Advertisement

Cognitive Structures of Software Evaluation: A Means-End Chain Analysis of Quality

  • Bernard Wong
  • Ross Jeffery
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2188)

Abstract

This paper reports on a study of eight interviews conducted in an Australian Internet/Telecommunications organization. We sought to study the stakeholders’ understanding of software quality, and the level of importance perceived in regard to different characteristics of software quality. The research finds that different stakeholders have different views of software quality. The research also finds that desired values and consequences sought by the stakeholder influence their view of quality and their choice of product characteristics used in their quality evaluation.

Keywords

Cognitive Structure Software Quality Quality Function Deployment Software Evaluation Billing System 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Hatton, L.: The Automation of Software Process and Product Quality, Software Quality Management I, Computational Mechanics Publications, 1993.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Myers, W.: Debating the many ways to achieve Quality, IEEE Software, March 1993.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Boehm, B., Brown, J. & Lipow, M: Quantitative Evaluation of Software Quality, Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Software Engineering, 1976, pp592–605.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cavano, J. & McCall, J.: A Framework for the Measurement of Software Quality, Proceedings of the ACM SQA Workshop, Nov 1978, pp 133–139.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    McCall, J., Richards, P. & Walters, G.: Factors in Software Quality, Vol 1,2, & 3, November 1977.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Carpenter, S., Murine, G.: Measuring Software Product Quality, Quality Progress May 1984, pp16–20.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Sunazuka, T., Azuma, M. & Yamagishi, N.: Software Quality Assessment Technology, IEEE 8th International Conference on S.E., 1985Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kitchenham, B. & Walker, J.: The Meaning of Quality, Software Engineering 86: Proceedings of BCS-IEE Software Engineering 86 Conference, Southampton England September 1986.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Olson, J.C. &, Jacoby, J.: Cue Utilization in the Quality Perception Process”, Proceedings, 3, M. Venkatesan, ed., Iowa City, Iowa: Association for Consumer Research, 167–79.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gutman, J.: A Means-End Chain Model Based on Consumer Categorization Processes, Journal of Marketing, 46 (Spring): 60–72.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Pirsig: Zen and the art of Motorcycle Maintenance: an enquiry into values, 1974.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Garvin, D.: What does “product quality” really mean?, Sloan Management Review, 1984, 24.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Smilie, T.: Standards for Australia, Informatics, Aug 1993.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Pfleeger, S.: Software Engineering: Theory and Practice, Prentice Hall, 2001.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Weiner: Human Motivation: metaphors, theories, and research, Sage Publications Inc, 1992.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wong, B. & Jeffery, R.: Quality Metrics: ISO9126 and Stakeholder Perceptions, Proceedings of the Second Australian Conference on Software Metrics, 1995, 54–65.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Wong, B. & Jeffery, R.: A Pilot Study of Stakeholder Perceptions of Quality, Technical Report, CSIRO, 1996.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Humphrey, W.: Characterizing the Software Process: A Maturity Framework, IEEE Software, 5(2), March 1988, pp73–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Paulk, M., Curtis, W., Chrissis, M.: Capability Maturity Model for Software, Report CMU/SEI-91-TR-24. SEI, Carnegie Mellon University, 1991.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ould, M.: Software Quality Improvement through Process Assessment-A view from the UK, IEEE Colloquium on Software Quality, 1992.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Dowson, M.: Software Process Themes and Issues, 2nd International Conference on the Software Process: Continuous Software Process Improvement, 1993, pp54–60.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Coallier, F.: How ISO9001 fits into the Software World, IEEE Software, Jan 1994.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kitchenham, B.: Towards a constructive quality model Part 1: Software quality modeling, measurement and prediction, Software Engineering Journal, July 1987.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kitchenham, B. & Pickard, L.: Towards a constructive quality model Part 2: Statistical techniques for modeling software quality in the ESPRIT REQUEST project, Software Engineering Journal, July 1987.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Delen: The Specification, Engineering, and Measurement of Information Systems Quality, Journal of Systems and Software, 1992, 17(3), pp205–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Erikkson: Quality Function Deployment: a Tool to Improve Software Quality, Information and Software Technology, 1993, 35(9), pp491–498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Thompsett, R.: Quality Agreements for Quality Systems, Proceedings of Australian Computer Society, Victorian Branch, Annual Conference, 1993.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Juliff, P.: Software Quality Function Deployment, Software Quality Management II Vol 1, Computational Mechanics Publications, 1994.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Vidgen, R., Wood, J. & Wood-Harper, A.: Customer satisfaction: the need for multiple perspectives of information system quality, Software Quality Management II Vol 1, Computaional Mechanics Publications, 1994.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Dromey, G.: “A Model for Software Product Quality”, IEEE Transactionss on Software Engineering, Vol 21, No. 2 Feb. 1995, pp.146–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Vidgen: A multiple perspective approach to information systems quality, University of Salford, 1996.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Kitchenham, B., Lonkman, S., Pasquini, A. & Nanni, V.: “The SQUID approach to defining a quality model”, Software Quality Journal 6, (1997) pp.211–233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    ISO9126: Information Technology Software Product Evaluation-Quality Characteristics and Guidelines for their Use, International Organisation for Standardisation, Geneva, 1991.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Sanders, J., Curran, E.: Software Quality, Addison-Wesley, 1994.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Azuma, M.: Towards the 21st Century’s Software, State of the art and International Standard in JTC1/SC7, Software Quality & Productivity, Dec 1994.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Constantine, L.: Fitting Practices to the People: Corporate Culture and Software Development, American Programmer, December 1994.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Gilb, T.: “Level 6: Why We Can’t get There from Here”, IEEE Software, Jan. 1996, 97–103. COMPCON 1995 Proceedings, pp. 52-60.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Avison, D. & Wood-Harper, A.T.: Multiview: An Exploration in Information Systems Development, Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford, 1990.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Wood-Harper, A.T. & Avison, D.: Reflections from the Experience of Using Multiview: through the lens of Soft Systems Methodology, Systemist, 14(3): 136–145.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Wood, J.R.: Linking Soft Systems Methodology (SSM) and Information Systems (IS), Systemist-Information Systems Special Edition, 14(3): 133–135.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Comerford, R.: “Software”, IEEE Spectrum, Jan. 1993, pp. 30–33.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Rokeach: Beliefs, Attitudes and Values, San Francisco: Jossey Bass.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Yankelovich: New Rules, New York: Random House.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Howard: Consumer Behaviour: Application of Theory, New York: McGraw Hill Book Company.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Vinson, Scott and Lamont: “The Role of Personal Values in Marketing and Consumer Behaviour”, Journal of Marketing, 41 (April), 44–50.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Young and Feigin: “Using the Benefit Chain for Improved Strategy Formulation”, Journal of Marketing, 39 (July), 72–74.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Gutman. J.: Means-End Chains as Goal Hierarchies, Psychology & Marketing, 14 (6): 1997 545–560.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Bagozzi, R.: Goal-directed behaviours in marketing: cognitive and emotional, Psychology & Marketing, 14, Sept 1997, pp 539–543.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Valette-Florence, P.: A Causal Analysis of Means-End Hierarchies in a Cross-cultural Context: Metholodogical Refinements, Journal of Business Research, v 42 No 2 June 1998, pp161–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Bagozzi, R. and Dabholkar, P.: Discursive psychology: an alternative conceptual foundation to means-end chain theory, Psychology & Marketing, 17, July 2000, pp 535–586.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Gutman, J. & Reynolds, T.J. An Investigation of the Levels of Cognitive Abstraction Utilized by Consumers in Product Differentiation, in Attitude Research Under the Sun, J Eighmey, ed, Chicago: American Marketing Association, 128–50.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Reynolds et al: Laddering Theory, Method, Analysis, and Interpretation, Journal of Advertising Research, Feb/Mar 1988, pp.11–31.Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Reynolds, T.J. and Gutman, J.: Developing Images for Services through Means-End Chain Analysis, in Emerging Perspectives on Service Marketing, 1983, 40–44.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bernard Wong
    • 1
  • Ross Jeffery
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Information SystemsUniversity of TechnologySydneyAustralia
  2. 2.School of Computer Science & EngineeringSydneyAustralia

Personalised recommendations