TL;DR
This paper theorizes on the emerging challenges and opportunities inherent in the conceptualization of the citizen developer in low code/no code environments.
Interviews with sixteen early-adopter software professionals who integrated LLM-based tools into their day-to-day work in early to mid-2023 offer actionable implications for developers, organizations, educators, and tool designers seeking to integrate LLMs responsibly into professional software practice.
Low‐Code Development Platforms (LCDPs) and DevOps share a common motive to increase agility during the software development process. DevOps focuses on automation, continuous delivery, and rapid response, whereas LCDPs support these practices by simplifying automation through visual programming and rapid prototyping, enabling teams to focus their expertise on decision‐making and other strategic tasks. To investigate how the crossroads of LCDPs and DevOps are valuable in achieving better agility and efficiency, we have conducted interviews with 12 IT project team members who deal with LCDPs and the DevOps environment. The objective of this study is to understand the concept of DevOps with LCDPs and to explore how their integration can contribute to the software development process and organizational agility from practitioners' perspectives. To analyze the interview data, we employed a Grounded Theory (GT) approach to systematically code the data and identify emerging categories and themes. The findings suggested that the crossroads of DevOps and LCDPs serve as an effective channel to operationalize the concept of continuous everything in a more efficient manner. However, to achieve this integration successfully, organizations must consider factors such as bridging gaps between talent needs and the available employment pool, governance, scalability, and a collaborative culture. Finally, we discussed the implications of our findings for practitioners and researchers, as well as opportunities for future research.
Purpose: This study investigated the technological deficiencies contributing to software errors in software products, examining how inadequacies in development tools, developer expertise gaps, architectural failures, modern technology adoption challenges, and legacy system constraints create conditions for software errors. Methodology: A qualitative phenomenological design was employed. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 12 experienced software developers averaging 14.5 years of experience in U.S.-based organizations across retail, healthcare, technology, and financial sectors. Data were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis in NVivo 14, anchored in the Technological Context construct of the Technology-Organization-Environment (TOE) framework. Findings: Five themes emerged from this study, theme 1. Inadequacies in development tools and practices- discovering the challenges with existing tools and developer practices; theme 2. Impact of developer expertise and practices on software quality- discusses how the individual work experience shows bias in software development; theme 3. System architecture and oversight failures- discusses the software errors caused due to poor architecture and error monitoring; theme 4. The role of modern technologies and automation- discusses the impact of AI coding assistants; theme 5. Challenges posed by legacy systems and external integrations- elaborates how legacy systems limit developers’ productivity and software innovation. These themes collectively constitute the Technological Error Origin Framework (TEOF). Unique contribution to theory, practice and policy: This study provides the first developer-experience-grounded, phenomenologically anchored account of software error origins within the TOE framework. Organizations should invest in integrated error-detection toolchains, implement developer upskilling programs spanning both technical and domain knowledge, enforce architecture-first principles with mandatory monitoring, and establish structured legacy modernization roadmaps.
Enterprise front-end development at scale is characterized by a persistent tension between the need for organizational consistency and the demand for product-team autonomy. Left unresolved, this tension produces fragmented codebases, duplicated infrastructure decisions, inconsistent security postures, and compounding onboarding costs. Application generators address this problem by encoding architectural standards, security defaults, and delivery contracts directly into the project creation process. Rather than relying on documentation and developer discipline to propagate platform conventions, generators make correct behavior the automatic outcome of project initialization. This article examines application generators as first-class platform infrastructure across their full operational lifecycle. The scope covers scaffold design and baseline contract definition, governance and security enforcement through generated defaults, extensibility architecture that preserves product-team autonomy without sacrificing platform coherence, pipeline and observability integration, developer experience as a technical requirement, shared asset distribution, and the governance models required to prevent generator sprawl. The article further addresses the implications of AI-assisted development for generator design, arguing that embedded static analysis and dependency governance become especially critical as AI-generated code enters enterprise codebases at an increasing rate. The article establishes that generator value is not realized at project creation alone. It builds up over time through consistent delivery pipelines, less time spent on compliance remediation, faster onboarding, and measuring at the portfolio level. Sustaining that value requires treating the generator as a versioned, owned, and actively maintained platform product, governed by the same rigor applied to the applications it produces.
The implementation of DevSecOps has emerged as an essential strategy for incorporating security from the early stages of software development. Its adoption allows for reducing vulnerabilities, streamlining threat detection, and complying with security regulations. Using a Systematic Literature Review, the study retrieved thirty research articles that met the requirements for inclusion in the review. The objective is to provide an overview of the current state of existing empirical studies on DevSecOps practices, which can help define strengths and areas of opportunity, and allow for planning future studies. Finally, studies reveal several advantages to adopting the DevSecOps approach, such as creating more secure and resilient software, improving cybersecurity defenses, and fostering a safe and open culture through communication and collaboration among development teams. However, the literature highlighted specific challenges or barriers to adopting this approach, such as organizational resistance, cultural transformations, and the complexity of implementing new security tools and procedures. Spanish-language metadata / Metadatos en españolTítulo en español: DevSecOps para el desarrollo seguro de software: una revisión sistemática de la literatura sobre prácticas, beneficios y barreras de adopciónResumen: La implementación de DevSecOps se ha consolidado como una estrategia esencial para incorporar la seguridad desde las primeras etapas del desarrollo de software. Su adopción permite reducir vulnerabilidades, agilizar la detección de amenazas y cumplir con las normativas de seguridad. Mediante una revisión sistemática de la literatura, el estudio recuperó treinta artículos de investigación que cumplieron los criterios de inclusión establecidos. El objetivo es ofrecer una visión general del estado actual de los estudios empíricos existentes sobre las prácticas de DevSecOps, con el fin de identificar sus fortalezas y áreas de oportunidad, así como facilitar la planificación de futuras investigaciones. Finalmente, los estudios revelan varias ventajas asociadas con la adopción del enfoque DevSecOps, entre ellas el desarrollo de software más seguro y resiliente, la mejora de las defensas de ciberseguridad y el fomento de una cultura segura y abierta mediante la comunicación y la colaboración entre los equipos de desarrollo. Sin embargo, la literatura también destaca desafíos o barreras específicas para la adopción de este enfoque, como la resistencia organizacional, las transformaciones culturales y la complejidad de implementar nuevas herramientas y procedimientos de seguridad. Palabras Claves: DevSecOps; desarrollo seguro de software; ciclo de vida del desarrollo de software; revisión sistemática de la literatura; seguridad por diseño; seguridad continua; prácticas de seguridad del software; resiliencia de ciberseguridad; detección de amenazas; barreras para la adopción de DevSecOps; cultura organizacional; automatización de la seguridad. Smart citations: https://scite.ai/reports/10.61467/2007.1558.2026.v17i4.1299Dimensions.Open Alex.
The results show that usability discussions exhibit a non-linear behavior over time, with periods of growth followed by stabilization, suggesting a gradual maturation of the topic within the developer community.