Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

On the Role of Software Quality Management in Software Process Improvement

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Product-Focused Software Process Improvement (PROFES 2016)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNPSE,volume 10027))

Abstract

Software Process Improvement (SPI) programs have been implemented, inter alia, to improve quality and speed of software development. SPI addresses many aspects ranging from individual developer skills to entire organizations. It comprises, for instance, the optimization of specific activities in the software lifecycle as well as the creation of organizational awareness and project culture. In the course of conducting a systematic mapping study on the state-of-the-art in SPI from a general perspective, we observed Software Quality Management (SQM) being of certain relevance in SPI programs. In this paper, we provide a detailed investigation of those papers from the overall systematic mapping study that were classified as addressing SPI in the context of SQM (including testing). From the main study’s result set, 92 papers were selected for an in-depth systematic review to study the contributions and to develop an initial picture of how these topics are addressed in SPI. Our findings show a fairly pragmatic contribution set in which different solutions are proposed, discussed, and evaluated. Among others, our findings indicate a certain reluctance towards standard quality or (test) maturity models and a strong focus on custom review, testing, and documentation techniques, whereas a set of five selected improvement measures is almost equally addressed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Afzal, W., Alone, S., Glocksien, K., Torkar, R.: Software test process improvement approaches: a systematic literature review and an industrial case study. J. Syst. Softw. 111, 1–33 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Ashrafi, N.: The impact of software process improvement on quality: in theory and practice. Inf. Manag. 40(7), 677–690 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Bayona-Oré, S., Calvo-Manzano, J., Cuevas, G., San-Feliu, T.: Critical success factors taxonomy for software process deployment. Software Qual. J. 22(1), 21–48 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Bennett, T., Wennberg, P.: Eliminating embedded software defects prior to integration test. CROSSTALK J. Defense Softw. Eng., pp. 13–18 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Bertolino, A., Marchetti, E.: A brief essay on software testing. In: Software Engineering: Development Process, 3rd edn., vol. 1, pp. 393–411 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Damian, D., Zowghi, D., Vaidyanathasamy, L., Pal, Y.: An industrial case study of immediate benefits of requirements engineering process improvement at the australian center for unisys software. Empirical Softw. Eng. 9(1), 45–75 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Dybå, T.: An instrument for measuring the key factors of success in software process improvement. Empirical Softw. Eng. 5(4), 357–390 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Elliott, M., Dawson, R., Edwards, J.: An evolutionary cultural-change approach to successful software process improvement. Software Qual. J. 17(2), 189–202 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Farooq, A., Dumke, R.R.: Research directions in verification & validation process improvement. ACM SIGSOFT Softw. Eng. Notes 32(4), 3 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Garcia, C., Dávila, A., Pessoa, M.: Test process models: systematic literature review. In: Mitasiunas, A., Rout, T., O’Connor, R.V., Dorling, A. (eds.) Software Process Improvement and Capability Determination, pp. 84–93. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Garousi, V., Felderer, M., Mäntylä, M.V.: The need for multivocal literature reviews in software engineering: complementing systematic literature reviews with grey literature. In: Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering, EASE 2016, pp. 26:1–26:6. ACM, New York (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Camargo, K.G., Ferrari, F.C., Fabbri, S.C.P.F.: Identifying a subset of TMMi practices to establish a streamlined software testing process. In: Brazilian Symposium on Software Engineering, SBES, pp. 137–146. IEEE (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Green, G.C., Hevner, A.R., Collins, R.W.: The impacts of quality and productivity perceptions on the use of software process improvement innovations. Inf. Softw. Technol. 47(8), 543–553 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Harter, D.E., Krishnan, M.S., Slaughter, S.A.: The life cycle effects of software process improvement: a longitudinal analysis. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Information Systems, ICIS, Atlanta, GA, USA, pp. 346–351. Association for Information Systems (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Helgesson, Y.Y.L., Höst, M., Weyns, K.: A review of methods for evaluation of maturity models for process improvement. J. Softw. Evol. Process 24(4), 436–454 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Horvat, R.V., Rozman, I., Györkös, J.: Managing the complexity of SPI in small companies. Softw. Process Improv. Pract. 5(1), 45–54 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Huang, L., Boehm, B.: How much software quality investment is enough: a value-based approach. IEEE Softw. 23(5), 88–95 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Hull, M., Taylor, P., Hanna, J., Millar, R.: Software development processes - an assessment. Inf. Softw. Technol. 44(1), 1–12 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Humphrey, W.S.: Managing the Software Process. Addison Wesley, Boston (1989)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Ivarsson, M., Gorschek, T.: A method for evaluating rigor and industrial relevance of technology evaluations. Empirical Softw. Eng. 16(3), 365–395 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Karthikeyan, S., Rao, S.: Adopting the right software test maturity assessment model. Technical report, Cognizant (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Kasoju, A., Petersen, K., Mäntylä, M.V.: Analyzing an automotive testing process with evidence-based software engineering. Inf. Softw. Technol. 55(7), 1237–1259 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Kitchenham,B., Charters, S.: Guidelines for performing systematic literature reviews in software engineering. Technical Report EBSE-2007-01, Keele University (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Kuhrmann, M., Diebold, P., Münch, J.: Software process improvement: a systematic mapping study on the state of the art. PeerJ Comput. Sci. 2(1), 1–38 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Kuhrmann, M., Diebold, P., Münch, J., Tell, P.: How does software process improvement address global software engineering? In: International Conference on Global Software Engineering, ICGSE, pp. 89–98. IEEE (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Kuhrmann, M., Fernández, D.M.: Systematic software development: a state of the practice report from Germany. In: International Conference on Global Software Engineering, ICGSE, pp. 51–60. IEEE (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Kumar, P.: Test process improvement - evaluation of available models. Technical report, Maveric (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Larrucea, X., O’Connor, R.V., Colomo-Palacios, R., Laporte, C.Y.: Software process improvement in very small organizations. IEEE Softw. 33(2), 85–89 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Li, J., Moe, N.B., Dybå, T.: Transition from a plan-driven process to scrum: a longitudinal case study on software quality. In: Proceedings of the 2010 ACM-IEEE International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement, ESEM 2010, pp. 13:1–13:10. ACM, New York (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  30. McGarry, F., Burke, S., Decker, B.: Measuring the impacts individual process maturity attributes have on software products. In: Proceedings of Fifth International on Software Metrics Symposium, Metrics 1998, pp. 52–60. IEEE (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Monteiro, L.F.S., de Oliveira, K.M.: Defining a catalog of indicators to support process performance analysis. J. Softw. Maintenance Evol. Res. Pract. 23(6), 395–422 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Petersen, K., Feldt, R., Mujtaba, S., Mattson, M.: Systematic mapping studies in software engineering. In: International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering, EASE, pp. 68–77. ACM (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  33. Pino, F.J., García, F., Piattini, M.: Software process improvement in small and medium software enterprises: a systematic review. Software Qual. J. 16(2), 237–261 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Staples, M., Niazi, M., Jeffery, R., Abrahams, A., Byatt, P., Murphy, R.: An exploratory study of why organizations do not adopt CMMI. J. Syst. Softw. 80(6), 883–895 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Sylemez, M., Tarhan, A.: Using process enactment data analysis to support orthogonal defect classification for software process improvement. In: International Conference on Software Process and Product Measurement, IWSM-MENSURA, pp. 120–125, October 2013

    Google Scholar 

  36. von Wangenheim, C.G., Hauck, J.C.R., Salviano, C.F., von Wangenheim, A.: Systematic literature review of software process capability/maturity models. In: International Conference on Software Process Improvement and Capability Determination-SPICE (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  37. Wieringa, R., Maiden, N., Mead, N., Rolland, C.: Requirements engineering paper classification and evaluation criteria: a proposal and a discussion. Requirements Eng. 11(1), 102–107 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Wohlin, C., Runeson, P., Höst, M., Ohlsson, M.C., Regnell, B., Wesslén, A.: Experimentation in Software Engineering. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  39. Zhi, J., Garousi-Yusifoğlu, V., Sun, B., Garousi, G., Shahnewaz, S., Ruhe, G.: Cost, benefits and quality of software development documentation: a systematic mapping. J. Syst. Softw. 99, 175–198 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. The Mærsk Mc-Kinney Møller Institute, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark

    Jan Wiedemann Jacobsen & Marco Kuhrmann

  2. Herman Hollerith Center, Reutlingen University, Böblingen, Germany

    Jürgen Münch

  3. Fraunhofer Institute for Experimental Software Engineering, Kaiserslautern, Germany

    Philipp Diebold

  4. Institute of Computer Science, University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria

    Michael Felderer

Authors
  1. Jan Wiedemann Jacobsen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Marco Kuhrmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jürgen Münch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Philipp Diebold
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Michael Felderer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marco Kuhrmann .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway

    Pekka Abrahamsson

  2. Fraunhofer Institute for Experimental Software Engineering, Kaiserslautern, Germany

    Andreas Jedlitschka

  3. and Technology, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway

    Anh Nguyen Duc

  4. University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria

    Michael Felderer

  5. Okayama Prefectural University, Soja, Japan

    Sousuke Amasaki

  6. Tampere University of Technology, Tampere, Finland

    Tommi Mikkonen

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing AG

About this paper

Cite this paper

Jacobsen, J.W., Kuhrmann, M., Münch, J., Diebold, P., Felderer, M. (2016). On the Role of Software Quality Management in Software Process Improvement. In: Abrahamsson, P., Jedlitschka, A., Nguyen Duc, A., Felderer, M., Amasaki, S., Mikkonen, T. (eds) Product-Focused Software Process Improvement. PROFES 2016. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 10027. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-49094-6_21

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-49094-6_21

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-49093-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-49094-6

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation