Evaluation of software quality-in-use attributes based on analysis network process

  • Seung-Hee Kim
  • Woo-Je Kim


Software quality-in-use is difficult to measure because it is based on user’s perception and closely related to corporate management performance. The application service quality indicator (ASQI) software quality-in-use has been developed that can be applied practically with the advantages of using the international standard under development. To measure the software quality-in-use of with ASQI, an accurate analysis of the importance of quality attributes in ASQI is required. In this study, a correlation analysis between quality attributes was first performed for applying analytic network process (ANP) to assess importance. Second, relative weights were derived using analytic network process methodology. Finally, we evaluated the validity of the weights through a case study. This study is the first to analyze the interrelationship among quality-in-use attributes for general purpose software and provides objective weight information in quality measurement. Additionally, the proposed method and procedures provide guidelines for the selective application of quality attributes.


Quality in use ASQI ANP Quality ISO/IEC25000 


  1. 1.
    IEEE.: IEEE std 730-2014 revision of IEEE std 730-2002—IEEE standard for software quality assurance processes. (2014)
  2. 2.
    JTC/SC7/WG6: Iso/iec 25021 system and software engineering—system and software product quality requirements and evaluation(square)—quality measure elements 3rd (2011)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    ISO/IEC: Systems and software engineering—systems and software quality requirements and evaluation(square)—system and software quality models(final draft) (2010)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    ISO/IEC: Systems and software engineering—systems and software quality requirements and evaluation (square)—measurement of quality in use (2012)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Atoum, I., Bong, C.H.: Measuring software quality in use: state-of-the-art and research challenges. ASQ.Software Qual. Prof. 17(2), 4–15 (2015)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Atoum, I., Bong, C.H., Narayanan, K.: Towards resolving software quality-in-use measurement challenges. J. Emerging Trends Comput. Inf. Sci. 5(11), 9 (2014)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bakota, T., Hegedűs, P., Körtvélyesi, P., Ferenc, R., Gyimóthy, T.: A probabilistic software quality model. In: 27th IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance (ICSM), pp. 243–252 (2011)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kim, S., Kim, W.J.: Development of quality-in-use measurement attributes of application software using kj method. Int. J. Softw. Eng. Its Appl. 8(3), 171–188 (2014)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Saaty, T.L.: Fundamentals of the analytic network process-dependence and feedback in decision-making with a single network. J. Syst. Sci. Syst. Eng. 13(2), 129–157 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Saaty, T.L.: The analytic network process. Iran. J. Oper. Res. 1(1), 1–28 (2008)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Choi, C.R., Jeong, H.Y., Park, J.H., Jang, H.J., Jeong, Y.S.: Relative weight comparison between virtual key factors of cloud computing with analytic network process. J. Supercomput. 72(5), 1694–1714 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Abdollahi, M., Arvan, M., Razmi, J.: An integrated approach for supplier portfolio selection: lean or agile? Exp. Syst. Appl. 42(1), 679–690 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Cho, H.K., Kim, W.J.: Development of evaluation index for foreign weapon system purchase using dematel and anp. J. Korean Oper. Res. Manag. Sci. Soc. 37(2), 73–88 (2012)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Li, C.W., Tzeng, G.H.: Identification of a threshold value for the dematel method using the maximum mean de-entropy algorithm to find critical services provided by a semiconductor intellectual property mall. Exp. Syst. Appl. 3(6), 981–989 (2012)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Boj, J.J., Rodriguez-Rodriguez, R., Alfaro-Saiz, J.J.: An anp-multi-criteria-based methodology to link intangible assets and organizational performance in a balanced scorecard context. Decis. Support Syst. 68, 98–110 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lee, H., Lee, S., Park, Y.: Selection of technology acquisition mode using the analytic network process. Math. Comput. Modell. 49(5), 1274–1282 (2009)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of IT Convergence Software EngineeringKorea University of Technology and EducationCheonanRepublic of Korea
  2. 2.Department of Industry and Information Systems EngineeringSeoul National University of Science and TechnologySeoulRepublic of Korea

Personalised recommendations