Efficient software review process for small and medium enterprises

Buy article PDF
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology
Published 14/07/2012

Abstract

A considerable amount of software is produced world-wide by small and medium enterprises (SMEs). These organisations do not have enough resources to implement a rigorous quality plan. It has been established that reviews of various artifacts play a very important role in ensuring the quality of software. Traditional review methods are rigorous and their implementation is cumbersome for SMEs. A new review process which is easy to implement and requires almost no documentation is introduced. It is based on reviewers' efforts to produce high-quality software while minimising the inspection cost. Additionally, people who are conducting this review need not be present at the same place during most phases of the review process. This process has been successfully implemented in a CMM level 3 software development company intending to achieve CMMI level 5 and results are found to be quite encouraging.

Inspec keywords: software quality; business data processing

Other keywords: software review process; medium enterprises; small enterprises; CMM level 3 software development company; inspection cost; software quality

Subjects: Software management; Business and administration; Software engineering techniques; Business and professional IT applications

References

    1. 1)
      • ISO/IES 9126: ‘Information technology – software product evaluation – quality characteristics and guidelines for their use’. International Organisation for Standardisation, 1991
    2. 2)
      • Pressman, R.S.: Software engineering–a practitioner's approach, 2002 (McGraw-Hill)
    3. 3)
      • Galin, D.: Software quality assurance, from theory to implementation, 2004 (Pearson, Addison-Wesley)
    4. 4)
      • McBreen, P.: Quality assurance and testing in agile projects, 2003 (McBreen Consulting)
    5. 5)
      • Jones, T.C.: Programming productivity, 1986 (McGraw-Hill)
    6. 6)
      • Gresse, C., Punter, T., Anacleto, A.: Software measurement for small and medium enterprises – A Brazilian–German view on extending the GQM method, 2003
    7. 7)
      • Quality and productivity of the Brasilian software sector (in Portuguese), 2001 (Ministerio da Ciencia e TecnologiaBrazil)
    8. 8)
    9. 9)
      • Gilb, T., Graham, D.: Software inspection, 1993 (Addison-Wesley)
    10. 10)
    11. 11)
      • O'Neill, D.: `National software quality experiment: results 1992–1996', Proc. Quality Week Europe Conf., 1997, Brussels, p. 1–25
    12. 12)
    13. 13)
      • `IEEE Standard for Software Reviews and Audits (IEEE STD 1028-1988)', , 1988
    14. 14)
      • `IEEE Standard for Software Reviews and Audits (IEEE STD 1028-1997)', , 1997
    15. 15)
      • Wheeler, D.A., Brykczynski, B., Meeson, R.N.: Software inspection: an industry best practice, 1996 (IEEE CS PressLos Alamitos, CA)
    16. 16)
      • Ballman, K., Votta, L.G.: `Organizational congestion in large-scale software development', Proc. 3rd Int. Conf. on the Software Process Applying the Software Process, 1994, IEEE CS Press, p. 23–34
    17. 17)
      • Russel, G.W.: Experience with inspection in ultra large-scale developments, 1991 (IEEE Software)
    18. 18)
      • Parnas, D.W., Weiss, D.M.: Active design review, 1989 (IEEE CS Press)
    19. 19)
      • Votta, L.G.: `Does every inspection need a meeting?', Proc. 1st ACM SIGSOFT Symp. on the Foundations of Software Engineering, 1993, p. 107–114
    20. 20)
      • Humphrey, W.: Managing the software process, 1989 (Addison-WesleyNY)
    21. 21)
    22. 22)
      • Land, L.P.W., Jeffery, R., Saucer, C.: Validating the defect detection performance of group designs for software reviews: Report of a replicated experiment, 1997, p. 17-26
    23. 23)
    24. 24)
      • Laitenberger, O., Dreyer, H.M.: `Evaluating the usefulness and the ease of use of a Web-based inspection data collection tool', Proc. 5th Int. Software Metrics Symp., 1998, p. 122–132
    25. 25)
    26. 26)
    27. 27)
    28. 28)
      • Johnson, P.M., Tjahjono, D.: CSRS users guide, 1993 (University of Hawaii)
    29. 29)
      • Johnson, P.: An instrumented approach to improving software quality through formal technical review (IEEE CS PressLos Alamitos, CA)
    30. 30)
    31. 31)
    32. 32)
    33. 33)
      • Tripp, L., Struck, W., Pflung, B.: The application of multiple team inspections on a safety-critical software standard, 1991
    34. 34)
      • McCarthy, P., Porter, A., Siy, H., Votta, L.G.: `An experiment to assess cost-benefits of inspection meetings and their alternatives: a pilot study', Proc. Int. Metrics Symp., 1996, IEEE CS Press, Berlin, p. 100–111
    35. 35)
      • MacDonald, F.: A review of tool support for software inspection’. In software manage. network, 1995, (IEEE Comput. Soc. PressLos Alamitos, CA, USA), p. 340-349
Print this page
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address