research-article

Do software process improvements lead to ISO 9126 architectural quality factor improvement

Authors:

Mathieu Lavallée,

Pierre N. RobillardAuthors Info & Claims

WoSQ '11: Proceedings of the 8th international workshop on Software quality

Pages 11 - 17

https://doi.org/10.1145/2024587.2024592

Published: 04 September 2011 Publication History

Abstract

This paper presents preliminary results of a systematic review performed to determine the impacts of Software Process Improvements (SPI) on developers' activities and on architectural quality. The analysis shows that most SPI research focuses on the motivations of developers like quality of work life and participation incentives, but provides little detail on the impacts of SPI on their day-to-day tasks. The impacts on product quality are limited to defect reduction, and do not consider architectural quality factors, such as changeability and stability. This study shows a very weak link between process quality, as defined by the CMMI, and architectural quality, as defined by ISO 9126. The SPI literature found by this review is mostly concerned with requirement process improvements, which are related to problem definition quality, but not to architectural quality. Future quality-oriented SPI research should therefore focus on improving design and development processes with an eye to considering architectural quality factors, or what the ISO 9126 terms "architectural capabilities".

References

[1]

Software Engineering Institute. 2011. SEI Statistics and History. Accessed in April 2011 at http://www.sei.cmu.edu/about/statisticshistory.cfm.

[2]

CMMI Product Team. 2010. CMMI for Development, Version 1.3. Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA.

[3]

Deming, W. E. 1986. Out of the Crisis. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Center for Advanced Engineering Study, Cambridge, MA.

[4]

Staples, M. and Niazi, M. 2008. Systematic review of organizational motivations for adopting CMM-based SPI. Information and Software Technology 50, 7--8 (Jun. 2008), 605--620.

Digital Library

[5]

Sulayman, M. and Mendes, E. 2009. A Systematic Literature Review of Software Process Improvement in Small and Medium Web Companies. In Advances in Software Engineering. D. Slezak et al., Ed. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1--8.

[6]

Allen, P., Ramachandran, M. and Abushama, H. 2003. PRISMS: an approach to software process improvement for small to medium enterprises. In Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Quality Software (Dallas, TX, November 06 - 07, 2003). QSIC'03. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, 211--214.

Digital Library

[7]

Beecham, S., Baddoo, N., Hall, T., Robinson, H. and Sharp, H. 2008. Motivation in Software Engineering: A systematic literature review. Information and Software Technology, 50, 9-10 (Aug. 2008), 860--878.

Digital Library

[8]

Kitchenham, B. 2004. Procedures for Performing Systematic Reviews. Joint Technical Report. Keele University (UK) and National ICT Australia Ltd.

[9]

Biolchini, J., Gomes Mian, P., Candida Cruz Natali, A. and Horta Travassos, G. 2005. Systematic Review in Software Engineering. Technical Report. Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro.

[10]

Pino, F. J., García, F. and Piattini, M. 2008. Software process improvement in small and medium software enterprises: a systematic review. Software Quality Journal, 16, 2 (Jun. 2008), 237--261.

Digital Library

[11]

Dybå, T. and Dingsøyr, T. 2008. Empirical studies of agile software development: A systematic review. Information and Software Technology, 50, 9--10 (Aug. 2008), 833--859.

Digital Library

[12]

Bjornson, F.O. and Dingosyr, T. 2008. Knowledge management in software engineering: A systematic review of studied concepts, findings and research methods used. Information and Software Technology, 50, 11 (Oct. 2008), 1055--1068.

Digital Library

[13]

Thomson Reuters. 2011. ISI Web of Knowledge Journal Citation Reports. Accessed in April 2011 at http://www.isiknowledge.com/JCR/.

[14]

Software Engineering Institute. 2011. CMMI for Development SCAMPI Class A Appraisal Results 2010 End-Year Update. Technical Report. Carnegie Mellon University.

[15]

Leung, H. K. N. and Yuen, T. C. F. 2001. A process framework for small projects. Software Process: Improvement & Practice, 6, 2 (Jun. 2001), 67--83.

[16]

Batista, J. and Dias de Figueiredo, A. 2000. SPI in a very small team: a case with CMM. Software Process: Improvement & Practice, 5, 4 (Dec. 2000), 243--250.

[17]

Cattaneo, F., Fuggetta, A. and Sciuto, D. 2001. Pursuing coherence in software process assessment and improvement. Software Process: Improvement & Practice, 6, 1 (Mar. 2001), 3--22.

[18]

Damian, D., Zowghi, D., Vaidyanathasamy, L. and Pal, Y. 2004. An Industrial Case Study of Immediate Benefits of Requirements Engineering Process Improvement at the Australian Center for Unisys Software. Empirical Software Engineering, 9, 1-2 (Mar. 2004), 45--75.

Digital Library

[19]

Dangle, K. C., Larsen, P., Shaw, M. and Zelkowitz, M. V. 2005. Software process improvement in small organizations: a case study. IEEE Software, 22, 6 (Dec. 2005), 68--75.

Digital Library

[20]

El-Emam, K., Goldenson, D., McCurley, J. and Herbsleb, J. 2001. Modelling the Likelihood of Software Process Improvement: An Exploratory Study. Empirical Software Engineering, 6, 3 (Sept. 2001), 207--229.

Digital Library

[21]

Morisio, M., Ezran, M. and Tully, C. 2002. Success and failure factors in software reuse. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 28, 4 (Apr. 2002), 340--357.

Digital Library

[22]

Subramanian, G. H., Jiang, J. J. and Klein, G. 2007. Software quality and IS project performance improvements from software development process maturity and IS implementation strategies. Journal of Systems and Software, 80, 4 (Apr. 2007), 616--627.

Digital Library

[23]

Kandt, R. K. 2009. Experiences in Improving Flight Software Development Processes. IEEE Software, 26, 3 (May 2009), 58--64.

Digital Library

[24]

Hyde, K. and Wilson, D. 2004. Intangible benefits of CMM-based software process improvement. Software Process: Improvement & Practice, 9, 4 (Dec. 2004), 217--228.

[25]

Software Engineering Institute. 2004. CMMI v1.1 SCAMPI v1.1 Class A Appraisal Results 2004 Mid-Year Update. Technical Report. Carnegie Mellon University.

[26]

Leung, H. K. N. 1999. Slow Change of Information System Development Practice. Software Quality Journal, 8, 3 (Nov. 1999), 197--210.

Digital Library

[27]

Dymond, K. M. 1995. A Guide to the CMM: Understanding the Capability Maturity Model for Software. Process Inc. U.S.

[28]

Leonard-Barton, D. 1987. Implementing Structured Software Methodologies: A Case of Innovation in Process Technology. INTERFACES, 17, 3 (Jun. 1987), 6--17.

Digital Library

[29]

Dyba, T. 2000. An Instrument for Measuring the Key Factors of Success in Software Process Improvement. Empirical Software Engineering, 5, 4 (Dec. 2000), 357--390.

Digital Library

[30]

Riemenschneider, C. K., Hardgrave, B. C. and Davis, F. D. 2002. Explaining software developer acceptance of methodologies: a comparison of five theoretical models. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 28, 12 (Dec. 2002), 1135--1145.

Digital Library

[31]

Green, G. C., Hevner, A. R. and Webb Collins, R. 2005. The impacts of quality and productivity perceptions on the use of software process improvement innovations. Information and Software Technology, 47, 8 (Jun. 2005), 543--553.

Digital Library

[32]

Chen, J.-C. and Huang, S.-J. 2009. An empirical analysis of the impact of software development problem factors on software maintainability. Journal of Systems and Software, 82, 6 (Jun. 2009), 981--992.

Digital Library

[33]

Kemerer, C. F. and Paulk, M. C. The Impact of Design and Code Reviews on Software Quality: An Empirical Study Based on PSP Data. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 35, 4 (Jul. 2009), 534--550.

Digital Library

[34]

Agrawal, M. and Chari, K. 2007. Software Effort, Quality, and Cycle Time: A Study of CMM Level 5 Projects. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 33, 3 (Mar. 2007), 145--156.

Digital Library

[35]

Molokken-Ostvold, K. and Jorgensen, M. 2005. A comparison of software project overruns - flexible versus sequential development models. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 31, 9 (Sept. 2005), 754--766.

Digital Library

[36]

International Organization for Standardization. 2001. ISO/IEC 9126-1 Software Engineering - Product Quality - Part 1: Quality Model. International Standard.

Cited By

Tuape MAyalew YBainomugisha EChaudron MHammouda IDittrich Y(2019)Factors affecting development process in small software companiesProceedings of the 2nd Symposium on Software Engineering in Africa10.1109/SEiA.2019.00011(16-23)Online publication date: 28-May-2019
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1109/SEiA.2019.00011
Cáliz DSamaniego GCáliz R(2016)Methodological Proposal of Policies and Procedures for Quality Assurance in Information Systems for Software Development Companies Based on CMMIJournal of Software10.17706/jsw.11.3.230-24111:3(230-241)Online publication date: 2016
https://doi.org/10.17706/jsw.11.3.230-241
García-Mireles GMoraga MGarcía FPiattini M(2015)Approaches to promote product quality within software process improvement initiativesJournal of Systems and Software10.1016/j.jss.2015.01.057103:C(150-166)Online publication date: 1-May-2015
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1016/j.jss.2015.01.057
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

Do software process improvements lead to ISO 9126 architectural quality factor improvement
1. Social and professional topics
  1. Professional topics
    1. Management of computing and information systems
2. Software and its engineering
  1. Software creation and management

Recommendations

Software quality and IS project performance improvements from software development process maturity and IS implementation strategies

The capability maturity model (CMM) is part of several software process improvement (SPI), six sigma, and total quality management (TQM) initiatives in organizations. SPI and continuous quality improvements are associated with better return on ...
De-motivators for software process improvement: an analysis of practitioners' views

We present a study of software practitioners' de-motivators for software process improvement (SPI). The aim of this study is to understand the nature of the issues that de-motivate software practitioners for SPI, so that SPI managers can better manage ...
Effects of Process Maturity on Quality, Cycle Time, and Effort in Software Product Development

The information technology IT industry is characterized by rapid innovation and intense competition. To survive, IT firms must develop high quality software products on time and at low cost. A key issue is whether high levels of quality can be achieved ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences

WoSQ '11: Proceedings of the 8th international workshop on Software quality

September 2011

64 pages

ISBN:9781450308519

DOI:10.1145/2024587

Program Chairs:
Stefan Wagner
University of Stuttgart, Germany
,
Sunita Chulani
Cisco Systems, USA
,
Bernard Wong
University of Technology Sydney, Australia

Copyright © 2011 ACM.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Sponsors

SIGSOFT: ACM Special Interest Group on Software Engineering

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 04 September 2011

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Conference

ESEC/FSE'11

Sponsor:

SIGSOFT

ESEC/FSE'11: Joint Meeting of the European Software Engineering Conference and the ACM SIGSOFT Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering

September 4, 2011

Szeged, Hungary

Acceptance Rates

WoSQ '11 Paper Acceptance Rate 7 of 11 submissions, 64%;

Overall Acceptance Rate 7 of 11 submissions, 64%

Upcoming Conference

ICSE 2025

2025 IEEE/ACM 46th International Conference on Software Engineering

April 26 - May 3, 2025

Ottawa , ON , Canada

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

5
Total Citations
View Citations
574
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)6
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0

Reflects downloads up to 06 Jan 2025

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Tuape MAyalew YBainomugisha EChaudron MHammouda IDittrich Y(2019)Factors affecting development process in small software companiesProceedings of the 2nd Symposium on Software Engineering in Africa10.1109/SEiA.2019.00011(16-23)Online publication date: 28-May-2019
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1109/SEiA.2019.00011
Cáliz DSamaniego GCáliz R(2016)Methodological Proposal of Policies and Procedures for Quality Assurance in Information Systems for Software Development Companies Based on CMMIJournal of Software10.17706/jsw.11.3.230-24111:3(230-241)Online publication date: 2016
https://doi.org/10.17706/jsw.11.3.230-241
García-Mireles GMoraga MGarcía FPiattini M(2015)Approaches to promote product quality within software process improvement initiativesJournal of Systems and Software10.1016/j.jss.2015.01.057103:C(150-166)Online publication date: 1-May-2015
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1016/j.jss.2015.01.057
Lavallée MRobillard PGlinz MMurphy GPezzè M(2012)The impacts of software process improvement on developers: a systematic reviewProceedings of the 34th International Conference on Software Engineering10.5555/2337223.2337237(113-122)Online publication date: 2-Jun-2012
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/2337223.2337237
Lavallee MRobillard P(2012)The impacts of software process improvement on developers: A systematic review2012 34th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE)10.1109/ICSE.2012.6227201(113-122)Online publication date: Jun-2012
https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSE.2012.6227201

View Options

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Publication

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Table of Contents