Communication channels in safety analysis: An industrial exploratory case study
Yang Wang,Daniel Graziotin,Stefan Kriso,Stefan Wagner
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2019.04.004
IF: 3.5
2019-07-01
Journal of Systems and Software
Abstract:<h2>Abstract</h2><p><em>Context:</em> Safety analysis is a predominant activity in developing safety-critical systems. It is a highly cooperative task among multiple functional departments due to increasingly sophisticated safety-critical systems and close-knit development processes. Communication occurs pervasively.</p><p><em>Motivation:</em> Effective communication channels among multiple functional departments influence safety analysis quality as well as a safe product delivery. However, the use of communication channels during safety analysis is sometimes arbitrary and poses challenges.</p><p><em>Objective:</em> In this article, we aim to investigate the existing communication channels, their usage frequencies, their purposes and challenges during safety analysis in industry.</p><p><em>Method:</em> We conducted a multiple case study by surveying 39 experts and interviewing 21 experts in safety-critical companies including software developers, quality engineers and functional safety managers. Direct observations and documentation review were also conducted.</p><p><em>Results:</em> Popular communication channels during safety analysis include formal meetings, project coordination tools, documentation and telephone. Email, personal discussion, training, internal communication software and boards are also in use. Training involving safety analysis happens 1-4 times per year, while other aforementioned communication channels happen ranging from 1-4 times per day to 1-4 times per month. We summarise 28 purposes of using these aforementioned communication channels. Communication happens mostly for the purpose of clarifying safety requirements, fixing temporary problems, conflicts and obstacles and sharing safety knowledge. The top 10 challenges are: (1) sensitiveness and confidentiality of safety analysis information; (2) fragmented safety analysis information; (3) inconsistent safety analysis information; (4) asynchronous channels; (5) a lack of tool support; (6) misunderstanding between developers and safety analysts; (7) language, geographic and culture limitations; (8) unwillingness to communicate (groupthink); (9) storage, authority, regulation and monitoring of safety analysis information; (10) a lack of documentation concerning safety analysis to support communication.</p><p><em>Conclusion:</em> During safety analysis, to use communication channels effectively and avoid challenges, a clear purpose of communication during safety analysis should be established at the beginning. We have limitations primarily on the research context namely the scope of domains, participants and countries. To derive countermeasures of fixing the top 10 challenges are potential next steps.</p>
computer science, theory & methods, software engineering