Abstract As the world of technology advances, so do the tools that software developers use to create new programs. In recent years, software development tools have become more popular, allowing developers to work more efficiently and produce higher-quality software. Still, installing such tools can be challenging for novice developers at the early stage of their careers, as they may face issues such as compatibility problems (e.g., with operating systems) and unclear instructions. Therefore, this work aims to investigate the challenges novice developers face when installing software development tools and the strategies they employ to overcome them. To investigate these, we conducted an analysis of 24 live software installation sessions to observe the difficulties developers encounter, the strategies they apply, and the types of information sources they consult when facing obstacles. We also conducted a validation survey with 144 students to support and expand our findings. Our results reveal recurring challenges such as unclear or dysfunctional documentation, complicated installation processes, version incompatibility, and lack of feedback during installation. To address these, participants used strategies such as reformulating search queries, reading instructions more carefully, and searching for alternative sources of documentation. These sources included community platforms (e.g., Stack Overflow), video tutorials, blog posts, and official documentation. Based on these findings, we provide practical recommendations for tool vendors, tool users, and researchers to improve the installation experience for novice developers.

Open source software (OSS) development offers a unique opportunity for students in Software Engineering to experience and participate in large-scale software development, however, the impact of such courses on students' self-efficacy and the challenges faced by students are not well understood. This paper aims to address this gap by analyzing data from multiple instances of OSS development courses at universities in different countries and reporting on how students' self-efficacy changed as a result of taking the course, as well as the barriers and challenges faced by students.

The combined use of User-Centered Design and Lean Startup with Agile Development has been pointed out by the literature as a manner to boost software development. User-Centered Design principles focus on providing tools for developers to better explore user needs and seek for a fitter solution. Lean Startup, on the other hand, supplements the triad combination by bringing the Build-Measure-Learn cycle and the concept of pivoting, either the problem understanding or the proposed solution. This paper reports on a case study of two software teams that have been undergoing the changes and impacts of such combined adoption. We investigated these teams for six months, from the moment that team members were trained on the job to grasp the essence of using the integrated approach inspired on Pivotal Labs proposal to the time they were considered mature enough to share their experiences with others within the organization. Through our in-depth study, we illustrate how this adoption promotes changes regarding to mindset, activities, practices, and techniques. We also report on the ‘team rhythm’ (or work flow) as experienced by the two teams. The paper contributes to current knowledge on the topic reporting on the changes and impacts that teams observed during the combined approach adoption.

Background: Despite the claimed benefits of an agile transformation, user involvement and added value are still reported as challenges in software development. A combined use of User-Centered Design and Lean Startup with Agile Development has been pointed out as a means to minimize these challenges. Aims: This paper aimed to characterize how a transformation to such combined approach takes place in a multinational company, as well as to point out benefits and challenges to undergo such transformation. Method: We performed a multiple case study. We collected data through semi-structured interviews, focus group session, questionnaire and observations. Results: Our study revealed two major strategies to conduct the transformation: to create a dedicated Transformation Team to lead it and to make a Transformation Package Toolkit available to team members. Also, introducing a Product Designer role to a cross-functional team and using experimentation are among the most important benefits. Managerial mindset change and team autonomy are among the most concerning challenges. Conclusions: Our results bring implications to industry practitioners: organizational and cultural changes involve role and responsibilities definitions, introduction of new working processes, and are dependent upon user engagement and managerial support. These sound paramount to organizations that aim to succeed in this yet-to-be-further-understood transformation.