A Case Study on Scenario-based Process Flexibility Assessment for Risk Reduction
Flexibility is a desired quality of software processes. Process flexibility implies a capability to adapt to new contexts. Another aspect of flexibility is the cost of maintaining process effectiveness as new situations arise. A lack of preparedness for future events may constitute a high risk to a software development organization. This paper presents a method for assessing the flexibility of an organization and its processes. The assessment method is scenario-based and provides an estimate of process flexibility in terms of risk. The method is evaluated in a case study, where the process flexibility at a telecommunication software developer has been assessed. The case study indicates that the method is feasible and effective, and that the cost of conducting scenario-based process flexibility assessment is reasonable. The proposed method was able to identify a number of relevant areas to be improved in order to reduce risks of inflexibility for the particular process.
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.Basili, V. R., Caldiera, G., Rombach, H. D.: The Experience Factory. In: Marciniak, J. J. (Ed.): Encyclopedia of Software Engineering, Vol. 1. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York (1994) 469–476Google Scholar
- 2.Zahran, S.: Software Process Improvement: Practical Guidelines for Business Success. Addison-Wesley, Harlow, UK (1998)Google Scholar
- 3.Sommerville, I.: Software Engineering, 6th Edition. Addison-Wesley, Harlow, UK (2001)Google Scholar
- 4.Nelson, K. M., Nelson, H. J., Ghods, M.: Technology Flexibility: Conceptualization, Validation, and Measurement. In: Nunamaker, J. F. Jr., Sprague, R. H. Jr. (Eds.): Proceedings of the 30th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Vol. 3. IEEE, Los Alamitos, California (1997) 76–87Google Scholar
- 5.Bass, L., Clements, P., Kazman, R.: Software Architecture in Practice. Addison-Wesley, Reading, Massachusetts (1998)Google Scholar
- 6.Jarke, M., Kurki-Suonio, R.: Guest Editorial: Introduction to the Special Issue: Scenario Management. In: Kemmerer, R. A., Ghezzi, C. (Eds.): IEEE Transaction on Software Engineering, Vol. 24, No. 12, December 1998, IEEE, Washington (1998) 1033–1035Google Scholar
- 7.Scriven, M.: Evaluation Thesaurus, 4th Edition. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks (1991)Google Scholar
- 8.Robson, C.: Real World Research: A Resource For Social Scientists and Practitioner-Researchers. Blackwell Publishers Ltd., Oxford, UK (1993)Google Scholar
- 9.Ares, J., García, R., Juristo, N., López, M., Moreno, A. M.: A More Rigorous and Comprehensive Approach to Software Process Assessment. In: Perry, D. E., Schäfer, W., Tully, C. (Eds.): Software Process: Improvement and Practice 2000; 5. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., UK (2000) 3–30Google Scholar
- 10.Regnell, B., Höst, M., Natt och Dag, J., Berenmark, P., Hjelm, T.: An Industrial Case Study on Distributed Prioritisation in Market-Driven Requirements Engineering for Packaged Software. In: Loucopoulos, P., Potts, C. (Eds.): Requirements Engineering Journal 2001; 6. Springer-Verlag Ltd., London, UK (2001) 51–62Google Scholar
- 11.Fusaro, P., El Emam, K., Smith, B.: Evaluating the Interrater Agreement of Process Capability Ratings. In: Bieman, J. (Chair): Proceedings of the Fourth International Software Metrics Symposium, IEEE, Washington (1997) 2–11Google Scholar
- 12.Wohlin, C., Regnell, B.: Strategies for Industrial Relevance in Software Engineering Education. In: Glass, R. L. (Ed.): Journal of Systems and Software, Vol. 49, No. 2-3, 125–134. Elsevier Science BV, Amsterdam, NL (1999)Google Scholar