Software Process Improvement

Abstract Design by contract is the principle that the interfaces between modules of a software system-especially a mission-critical one-should be governed by precise specifications. The contracts cover mutual obligations (pre-conditions), benefits (post-conditions), and consistency constraints (invariants). Together, these properties are known as assertions, and are directly supported in some design and programming languages. A recent $500 million software error provides a sobering reminder that this principle is not ...

Small and medium enterprises are a very important cog in the gears of the world economy. The software industry in most countries is composed of an industrial scheme that is made up mainly of small and medium software enterprises—SMEs. To strengthen these types of organizations, efficient Software Engineering practices are needed—practices which have been adapted to their size and type of business. Over the last two decades, the Software Engineering community has expressed special interest in software process improvement (SPI) in an effort to increase software product quality, as well as the productivity of software development. However, there is a widespread tendency to make a point of stressing that the success of SPI is only possible for large companies. In this article, a systematic review of published case studies on the SPI efforts carried out in SMEs is presented. Its objective is to analyse the existing approaches towards SPI which focus on SMEs and which report a case study carried out in industry. A further objective is that of discussing the significant issues related to this area of knowledge, and to provide an up-to-date state of the art, from which innovative research activities can be thought of and planned.

Different advances have been made in the development of software process improvement (SPI) standards and models, e.g. capability maturity model (CMM), more recently CMMI, and ISO's SPICE. However, these advances have not been matched by equal advances in the adoption of these standards and models in software development which has resulted in limited success for many SPI efforts. The current problem with SPI is not a lack of standard or model, but rather a lack of an effective strategy to successfully implement these standards or models. The importance of SPI implementation demands that it be recognised as a complex process in its own right and that organizations should determine their SPI implementation maturity through an organized set of activities. In the literature, much attention has been paid to “what activities to implement” instead of “how to implement” these activities. We believe that identification of only “what” activities to implement is not sufficient and that knowledge of “how” to implement is also required for successful implementation of SPI programmes.We have adopted a CMMI approach and developed a maturity model for SPI implementation in order to guide organizations in assessing and improving their SPI implementation processes. The basis of this model is what we have studied in the SPI literature and an empirical study we have carried out. In the design of this maturity model we have extended the concept of critical success factors (CSFs). We have conducted CSF interviews with 23 Australian practitioners. We have also analysed CSFs and critical barriers using 50 research articles (published experience reports and case studies). This maturity model has three dimensions––maturity stage dimension, CSF dimension and assessment dimension. It provides a very practical structure with which to assess and improve SPI implementation processes.

We have conducted face-to-face questionnaire based survey sessions with twenty-three Vietnamese software practitioners in order to determine software process improvement (SPI) de-motivators. The main objective of this study is to provide SPI practitioners with some insight into designing appropriate SPI implementation strategies and to maximize practitioners support for SPI. We asked practitioners to choose and rank various SPI de-motivator against the five types of assessments (high, medium, low, zero or do not know). ...

BACKGROUND-Software Process Improvement (SPI) is a systematic approach to increase the efficiency and effectiveness of a software development organization and to enhance software products. OBJECTIVE-This paper aims to identify and characterize evaluation strategies and measurements used to assess the impact of different SPI initiatives. METHOD-The systematic literature review includes 148 papers published between 1991 and 2008. The selected papers were classified according to SPI initiative, applied evaluation strategies, and measurement perspectives. Potential confounding factors interfering with the evaluation of the improvement effort were assessed. RESULTS-Seven distinct evaluation strategies were identified, wherein the most common one, “Pre-Post Comparison,” was applied in 49 percent of the inspected papers. Quality was the most measured attribute (62 percent), followed by Cost (41 percent), and Schedule (18 percent). Looking at measurement perspectives, “Project” represents the majority with 66 percent. CONCLUSION-The evaluation validity of SPI initiatives is challenged by the scarce consideration of potential confounding factors, particularly given that “Pre-Post Comparison” was identified as the most common evaluation strategy, and the inaccurate descriptions of the evaluation context. Measurements to assess the short and mid-term impact of SPI initiatives prevail, whereas long-term measurements in terms of customer satisfaction and return on investment tend to be less used.

A number of advances have been made in the development of software process improvement (SPI) standards and models, e.g. Capability Maturity Model (CMM), more recently CMMI, and ISO’s SPICE. However, these advances have not been matched by equal advances in the adoption of these standards and models in software development which hasresulted in limited success for many SPI efforts. The current problem with SPI is not a lack of standards or models, but rather a lack of an effective strategy to successfully implement these standards or models.In this paper we have focused on SPI implementation issues and designed three individual components in order to assist SPI practitioners in the design of effective SPI implementation initiatives. We have pulled together individual components under one SPI implementation framework (SPI-IF) using a bottom-up approach already familiar to many practitioners and researchers. The framework is based on the results drawn from SPI literature and an empirical study we have carried out. In the design of SPI-IF, the concept of critical success factors (CSFs) was used and extended. Thirty-four CSF interviews were conducted with Australian practitioners. In addition, 50 research articles (published experience reports and case studies) were also selected and analysed in order to identify factors that play positive or negative roles in SPI implementation. The SPI-IF provides a very practical structure with which to assess and implement SPI implementation initiatives.In order to evaluate SPI-IF, a practical evaluation scheme was undertaken. The evaluation results show that SPI-IF has potential to assist SPI practitioners in the design of effective SPI implementation initiatives. Thus, we recommend organizations to use SPI-IF in order to effectively design SPI implementation initiatives.

Competisoft provides the Latin American software industry with a reference framework for improvement and certification of its software processes.The project is based on proven solutions, including the MoProSoft model that four Mexican software companies applied to increase their processes' capacity level.

Current research in the field of software product management (SPM) and software process improvement does not take the situational context of a company into account. Taking the context into account, allows small and medium sized companies to improve their SPM processes in a more optimal manner. This research shows that situational factors (SFs) influence the selection process of method fragments for SPM in two applications: SPM process maintenance – the influence level of SFs on the SPM processes: if the SF changes value the SPM process may need to be changed; and method fragment choice – selecting a method which fits the situational context of the company. This paper presents a list of 27 situational factors in 5 categories, relevant to SPM, with the level of influence they have on the selection of (parts of) methods.

This paper presents a comprehensive overview of all the important areas within Software Product Management (SPM). The overview has been created and validated in collaboration with many experts from practice and the scientific community. It provides a list of 68 capabilities a product software organization should implement to reach a full grown SPM maturity. The overview consists of the SPM Competence Model that shows the areas of importance to SPM, and the SPM Maturity Matrix that lists all important activities within those areas in a best practice implementation order. SPM organizations can use this matrix to map and improve their SPM practices incrementally.