Advertisement

Organisational Learning and Software Process Improvement: A Case Study

  • Judith Segal
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2176)

Abstract

This paper describes a longitudinal study of an organisation over a period of eighteen months as it initiated and then implemented a manual of software best practice. The organisation consists of end-users, in the sense that, although developing software is an integral part of their job, they are not professional software developers. Although the organisation itself was unaware of current trends in Software Process Improvement (SPI) or theories of organisational learning, our case study affords us insights into some practical deficiencies of the accepted techno-centric model of a SPI programme. We argue that such a model imposes unnatural work practices on an organisation and fails to take account of how process improvements might occur spontaneously within a community of practice.

Keywords

Organisational Learning Software Quality Organisational Memory Ideal Scenario Executive Management 
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.
    Hendry D.G. amp; Green T.R.G: Creating, comprehending and explaining spreadsheets: a cognitive interpretation of what discretionary users think of the spreadsheet model. Int. J. Human-Computer Studies 40 (1994)1033–1065.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Panko R: What we know about spreadsheet errors. Journal of End User Computing, 10(2) (1998) 15–21Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Taylor MP, Moynihan EP amp; Wood-Harper AT. End user computing and information system methodologies. Information Systems Journal 8 (1998)85–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hall MJJ. A risk and control-oriented study of the practices of spreadsheet application developers. Proceedings of the 29th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. (1996) 364–373Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Fox C amp; Frakes W. The quality approach: is it delivering? Comm ACM. 40(6) (1997) 25–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Curtis B. Which comes first, the organisation or its processes? IEEE Software. 15(6) (1998) 10–13Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Sweeney A amp; Bustard D. Software process improvement: making it happen in practice. Software Quality Journal 6 (1997) 265–273CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    British Standards Institute. The TickIT Guide (1995)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • Judith Segal
    • 1
  1. 1.Faculty of Maths and Computing, Department of ComputingThe Open UniversityMilton KeynesUK

Personalised recommendations