research-article

Strategically balanced process adoption

Authors:

Hesam Chiniforooshan Esfahani,

Maria Carmela AnnosiAuthors Info & Claims

ICSSP '11: Proceedings of the 2011 International Conference on Software and Systems Process

Pages 169 - 178

https://doi.org/10.1145/1987875.1987902

Published: 21 May 2011 Publication History

Abstract

Software processes have an important role to play in realizing organizational strategies. When a software organization is about to decide on the adoption of a new process, it should have a clear understanding of its own strategic objectives, as well as the potentials of the new method in supporting or hindering its strategic plan. From this perspective, a successful process adoption initiative is one which provides maximum support to the strategic objectives of an organization while producing a minimum of adverse effects.

This paper introduces the concept of Strategically Balanced Process Adoption (SBPA) for anticipating and monitoring the strategic impacts of a new process before and after its adoption. A set of techniques are proposed for the realization of SBPA, which are based on a repository of method fragments, introduced in an earlier ICSP paper. The proposed techniques are deployed in an industrial experience, where the subject organization was about to adopt a custom-designed agile process. The proposed techniques of SBPA helped the subject organization to better design the to-be process, with improved control over its enactment.

References

[1]

H. Chiniforooshan Esfahani and E. Yu, A Repository of Agile Method Fragments, in New Modeling Concepts for Today's Software Processes (Proceedings of the ICSP'10), J. Münch, Y. Yang, and W. Schäfer, Editors, Springer Berlin / Heidelberg: Germany. p. 163--174 (2010).

Digital Library

[2]

R. S. Kaplan and D. P. Norton, The balanced scorecard: Translating strategy into action, Boston, Harvard Business School Press (1996).

[3]

R. S. Kaplan and D. P. Norton, Using the Balanced Scorecard as a Strategic Management System.In Harward Business Review, 74 p. 75--85 (1996).

[4]

R. S. Kaplan and D. P. Norton, Strategy Maps : Converting Intangible Assets into Tangible Outcomes, Boston, Harvard Business School (2004).

[5]

Smg, The Strategic Management Maturity Model, Strategy Management Group, Balanced Scorecard Institute, (2010).

[6]

M. Martinsons, R. Davison, and D. Tse, The balanced scorecard: a foundation for the strategic management of information systems. In Decision Support Systems, 25(1) p. 71--88 (1999).

Digital Library

[7]

V. W. Grembergen and I. Amelinckx. Measuring and managing e-business projects through the balanced scorecard. In Proceedings of the 35th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (2002).

Digital Library

[8]

C. D. Huang and Q. Hu, Achieving IT-Business Strategic Alignment via Enterprise-Wide Implementation of Balanced Scorecards. In Information Systems Management, 24(2) p. 173--184 (2007).

Digital Library

[9]

J. Kim, E. Suh, and H. Hwang, A model for evaluating the effectiveness of CRM using the balanced scorecard. In Journal of Interactive Marketing, 17(2) p. 5--19 (2003).

[10]

K. Sureshchandra and J. Shrinivasavadhani. Adopting Agile in Distributed Development. In Global Software Engineering, 2008. ICGSE 2008. IEEE International Conference on (2008).

Digital Library

[11]

H. Eilat, B. Golany, and A. Shtub, R&D project evaluation: An integrated DEA and balanced scorecard approach. In Omega, 36(5) p. 895--912 (2008).

[12]

E. S. K. Yu. Towards modelling and reasoning support for early-phase requirements engineering. In Proceedings of the Third IEEE International Symposium on Requirements Engineering: IEEE Computer Society (1997).

Digital Library

[13]

S. Brinkkemper, Method engineering: engineering of information systems development methods and tools. In Information and Software Technology, 38(4) p. 275--280 (1996).

[14]

T. Poppendieck, Lean Software Development: An Agile Toolkit, Addison Wesley (2003).

Digital Library

[15]

A. Sidky, J. Arthur, and S. Bohner, A disciplined approach to adopting agile practices: the agile adoption framework. In Innovations in Systems and Software Engineering, 3(3) p. 203--216 (2007).

[16]

A. Sidky and J. Arthur. Determining the Applicability of Agile Practices to Mission and Life-Critical Systems. In Proceedings of the 31st IEEE Software Engineering Workshop: IEEE Computer Society (2007).

Digital Library

[17]

A. Qumer and B. Henderson-Sellers, A framework to support the evaluation, adoption and improvement of agile methods in practice. In Journal of Systems and Software, 81(11) p. 1899--1919 (2008).

Digital Library

[18]

I. Krasteva, S. Ilieva, and A. Dimov, Experience-Based Approach for Adoption of Agile Practices in Software Development Projects, in Advanced Information Systems Engineering, Springer Berlin / Heidelberg. p. 266--280 (2010).

Digital Library

Cited By

Babar ZLapouchnian AYu E(2015)Modeling DevOps Deployment Choices Using Process Architecture Design DimensionsThe Practice of Enterprise Modeling10.1007/978-3-319-25897-3_21(322-337)Online publication date: 26-Nov-2015
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-25897-3_21
Schramm JDohrmann PRausch ATernité T(2014)Process Model Engineering LifecycleProceedings of the 2014 40th EUROMICRO Conference on Software Engineering and Advanced Applications10.1109/SEAA.2014.26(127-130)Online publication date: 27-Aug-2014
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1109/SEAA.2014.26
Stavru SIlieva S(2012)Who Is Stronger in Your Agile Deployment – The Id or the Superego?Agile Processes in Software Engineering and Extreme Programming10.1007/978-3-642-30350-0_14(185-192)Online publication date: 2012
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-30350-0_14

Index Terms

Strategically balanced process adoption
1. Social and professional topics
  1. Professional topics
    1. Management of computing and information systems
      1. Project and people management
      2. Software management

Recommendations

Asymmetric New Product Development Alliances: Win-Win or Win-Lose Partnerships?

Interorganizational alliances are widely recognized as critical to product innovation, particularly in high-technology markets. Many new product development (NPD) alliances tend to be asymmetric, that is, they are formed between a larger firm and a ...
Integration of strategic management, process improvement and quantitative measurement for managing the competitiveness of software engineering organizations

Strategic management is a key discipline that permits companies to achieve their competitive goals. An effective and explicit alignment and integration of business strategy with SPI initiatives based on measurement is essential to prevent loss of income,...
Adoption and Impacts of Interorganizational Business Process Standards: Role of Partnering Synergy

Notwithstanding potential benefits, such as quality of interorganizational relationships and operational and strategic gains, adoption of information technology (IT)-enabled interorganizational business process standards (IBPS) is still limited. Given ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Other conferences

ICSSP '11: Proceedings of the 2011 International Conference on Software and Systems Process

May 2011

256 pages

ISBN:9781450307307

DOI:10.1145/1987875

General Chair:
David Raffo
Portland State University, USA
,
Program Chairs:
Dietmar Pfahl
Lund University, Sweden
,
Li Zhang
BeiHang University, China

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]

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 21 May 2011

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Conference

ICSSP '11

ICSSP '11: International Conference on Software and Systems Process

May 21 - 22, 2011

HI, Waikiki, Honolulu, USA

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

3
Total Citations
View Citations
365
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)2
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0

Reflects downloads up to 01 Jan 2025

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Babar ZLapouchnian AYu E(2015)Modeling DevOps Deployment Choices Using Process Architecture Design DimensionsThe Practice of Enterprise Modeling10.1007/978-3-319-25897-3_21(322-337)Online publication date: 26-Nov-2015
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-25897-3_21
Schramm JDohrmann PRausch ATernité T(2014)Process Model Engineering LifecycleProceedings of the 2014 40th EUROMICRO Conference on Software Engineering and Advanced Applications10.1109/SEAA.2014.26(127-130)Online publication date: 27-Aug-2014
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1109/SEAA.2014.26
Stavru SIlieva S(2012)Who Is Stronger in Your Agile Deployment – The Id or the Superego?Agile Processes in Software Engineering and Extreme Programming10.1007/978-3-642-30350-0_14(185-192)Online publication date: 2012
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-30350-0_14

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