Abstract
Thinking about improving the management of software development in software firms has been dominated by one approach: the capability maturity model (CMM) devised and administered at Carnegie Mellon University. Although widely known and used, there are a number of well-understood difficulties and limitations with this approach. This article examines, through the lens of modern management theory, the governing assumptions about management and organizational improvement behind the CMM approach. It characterizes this assumption set as the industry model of software management improvement. We take a dialectic approach to propose antithetical assumptions and a configuration approach to weave these different assumptions into alternative assumption platforms: the knowledge model and the network model. These two models, we suggest, might be better foundations for some types of software managements in a world responding to globalization and rapid technology change. If these assumption platforms were used to underpin improvements in software management, we ask, what kinds of approaches would they lead to?
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.References
Ahern DM, Clouse A, Turner R (2001) CMMI distilled: an introduction to multi-discipline process improvement. Addison Wesley, Reading, MA
Bach J (1994) The immaturity of the CMM. Am Progr 7(9):13–18
Bach J (1995) Enough about process: what we need are heroes. IEEE Softw 12:96–98
Basili V, Caldiera G (1995) The experience factory strategy and practice
Basili V, Caldiera G, Rombach HD (1994) Tthe experience factory. Encyclopedia of software engineering—2 volume set. Wiley, New York
Basili VR (1992) Software modeling and measurement: The goal/question/metric paradigm. College Park, MD 20742, University of Maryland
Beck K (2000) Extreme programming explained: embracing change. Addison Wesley, Boston
Bollinger TB, McGowan C (1991) A critical look at software capability evaluations. IEEE Softw 8:25–41
Brodman JG, Johnson DL (1994) What small businesses and small organizations say about the CMM. In: 16th international conference on software engineering. Sorrento, Italy
Brodman JG, Johnson DL (1996) Return on investment (ROI) from software process improvement as measured by US industry. Crosstalk 9(4):35–47
Brooks FP (1987) No silver bullet: essence and accidents of software engineering. Computer 20(4):10–19
Castells M (2001) The internet galaxy—reflections on the internet. Business and Society, Oxford University Press, Oxford
CMMI PT (2002) CMMI for Software Engineering, Version 1.1, Continuous Representation (CMMI-SW, V1.1, Continuous) (Tech. report No. CMU/SEI-2002-TR-028). Pittsburgh, PA, Software Engineering Institute
Cockburn A (2001) Agile software development: software through people. Addison Wesley, Boston
Conradi R, Dingsoyr T (2000) Software experience bases, a consolidated evaluation and status report. Product Focused Software Process Improvement
Cooper R (2005) Thought experiments. Metaphilosophy 36:328–347
Deck M (2001) Managing process diversity while improving your practices. IEEE Softw 18:21–27
Dess GG, Newport S, Rasheed AMA (1993) Configuration research in strategic management—key issues and suggestions. 19:775–795
Emam KE, Madhavji N (1995) The reliability of measuring organizational maturity. Softw Process Improv Pract 1:3–25
Endres A, Rombach D (2003) Empirical software and systems engineering: a handbook of observations. Laws and Theories. Pearson/Addison Wesley, Harlow
Fernström C (1991) The eureka software factory: concepts and accomplishments. In: Lamsweerde A, Fugetta A (eds) 3rd European software engineering conference. Springer, Berlin
Frederiksen HD, Rose J (2003) The social construction of the software operation: reinforcing effects in metrics programs. Scand J Inf Syst 15:23–38
Hansen B, Rose J, Tjørnehøj G (2004) Prescription, description, reflection: the shape of the software process improvement field. Int J Inf Manag 24:457–472
Henry J, Rossman A, Snyder J (1995) Quantitative-evaluation of software process improvement. J Syst Softw 28:169–177
Humphrey W (1989) Managing the software process. Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Reading, Massachusetts
Humphrey W, Florac WA, Carleton AD (1999) Measuring the software process: statistical process control for software process improvement (SEI). Addison Wesley, Reading, MA
Humphrey WS (1988) Characterizing the software process. IEEE Softw 5:73–79
Introna L (1997) Imagine: thought experiments in information systems research? In: Degross Ji AL, Liebenau J (eds) Information systems and qualitative research. Chapman and Hall, London
Jakobsen AB (1998) Bottom-up process improvement tricks. IEEE Softw 15:64–68
Jørgensen M, Sjøberg DIK (2001) Software process improvement and human judgement heuristics. Scand J Inf Syst 13:99–122
Kaplan RS, Norto DP (1992) The balanced scorecard–measures that drive performance. Harv Bus Rev 70(1):71–79
Kelly DP, Culleton B (1999) Process improvement for small organizations. Computer 32:41–47
Konrad M, Chrissis MB, Ferguson J, Garcia S, Hefley B, Kitson D, Paulk M (1996) Capability maturity modeling at the SEI. Softw Process Improv Pract 2:21–34
Kuvaja P, Bicego A (1994) BOOTSTRAP—a European assessment methodology. Softw Qual J 3:117–127
Kuvaja P, Palo J, Bicego A (1999) TAPISTRY—a software process improvement approach tailored for small enterprises. Softw Qual J 8:149–156
Kuvaja P, Similä J, Krzanik L, Bicego A, Saukkonen S, Koch G (1994) Software process assessment & improvement—the bootstrap approach. Blackwell Publisher, Oxford
Larsen EÅ, Kautz K (1997) Quality assurance and software process improvement in Norway. Softw Process Improv Pract 3:71–86
Mason RO, Mitroff II (1973) A program for research on management information systems. Manag Sci 19:475–487
Mathiassen L, Nielsen PA (1989) Soft systems and hard contradictions. J Appl Syst Anal 16:75–88
Matsumoto Y (1981) SWB system: a software factory. North-Holland, Amsterdam
Matsumoto Y (1987) A software factory: an overall approach to software production, IEEE
McGregor D (1960) The human side of enterprise. McGraw Hill, New York
Messnarz R, Tully C (eds) (1999) Better software practice for business benefit. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos, California
Miller D (1987) The genesis of configuration. Acad Manag Rev 12:686–701
Mintzberg H (1983) Structure in fives. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs
Mintzberg H (1990) Strategy formation: schools of thought. In: Fredrickson JW (ed) Perspectives on strategic management. Harper Business, New York
Mitroff II, Williams J, Rathswoh E (1972) Dialectical inquiring systems—new methodology for information science. J Am Soc Inf Sci 23:365–378
Nielsen PA, Nørbjerg J (2001) Software process maturity and organizational politics. In: Fitzgerald B, Russo N (eds) Realigning research and practice in information systems development: the social and organizational perspective, proceedings of IFIP WG 8.2 conference. Boise, Idaho
Niessink F, van Vliet H (2001) Measurement program success factors revisited. Inf Softw Technol 43:617–628
Nonaka I (1991) The knowledge-creating company. Harv Bus Rev 69(6):96–104
Paulish DJ (1993) Case-studies of software process improvement methods. Pittsburgh, Software Engineering Institute
Paulk MC, Curtis B, Chrissis MB, Weber C (1993) Capability maturity model for software ver. 1.1. Software Enginering Institute, Pittsburgh, PA
Paulk MC, Weber C, Curtis B, Chrissis MB (1995) The capability maturity model: guidelines for improving the software process. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA
Porter M (1985) Competititve advantage: creating and sustaining superior performance. Free Press, New York
Pulford K, Kuntzmann-Combelles A, Shirlaw S, Harutunian K (1992) A quantitative approach to software management: the ami handbook. CSSE South Bank University, London
Reifer DJ (2002) The CMMI: it’s formidable. J Syst Softw 50:97–98 Guest editor’s corner
Richardson I (2002) SPI models: what characteristics are required for small software development companies? Softw Qual J 10:101–114
Rifkin S (2001) What makes measuring software so hard? IEEE Softw 18:41–+
Rifkin S (2002) Is process improvement irrelevant to produce new era software? Softw Qual—Ecsq 2002
Sakamoto K, Kishida K, Nakakoji K (1996) Cultural adaptation of the CMM: a case study of a software engineering process group in a Japanes manufacturing factory. In: Fuggetta A, Wolf A (eds) Software process, 0th edn. Wiley, New York
Schneider K (2002) Experience based process improvement. Softw Qual—Ecsq 2002
Senge PM (1990) The fifth discipline. Century, London
Siakas KV, Georgiadou E (2002) Empirical measurement of the effects of cultural diversity on software quality management. Softw Qual J 10:169–180
Sweeney A, Bustard DW (1997) Software process improvement: making it happen in practice. Softw Qual J 6:265–273
Trienekens J, Kusters R, van Solingen R (2001) Product focused software process improvement: concepts and experiences from industry. Softw Qual J 9:269–281
van Solingen R, Berghout E, Kusters R, Trienekens J (2000) No improvement without learning: Prerequisites for learning the relations between process and product quality in practice. Product focused software process improvement, Berlin. Springer, Berlin
van Solingen R, Kusters RJ, Trienekens JJM, van Uijtregt A (1999) Product-focused software process improvement (P-SPI): concepts and their application. Qual Reliab Eng Int 15:475–483
Villalon J, Agustin GC, Gilabert TSF, Seco AD, Sanchez LG, Cota MP (2002) Experiences in the application of software process improvement in SMES. Softw Qual J 10:261–273
von Hippel E, von Krogh G (2003) Open source software and the “private-collective” innovation model: issues for organization science. Org Sci 14:209–223
von Krogh G, Spaeth S, Lakhani KR (2003) Community, joining, and specialization in open source software innovation: a case study. Res Policy 32:1217–1241
Wang YX, Bryant A (2002) Process-based software engineering: building the infrastructures—editors’ introduction. Ann Softw Eng 14:9–37
Ward RP, Fayad ME, Laitinen M (2001) Software process improvement in the small—a small software development company’s most difficult challenge: changing processes to match changing circumstances. Commun Acm 44:105–107
Weber H (1997) The software factory challenge. IOS Press, Amsterdam
Weinberg GM (1992) Quality software management. Dorset House Publishing, New York
Wenger E (1998) Communities of practice: learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Wohlwend H, Rosenbaum S (1994) Schlumberger’s software improvement program. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 20:833–839
Aaen I (2003) Software process improvement: blueprints versus Recipes. IEEE Softw 20(5):86–93
Aaen I, Pries-Heje J (2004) Standardising software processes—an obstacle for innovation? IFIP TC8/WG8.6 seventh working conference on IT innovation for adaptability and competitiveness. Leixlip, Ireland, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston
Acknowledgments
The research was in part made possible by the Danish Government through their sponsorship of the Software Processes and Knowledge (SPV) project.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Rose, J. Improving software management: the industry model, the knowledge model, the network model. Innovations Syst Softw Eng 11, 9–23 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11334-014-0240-4
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11334-014-0240-4