Advertisement

Abstract

Small software development teams are much more productive than large teams. That’s been shown time after time. So how does in Nokia – with more than half of our R&D work devoted to software development – face this dilemma? The answer relies on applying the most appropriate software process to a particular business context: the good-enough software process.

Keywords

Software Process Business Group Software Product Line Software Process Improvement Capability Maturity Model 
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.
    Känsälä, K.: Software processes and their effect on productivity. In: Tieturi seminar on Software Productivity, Helsinki, Finland, June 9-10 (2003)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Boehm, B.: Software engineering economics, 767 p. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1981)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hemens, A.: Some case studies in the use of metrics to support process improvement. In: 8th European SEPG Conference, London, UK, June 16-19, 5 p. (2003)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Känsälä, K.: Managing software engineering knowledge. In: European SEPGTM 2001, Amsterdam, the Netherlands, June 11-14 (2001)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Paulk. M.C., et.al.: Capability Maturity ModelSM for Software, Version 1.1 (February 1993), SEI/CMU-93-TR-24Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Känsälä, K.: Practices for managing a corporate-wide SPI program. In: European SEPGTM 1999, Amsterdam, the Netherlands, June 7-10 (2001)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    SEI/CMU - CMMI Integration project, http://www.sei.cmu.edu/cmmi/
  8. 8.
    Leinonen, T.: Software engineering under tight economic constraints. In: Oivo, M., Komi-Sirviö, S. (eds.) PROFES 2002. LNCS, vol. 2559, pp. 519–531. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Känsälä, K., Voltti, P.: How Nokia moved from SW-CMM to CMMI in a year. In: European SEPGTM 2003, London, UK, June 16-19 (2003)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Haie, A.: Global Software Product Lines and Infinite Diversity. In: 1st Software Product Line Conference (SPLC1), Denver, CO, USA, August 28-31, 19 p. (2000)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
  12. 12.
    Känsälä, K.: Assessing the maturity of Nokia’s software product lines. In: Seminar on Product Family Development, Dagstuhl, Germany, April 7-10 (2003), TM European SEPG is a European Community registered trademark of the ESPI Foundation. SM CMM and Capability Maturity Model are service marks of Carnegie Mellon UniversityGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Vanhanen, J., Kähkönen, T., Jartti, J.: Practical Experiences of Agility in the Telecom Industry. In: Marchesi, M., Succi, G. (eds.) XP 2003. LNCS, vol. 2675, Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Avraham, Y.: Goldratt Institute, http://www.goldratt.com/

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kari Känsälä
    • 1
  1. 1.Nokia Research CenterNokia GroupFinland

Personalised recommendations