Your browser does not support JavaScript!
http://iet.metastore.ingenta.com
1887

access icon free Process diversity in software development: an industrial study

Software companies need to employ state-of-the-art technologies to meet customer requirements. Owing to the complexity of contemporary software products and uncertainty concerning the budget for the required resources, companies use process-oriented quality management techniques in order to guarantee appropriate product quality. In this light, standardised quality assurance system that uses the capability maturity model integration-development (CMMI-DEV) program are incorporated into software development processes, and software companies aim to enhance productivity by acquiring CMMI-DEV certificates. In this study, an approach based on CMMI-DEV is used to develop software process diversity for an international company. The results show that the proposed software process diversity model can be used to assess and improve processes in middle-sized software companies that have identical technical frameworks and similar business structures.

References

    1. 1)
      • 5. Aaen, I., Arent, J., Mathiassen, L., et al: ‘A conceptual map of software process improvement’, Scand. J. Inf. Syst., 2001, 13, (1), pp. 123146.
    2. 2)
      • 16. Samalikova, J., Kusters, R.J., Trienekens, J.J., et al: ‘Process mining support for capability maturity model integration-based software process assessment, in principle and in practice’, J. Softw. Evol. Process, 2014, 26, (7), pp. 714728.
    3. 3)
      • 32. Boehm, B., Turner, R.: ‘Management challenges to implementing agile processes in traditional development organizations’, IEEE Softw., 2005, 22, (5), pp. 3039.
    4. 4)
      • 12. Chrissis, M.B., Konrad, M., Shrum, S.: ‘CMMI: guidelines for process integration and product improvement’, 2003.
    5. 5)
      • 30. Ramesh, B., Mohan, K., Cao, L.: ‘Ambidexterity in agile distributed development: an empirical investigation’, Inf. Syst. Res., 2012, 23, (2), pp. 323339.
    6. 6)
      • 8. O'Reilly, C.A., Tushman, M.L.: ‘Organizational ambidexterity in action: how managers explore and exploit’, Calif. Manage. Rev., 2011, 53, (4), pp. 522.
    7. 7)
      • 33. Vinekar, V., Slinkman, C.W., Nerur, S.: ‘Can agile and traditional systems development approaches coexist? An ambidextrous view’, Inf. Syst. Manag., 2006, 23, (3), pp. 3142.
    8. 8)
      • 23. Pawar, R.P.: ‘A comparative study of agile software development methodology and traditional waterfall model’, IOSR J. Comput. Eng., 2015, 2, (2), pp. 18.
    9. 9)
      • 31. Subramanyam, R., Ramasubbu, N., Krishnan, M.S.: ‘In search of efficient flexibility: effects of software component granularity on development effort, defects, and customization effort’, Inf. Syst. Res., 2012, 23, (3), pp. 787803.
    10. 10)
      • 29. Harris, M.L., Collins, R.W., Hevner, A.R.: ‘Control of flexible software development under uncertainty’, Inf. Syst. Res., 2009, 20, (3), pp. 400419.
    11. 11)
      • 3. Sabale, R.G., Dani, A.: ‘Comparative study of prototype model for software engineering with system development life cycle’, IOSR J. Eng., 2012, 2, (7), pp. 22503021.
    12. 12)
      • 7. Adler, P.: ‘The collaborative, ambidextrous enterprise’, Universia Bus. Rev., 2013, 40, pp. 3451.
    13. 13)
      • 9. Heckscher, C., Adler, P.: ‘The Firm as Collaborative Community: Reconstructing Trust in the Knowledge Economy’, (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK, 2007, 1st Edn.).
    14. 14)
      • 26. Stoica, M., Mircea, M., Ghilic-Micu, B.: ‘Software development: agile vs. Traditional’, Inform. Econ., 2013, 17, (4), pp. 6476.
    15. 15)
      • 20. Cho, J.: ‘A hybrid software development method for large-scale projects: rational unified process with scrum’, Issues Inf. Syst., 2009, 10, (2), pp. 340348.
    16. 16)
      • 25. Preeti, R., Saru, D.: ‘Impact of different methodologies in software development process’, Int. J. Comput. Sci. Inf. Technol., 2014, 5, (2), pp. 11121116.
    17. 17)
      • 2. Mathai, M.K., Venugopal, R., Abraham, J.T.: ‘Hybrid model for software development’, Int. J. Res. Eng. Technol., 2016, 5, (1), pp. 198202.
    18. 18)
      • 15. Garzás, J., Paulk, M.C.: ‘A case study of software process improvement with CMMI-DEV and Scrum in Spanish companies’, J. Softw. Evol. Process, 2013, 25, (12), pp. 13251333.
    19. 19)
      • 11. Glazer, H., Dalton, J., Anderson, D., et al: ‘CMMI or agile: why not embrace both!’. CMU/SEI-2008-TN-003, Softw. Eng. Inst., November 2008, p. 48.
    20. 20)
      • 24. Munassar, N.M.A., Govardhan, A.: ‘A comparison between five models of software engineering’, Int. J. Comput. Sci., 2010, 7, (5), pp. 94101.
    21. 21)
      • 19. Hneif, M., Ow, S.H.: ‘Review of agile methodologies in software development 1’, Int. J. Res. Rev. Appl. Sci., 2009, 1, (1), pp. 20762734.
    22. 22)
      • 10. Agrawal, M., Chari, K.: ‘Software effort, quality, and cycle time: a study of CMM level 5 projects’, IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng., 2007, 33, (3), pp. 145156.
    23. 23)
      • 13. Kuhrmann, M.: ‘Crafting a software process improvement approach – a retrospective systematization’, J. Softw. Evol. Process, 2015, 27, pp. 114145.
    24. 24)
      • 17. Paulk, M.C.: ‘Extreme programming from a CMM perspective’, IEEE Softw., 2001, 18, (6), pp. 1926.
    25. 25)
      • 4. Ramasubbu, N., Balan, R.K.: ‘The impact of process choice in high maturity environments: an empirical analysis’. Proc. – Int. Conf. on Software Engineering, Vancouver, Canada, May 2009, pp. 529539.
    26. 26)
      • 21. Stephen, O., Oriaku, K.: ‘Software development methodologies: agile model vs V-model’, Int. J. Eng. Tech. Res., 2014, 2, (11), pp. 108113.
    27. 27)
      • 14. Niazi, M.: ‘A comparative study of software process improvement implementation success factors’, J. Softw. Evol. Process, 2015, 27, (9), pp. 700722.
    28. 28)
      • 6. Lindvall, M., Rus, I. ‘Process diversity in software development’, IEEE Softw., 2000, 17, (4), pp. 1418.
    29. 29)
      • 34. Batra, D., Xia, W., Van der Meer, D.E., et al: ‘Balancing agile and structured development approaches to successfully manage large distributed software projects: A case study from the cruise line industry’, Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst., 2010, 27, (1), pp. 379394.
    30. 30)
      • 1. Curtis, B.: ‘Global pursuit of process maturity’, IEEE Softw., 2000, 17, (4), pp. 7678.
    31. 31)
      • 28. Ramasubbu, N., Bharadwaj, A., Kumar Tayi, G.: ‘Software process diversity: conceptualization, measurement, and analysis of impact on project performance’, MIS Q., 2015, 39, (4), pp. 787807.
    32. 32)
      • 18. Sutherland, J., Jakobsen, C.R., Johnson, K.: ‘Scrum and CMMI level 5: the magic potion for code warriors’. Proc. – AGILE 2007, Washington, D.C., USA, August 2007, pp. 272277.
    33. 33)
      • 22. Balaji, S.: ‘Waterfall vs v-model vs agile: a comparative study on SDLC’, Int. J. Inf. Technol. Bus. Manage., 2012, 2, (1), pp. 2630.
    34. 34)
      • 27. Madachy, R., Boehm, B., Lane, J.A.: ‘Spiral lifecycle increment modeling for new hybrid processes’. SPW: Int. Software Process Workshop, Shanghai, China, May 2006, pp. 167177.
http://iet.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1049/iet-sen.2018.5079
Loading

Related content

content/journals/10.1049/iet-sen.2018.5079
pub_keyword,iet_inspecKeyword,pub_concept
6
6
Loading
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address