Measuring the Quality of Service Oriented Design

  • Renuka Sindhgatta
  • Bikram Sengupta
  • Karthikeyan Ponnalagu
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5900)


Service Oriented Architecture (SOA) has gained popularity as a design paradigm for realizing enterprise software systems through abstract units of functionality called services. While the key design principles of SOA have been discussed at length in the literature, much of the work is prescriptive in nature and do not explain how adherence to these principles can be quantitatively measured in practice. In some cases, metrics for a limited subset of SOA quality attributes have been proposed, but many of these measures have not been empirically validated on real-life SOA designs. In this paper, we take a deeper look at how the key SOA quality attributes of service cohesion, coupling, reusability, composability and granularity may be evaluated, based only on service design level information. We survey related work, adapt some of the well-known software design metrics to the SOA context and propose new measures where needed. These measures adhere to mathematical properties that characterize the quality attributes. We study their applicability on two real-life SOA design models from the insurance industry using a metrics computation tool integrated with an Eclipse-based service design environment. We believe that availability of these measures during SOA design will aid early detection of design flaws, allow different design options and trade-offs to be considered and support planning for development, testing and governance of the services.


Service Design Business Process Model Service Design Principles Metrics 


  1. 1.
    Stevens, W., Myers, G., Constantine, L.: Structured Design. IBM Systems J. 13, 115–139 (1974)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Briand, L.C., Morasca, S., Basili, V.R.: Property-Based Software Engineering Measurement. IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 22(1), 68–85 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chidamber, S.R., Kemerer, C.F.: A Metrics Suite for Object Oriented Design. IEEE Trans. Software Eng. 20(6), 476–493 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Perepletchikov, M., Ryan, C., Frampton, K., Tari, Z.: Coupling Metrics for Predicting Maintainability in Service-Oriented Designs. In: Software Engineering Conference, ASWEC 2007, pp. 329–340 (2007)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Perepletchikov, M., Ryan, C., Frampton, K.: Cohesion Metrics for Predicting Maintainability of Service-Oriented Software. In: Seventh International Conference on Quality Software, pp. 328–335 (2007)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Erl, T.: SOA, Principles of Service Design. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs (2007)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Artus, D.J.N.: SOA realization: Service design principles,
  8. 8.
    Bieman, J., Ott, L.M.: Measuring Functional Cohesion. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 20(8), 644–657 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Henderson-Sellers, B.: Object-Oriented Metrics: Measures of Complexity. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1996)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    ISO/IEC, ISO/IEC 9126-1:2001 Software Engineering Product Quality – Quality Model, International Standards Organization, Geneva (2001)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Eder, J., Kappel, G., Schrefl, M.: Coupling and Cohesion in Object-Oriented Systems. In: ACM Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, CIKM (1992)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Briand, L.C., Daly, J., et al.: A Unified Framework for Coupling Measurement in Object-Oriented Systems. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 25(1), 91–121 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Briand, L.C., Daly, J., et al.: A Comprehensive Empirical Validation of Design Measures for Object-Oriented Systems. In: 5th International Software Metrics Symposium (1998)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Washizaki, H., Yamamoto, H., Fukazawa, Y.: A Metrics Suite for Measuring Reusability of Software Components. IEEE Metrics (2003)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Poulin, J., Caruso, J.: A Reuse Metric and Return on Investment Model. In: Advances in Software Reuse: Proceedings of Second International Workshop on Software Reusability, pp. 152–166 (1993)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Boxall, M., Araban, S.: Interface Metrics for Reusability Analysis of Components. In: Australian Software Engineering Conference, ASWEC (2004)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Web Service Semantics – WSDL-S,
  18. 18.
    Arsanjani, A.: Service-Oriented Modeling and Architecture,
  19. 19.
    Reddy, V., Dubey, A., Lakshmanan, S., et al.: Evaluation of Legacy Assets in the Context of Migration to SOA. Software Quality Journal 17(1), 51–63 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Huschens, J., Rumpold-Preining, M.: IBM Insurance Application Architecture (IAA) – An Overview of the Insurance Business Architecture. In: Handbook on Architectures of Information Systems, pp. 669–692. Springer, Heidelberg (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
  22. 22.

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Renuka Sindhgatta
    • 1
  • Bikram Sengupta
    • 1
  • Karthikeyan Ponnalagu
    • 1
  1. 1.IBM India Research LaboratoryBangaloreIndia

Personalised recommendations