles / papers and a high degree

of quality. The studies search method will be

automatic, carried out through web search engines

by keywords.

Table 1: Search String.

(Software organization) AND ((gamification OR

game*) AND (software process improvement OR

SPI OR (improvement AND (planning* OR

implementation* OR evaluation*)))) AND

(Process models OR quality models OR

techniques OR methodolo

ies OR tools)

3.4 Study Selection

In this stage of the work, inclusion (IC) and exclusion

(EC) criteria were applied, in order to select only the

relevant works that answered our research questions.

The IC and EC are presented below.

• IC: Studies that present, primarily or secondarily,

gamified practices or gamification applied to

software process improvement,

• EC: Studies that are not written in English,

studies not available for download openly or

through the institutional IP of the researchers,

studies such as workshop reports, posters,

presentations, speaker keynotes, books, theses

and dissertations.

Each of the studies underwent a selection process

consisting of four steps: (i) three researchers read the

titles and abstracts of all studies and applied the

exclusion criteria, this step was defined as pre-

selection, (ii) the same researchers discussed

differences in the application of exclusion criteria to

reach a consensus, (iii) the researchers read the title

and abstract, and the full text if necessary, of the

studies selected in the first step to apply the

inclusion criteria, (iv) the researchers discussed

differences in the application of exclusion criteria

to reach a consensus. The process described

resulted in 7 primary studies, available at

https://zenodo.org/record/6046131.

3.5 Study Classification and Data

Extraction

To collect the necessary data that answer the

Use of Gamiﬁcation as Implementation Approach for Software Process Improvement: Trends and Gaps

563

research questions defined for this work, a

researcher was responsible for reading the 7 selected

studies.

Data analysis aims to classify the studies

according to the proposed research questions.

Therefore, the result of this SLR should map and

classify studies regarding: what are the problems

during the implementation of software process

improvement and how to use gamification to solve

and / or reduce problems and difficulties that

organizations face during the implementation of SPI.

4 RESULTS

This section presents the results of SLR. Subsection

4.1 presents an overview of the results. Subsections

4.2, 4.3 and 4.4 describe the results for RQ1, RQ2

and RQ3, respectively. In these subsections, the

primary studies will be referenced and identified by

codes and are available at the URL presented in

subsection 3.4.

4.1 Overview

This SLR searched for studies between the years

2011 and 2021. The search resulted in 499 studies,

with 485 found in the ACM Digital Library and 14

in IEEEExplore. However, only 07 primary studies

(after the inclusion and exclusion criteria) were

selected among the 499, and are distributed between

the years 2014 and 2021, as shown in Figure 1. Still

based on Figure 1, we can see that there are few

studies involving gamification with an approach to

SPI, the trend is for a growth in the number of

publications related to the subject of this work, given

that many universities and companies needed to

reduce their research activities due to the pandemic.

Figure 1: Distribution of studies by year.

The study [A1] presents an approach that uses

game theory to facilitate the interaction between

players in an SPI initiative, in a real environment.

The study [A2] presents a teaching tool based on the

principles of gamification to achieve the level of

motivation required in teams involved in SPI. The

study [A3] uses gamification as a systematic strategy

in the teaching and learning of tests through an

experiment with undergraduate students in

Computer Science and the other with students

graduated in Computer Technicians. The study [A4]

identifies models and strategies for evaluating

elements of gamification already reported in the

literature in the context of software engineering. The

study [A5] presents an experiment of a proposal to

teach the software measurement process from

gamification using game and serious game elements.

The study [A6] proposes the use of gamification to

increase the quality of user feedback, and

consequently, improve the quality of the software.

And, finally, the study [A7] makes a comparison of

two work environments, with and without

gamification; the gamified environment shows better

performance and accuracy in its results.

4.2 Gamification Practices to Assist in

SPI

This subsection presents results related to RQ1

(“What gamification practices can help in MPS?”).

In the selected studies it was not possible to

identify the gamification elements to solve the

identified problems. Only in Section 7 (Related

Works) can the gamification elements be identified

(Soares and Oliveira, 2021).

4.3 Problems and / or Difficulties of an

Organization in Implementing SPI

This subsection gives an overview of the main

problems and / or difficulties companies face in an

MPS initiative. From the selected studies, it was

possible to identify the problems in the SPI

initiatives, as can be seen in Table 2.

4.4 Types of Approaches Have Been

Used to Implement SPI in an

Organization

This subsection presents the approaches used in an

SPI initiative implementation.

From the selected studies, it was possible to

identify that the approaches are conducted using

ENASE 2022 - 17th International Conference on Evaluation of Novel Approaches to Software Engineering

564

software development process structures and

patterns, such as the CMMI, ISO/IEC (International

Organization for Standardization / International

Electrotechnical Commision), SWEBOK (Software

Engineering Body of Knowledge), and game theory

frameworks that facilitate the interaction between

players in a SPI initiative.

Table 2: The problems in the SPI initiatives.

1. Focus on certification instead of focusing on

improvement.

2. Lack of

overnment incentive.

3. Reduction in consulting hours as a way to

reduce costs.

4. Lack of knowledge of the importance of

models b

the market.

5. Lack of / few projects to validate an

improvement pro

ram.

6. Bureaucrac

in i

rovement pro

rams.

7. Continuity of team engagement in the defined

rocess.

8. Lack of / little knowledge of the models by

emplo

ees.

9. Different interpretations re

ardin

the models.

10. Lack of consistent pro

ect portfolio plannin

11. Lack of consistent planning by the top

mana

ement of the or

anization.

12. Lack of flexibilit

of the models.

5 DISCUSSION

This section presents our main conclusions and

impressions of the results presented in Section 4.

First, it can be observed that gamification can be

used to solve or minimize problems faced in SPI

initiatives according to selected studies and related

works (in Section 7). The gamification elements

identified can be used when organizations are facing

these issues, not limited to a specific scenario.

However, there is no research according to the

selected studies and related works in which

gamification can be verified in a real scenario of the

SPI initiative, or even compared with a framework

of initiatives such as CMMI, ISO/IEC, SWEBOK

and other approaches.

According to the results listed and described in

this study, it is possible to affirm that there is an

interest on the part of academia and the software

industry in developing research focused on

gamification, especially research that focuses on

approaches to SPI.

6 THREATS TO VALIDITY

This section discusses potential threats to the

validity of this paper and actions taken to address

validity issues. We used the structure proposed by

Wohlin et al. (2000).

6.1 Construction Validity

To minimize the risk that the SLR would not bring

the studies that answered the research questions, a

test was carried out with the search string. Four

studies that proved to meet the research objectives

were manually selected and then it was verified if,

when running the string in the bases, these same

studies would return, which in fact happened.

6.2 Internal Validity

During the extraction process, studies were ranked

based on our judgment. Studies that depend on the

judgment of the authors can carry with them a bias

that needs to be mitigated as much as possible. With

that in mind, throughout the study analysis process,

weekly meetings were held to discuss and reach a

consensus on which studies should really be

selected.

6.3 External Validity

It is possible that SLR does not return all relevant

studies on approaches that support to solve SPI

problems. To mitigate this risk, we identified and

relied on studies similar to this one so it wouldn't

start from scratch.

6.4 Validity of Conclusion

To ensure the validity of the conclusion of our study,

we present the results generated directly from the

data and discuss the observations and explicit trends.

This ensures a high degree of traceability between

data and conclusions. In addition, our corpus of

studies is available to other researchers.

Furthermore, the SLR process was carried out with

the support of two PhD professors who have

extensive experience in studies of this genre, with

several publications in software engineering.

Use of Gamiﬁcation as Implementation Approach for Software Process Improvement: Trends and Gaps

565

7 RELATED WORKS

This section presents similar studies that are directly

or indirectly related to the investigation of the

present study.

Herranz et al. (2013) present an approach to

managing change in SPI initiatives, based on the use

of gamification techniques to support SPI processes.

The authors highlight change management as one of

the important areas to be controlled. In this way,

they direct greater care to managers, since their

actions are essential in the improvement of the

software process and their commitments and support

are essential to obtain the benefits of a software

process. However, the authors present a gamified

approach more focused on top management, without

addressing other gaps that are perceived during the

implementation of the improvement.

In the work by Herranz et al. (2014) a

gamification framework oriented to the needs of the

organization and the groups of software

professionals involved in an SPI initiative was

defined. To establish an adequate gamification

framework, the authors emphasized the need to

adapt the motivational factors of each of the

software professional groups. Although the authors

build a gamified structure to help different groups of

professionals, the approach did not specify elements

that should be used as possible solutions to the

problems that professionals would face, since the

structure to be used depends primarily on the initial

study of the people who will be involved. in the

improvement initiative.

To validate the gamification structure presented

earlier, Herranz et al. (2016) used a structure

adapted to the particularities of an organization and

software professionals to encourage motivation. In

this validation, a qualitative research methodology

was employed through interviews that involved a

total of 29 experts in gamification and SPI. The

results of this study confirm the validity of the

presented framework, its relevance in the field of

SPI and its alignment with the standard practices of

gamification implementation in organizations. The

results obtained in the study were relevant to support

the use of the gamification approach in the context

of SPI, however the structure was adapted to the

particularities of an organization and specific

professionals, so it cannot be generalized to other

organizations, since the authors are unaware of their

needs. This perception is in opposition to what was

exposed in the work previously, of creating a

structure adapted according to the scenario of the

organization.

The study by Herranz et al. (2018) aimed to

bridge the gap between gamification in SPI and

empirical evidence by presenting the implementation

of the SPI gamification framework in a real

environment. The framework validated in the

authors' previous work was adjusted and

implemented in a small Spanish software

development organization, in a controlled

experiment, focusing on a team competition

(experimental group) to validate its effectiveness.

The implementation results show that the application

of the structure does not increase staff motivation in

SPI tasks, although it contributes to improving their

performance. Therefore, the authors point out that

the results obtained are a consequence of the use of

competitive game mechanics, which may have

caused tension between the participants, and this fact

can reduce motivation and fun.

Soares (2020 and 2021) present a systematic

review of the literature, where problems or

difficulties detected during the implementation of

MPS and gamification elements for the treatment of

these problems are analyzed. The problems were

conducted from two perspectives, analyzes carried

out in the literature and another from the analysis of

results obtained from the application of a survey.

Marougkas et al. (2021) proposes the

improvement of teaching and learning methods

through a framework based on virtual reality,

gamification and adaptive design according to the

student's profile, aiming to make learning procedures

more fun, engaging and effective. The method

proposed in the creation of the framework can serve

as a basis for the design of the applicability guide

using gamification in SPI.

In this way, we can see that although the studies

dealt with in the SLR did not answer all the research

questions; the related works presented in this section

can be used as a basis for collecting this information.

8 CONCLUSION

This study described an SLR to identify problems

during the implementation of software process

improvement and how to use gamification to solve

and / or reduce problems and difficulties that

organizations face during the implementation of SPI.

We selected 7 primary studies, from 2011 to 2021.

From the results, it was possible to verify how

scarce the use of approaches and elements involving

gamification for SPI is, despite the studies

describing gamification as a tool in several areas of

software engineering and SPI, in addition to being

ENASE 2022 - 17th International Conference on Evaluation of Novel Approaches to Software Engineering

566

able to see some limitations that still must be

mitigated, which therefore provides opportunities for

researchers in the area to develop further, using the

experiences presented in related works.

This SLR will serve for the next stage of

research, as an instrument for the elaboration of an

applicability guide using the gamification elements

described by Soares (2021) in software

organizations. In this line, we plan future works to

use gamification as a tool to mitigate barriers during

the implementation of an SPI initiative in a company

that opted for an SPI framework such as CMMI and

/ or MPS.BR, and to develop a guide of applicability

using gamification in SPI so that it can be used by

software organizations.

REFERENCES

Bayona, S., Calvo-Manzano, J., Feliu, T. (2012). Critical

Success Factors in Software Process Improvement: A

Systematic Review. 12th International Conference,

SPICE 2012. Palma, Spain.

CMMI Institute. (2018). Capability Maturity Model

Integration (CMMI) for Development. Version 2.0.

Carnegie Mellon, USA.

Feiler, P. H., Humphrey, W. S. (1993). Software process

development and enactment: concepts and definitions.

Proceedings of the Second International Conference

on the Software Process-Continuous Software Process

Improvement.

Fuggeta, A. (2000). Software Process: A Roadmap.

Proceedings of the Conference on The Future of

Software Engineering.

Goldenson, D. R., Gibson, D. L. (2003). Demonstrating

the Impact and Benefits of CMMI: An Update and

Preliminary Results. In SEI Special Report,

CMU/SEI-2003-SR-009.

Greenwood, R. M., Kawalek, P., Robertson, I., Warboys,

B. C. (1996). An Asset View on the Software Process.

Software Process Workshop.

Hall, T., Rainer, A., Baddoo, N. (2002). Implementing

Software Process Improvement: An Empirical Study.

Software Process Improvement and Practice.

Herranz, E., Colomo-Palacios, R., De Amescua-Seco, A.

(2013). Towards a New Approach to Supporting Top

Managers in SPI Organizational Change Management.

In Proceedings of CENTERIS 2013 - Conference on

ENTERprise Information Systems / ProjMAN 2013 -

International Conference on Project MANagement,

Procedia Technology, Volume 9, pp. 1-1372, Lisbon,

Portugal.

Herranz, E., Colomo-Palacios, R., De Amescua-Seco, A.,

Yilmaz, M. (2014). Gamification as a disruptive factor

in software process improvement initiatives. Journal

of Universal Computer Science, 20(6), 885–906.

Herranz, E., Colomo-Palacios, R., De Amescua-Seco, A.,

Sánchez-Gordón, M. L. (2016). Towards a

Gamification Framework for Software Process

Improvement Initiatives: Construction and Validation.

Journal of Universal Computer Science, 22(12), 1509-

1532.

Herranz, E., Guzman, J., De Amescua-Seco, A.; Larrucea,

X. (2018). Gamification for software process

improvement: A practical approach. IET Software, vol.

13, no. 2, pp. 112–121.

Kapp, K. M. (2012). The Gamification of Learning and

Instruction: Game-based Methods and Strategies for

Training and Education. North Carolina: Pfeiffer, 366

Kitchenham, B., Charters, S. (2007). Guidelines for

performing systematic literature reviews in software

engineering. EBSE Technical Report EBSE-2007-01.

UK.

Kitchenham, B., Budgen, D., Brereton, P. (2015).

Evidence-Based Software Engineering and Systematic

Reviews. CRC Press.

Komi-Sirvö, S. (2004). Development and Evaluation of

Software Process Improvement Methods. Faculty of

Science, University of Oulu.

Marougkas, A., Troussas, C., Krouska, A., Sgouropoulou,

C. (2021). A Framework for Environments with

Gamified Design in Education. IOS Press.

McGONIGAL, J. (2011). Reality Is Broken: Why Games

Make Us Better and How They Can Change the

World. Penguin, London.

Montoni, M. (2010). Uma investigação sobre os fatores

críticos de sucesso em iniciativas de melhoria de

processos de software. Tese de D.Sc., Universidade

Federal do Rio de janeiro - UFRJ, Rio de Janeiro, RJ,

Brazil.

Soares, E. M., Oliveira, S. R. B. (2020). An Analysis of

Problems in The Implementation of Software Process

Improvement: A Literature Review and Survey. 17

CONTECSI. (CONTECSI/PSE-6480). Brazil.

Soares, E. M., Oliveira, S. R. B. (2021). An Analysis of

Gamification Elements for a Solving Proposal of

Software Process Improvement Problems. In: 16th

International Conference on Software Technologies

(ICSOFT 2021). pages 294-301. Online.

SOFTEX (2021). Guia Geral MPS de Software (MR-MPS-

SW). Associação para Promoção da Excelência do

Software Brasileiro - Softex. Brazil.

Unterkalmsteiner, M., Islam, M., Cheng, C. K., Permadi,

R. B., FeldtT, R. (2012). Evaluation and Measument

of Software Process Improvement: A Systematic

Review. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering.

Wang, Y., King, G. (2000). Software Engineering

Processes, Principles and Appliations. CRC Press.

Wohlin, C., Runeson, P., Höst, M., Ohlsson, M. C.,

Regnell, B., Wesslén, A. (2000). Experimentation in

Software Engineering. Springer US.

Use of Gamiﬁcation as Implementation Approach for Software Process Improvement: Trends and Gaps

567