A 360-degree process improvement approach based on multiple models
Keywords:Harmonization of multiple models and standards, software process improvement (SPI), models, standards
Several models and methodologies have been defi ned in order to support organisational process improvement. The implementation and institutionalisation of these approaches allow organisations to improve, mature, acquire and institutionalise best practices and management systems from multiple approaches. However, there are two issues, which have to be kept in mind. On one hand, it is possible to fi nd several similarities amongst improvement, management and governance approaches. Experts and practitioners can thereby save, improve and optimize the organisational efforts using the best parts of existing models as building blocks; they can thus be prepared to deconstruct models, aiming for their designs to meet multiple needs. On the other hand, nonetheless, there are other factors which may infl uence, for example, compliance, or those aspects related to structural differences such as terminology, size, process, element structure, content, granularity, and complexity, which make diffi cult to work in multi-model environments. This being the case, the people involved need a map or guideline telling them how to carry out the harmonisation of models and standards that have to be implemented inside their organisations. In the quest to help support the work of harmonization of multiple models, this paper presents a framework that defi nes elements needed for the harmonization of multiple reference models to occur, as well as its application to three case studies. The results obtained show that the framework proposed has allowed the harmonization of several
J. Moore, “An Integrated Collection of Software Engineering Standards”, IEEE Software, vol. 16, no. 6, pp. 51-57, 1999.
E. Oud, “The value to IT of using international standards”, Information Systems Audit and Control Association, vol. 3, pp. 1-5, 2005.
I. Aaen, “Software process improvement: Blueprints versus recipes”, IEEE Software, vol. 20, no. 5, pp. 86-93, 2003.
U. Andelfinger, A. Heijstek, P. Kirwan and H. Sassenburg, “Towards a Unified Process Improvement Approach (UPIA)”, in European Software Engineering Institure Workshop (ESEPG Workshop), Frankfurt, Germany, 2006, pp. 1-6.
A. Ferreira, R. Machado and M. Paulk, “Quantitative analysis of best practices models in the software domain”, in 17th Asia Pacific Software Engineering Conference (APSEC), Sydney, Australia, 2010, pp. 433-442.
A. Ferreira, R. Machado and M. Paulk, “Supporting audits and assessments in multi-model environments”, in 12th International Conference on Product-Focused Software Process Improvement (PROFES), Torre Canne, Italy, 2011, pp. 73-87.
Y. Wang and G. King, Software Engineering Processes: Principles and Applications, 1st ed. Boca Ratón, USA: CRC Press, 2000.
M. Paulk, “A Comparison of ISO 9001 and the capability maturity model for software”, Software Engineering Institute/Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, USA, Tech. Rep. CMU/SEI-94-TR-12, Jul. 1994.
B. Mutafelija and H. Stromber, “ISO 9001:2000 - CMMI V1.1 Mappings”, Software Engineering Institute, Boston, USA, Tech. Rep. V1.1., Dec. 2003.
G. Soydan and M. Kokar, “An OWL Ontology for Representing the CMMI-SW Model”, in 2nd International Workshop on Semantic Web Enabled Software Engineering (SWESE), Athens, Greece, 2006, pp. 1-14.
O. Mendes and A. Abran, “Software engineering ontology: A development methodology”, Metrics News, vol. 9, pp. 68-76, 2004.
Software Engineering Institute and Carnegie Mellon University, The PrIME Project, 2015. [Online]. Available: http://www.sei.cmu.edu/process/research/prime-details.cfm. Accessed on: Feb. 19, 2014.
Information Systems Audit and Control Association (ISACA), Aligning COBIT 4.1, ITIL V3 and ISO/IEC 27002 for Business Benefit, 2008. [Online]. Available: http://goo.gl/E2g1e9. Accessed on: Feb. 19, 2014.
C. Pardo, F. Pino, F. García, M. Piattini and M. Baldassarre, “An ontology for the harmonization of multiple standards and models”, Computer Standards & Interfaces, vol. 34, no. 1, pp. 48-59, 2012.
C. Pardo, F. Pino, F. García, M. Piattini and M. Baldassarre, “A Reference Ontology for Harmonizing Process-reference Models”, Revista Facultad de Ingeniería Universidad de Antioquia, no. 73, pp. 29-42, 2014.
C. Pardo et al., “HProcessTOOL: a support tool in the harmonization of multiple reference models”, in 2011 International Conference on Computational Science and Its Applications (ICCSA), Santander, Spain, 2011, pp. 370-382.
F. Pino, M. Baldassarre, M. Piattini, G. Visaggio and D. Caivano, “Mapping software acquisition practices from ISO 12207 and CMMI”, in 10th International Conference on Evaluation of Novel Approaches to Software Engineering (ENASE), Milan, Italy, 2009, pp. 234-247.
C. Pardo, F. Pino, F. García, M. Baldassarre and M. Piattini, “From chaos to the systematic harmonization of multiple reference models: A harmonization framework applied in two case studies”, Journal of Systems and Software, vol. 86, no. 1, pp. 125-143, 2013.
R. Yin, Case Study Research: Design and Methods, 5th ed. Los Angeles, USA: Sage Publications, 2003.
C. Pardo et al., “Homogenization, Comparison and Integration: A Harmonizing Strategy for the Unification of Multiple-Models in the Banking Sector”, in 12th International Conference on Product-Focused Software Process Improvement (PROFES), Torre Canne, Italy, 2011, pp. 59–72.
D. Malzahn, “Assessing-Learning-Improving, an Integrated Approach for Self Assessment and Process Improvement Systems”, in 4th International Conference on Systems (ICONS), Guadeloupe, France, 2009, pp. 126-130.
How to Cite
Revista Facultad de Ingeniería, Universidad de Antioquia is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution BY-NC-SA 4.0 license. The material published in the journal can be distributed, copied and exhibited by third parties if the respective credits are given to the journal. No commercial benefit can be obtained and derivative works must be under the same license terms as the original work.