Advertisement

Analyzing Relationships to the Quality Level between CMM and Six Sigma

  • Ji-Hyub Park
  • Ki-Won Song
  • Kyung Whan Lee
  • Sun-Myung Hwang
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3026)

Abstract

Software quality management, which leads to improve the performance capability of project, has been studied on the many viewpoints. It is hard work to compare the each process level assessed with CMM, SPICE and Six-Sigma, which are the popular techniques for the industry of software and system management. This paper discusses the relationship between the three process assessments and the derivation of overall mapping table which relates the result levels assessed with SPICE, CMM and Six-Sigma. Additionally, we analyze the mapping-effectiveness, which is the most effectual way after mapping of the levels or before, using the Analytic Hierarchy Process method.

Keywords

Quality Level Process Yield Achievement Rate Mapping Table Sigma Level 
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.
    Lee, K.W.: Modeling for High Depending Computing. In: Keynote speech, 5th KISS SIG SE, The Korea Conference on Software Engineering Book, phenix park, pp. 20–21 (February 2003)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    ISO/IEC JTC1/SC7 15504, Information Technology Software Process Assessment (January 1998) Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Amsjo, G.: Capability Maturity Model(CMM) for Software Development, http://www.ifi.uio.no/in331/foiler/SW-CMM.pdf
  4. 4.
    Boehm, B.W., et al.: Software cost estimation with COCOMOII. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs (2000)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Krishnan, R.: Multi Criteria Decision Making, http://expertchoice.co.kr/Expert%20Choice/Methodology/mnuMeth-od.htm
  6. 6.
    KSPICE (Korea Association of Software process Assessors), SPICE Assessment Report(2002), http://kaspa.org
  7. 7.
    Lee, K.-W.: Research for HDC Modeling. In: Proceedings of the 5th Korean Conference on Software Engineering, February 20 –22 (2003)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kim, W.-S.: Reliability Test of Maturity Questionnaire Selection Model Through KPA Rating Data Calibration. In: Conference proceedings, KISS, Jeju, Korea, April 25-26Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Song, K.-W.: Research about confidence verification of KPA question item through SEI Maturity Questionnaire’s calibration and SPICE Level metathesis modeling. In: SERA 2003, San Francisco (June 2003)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Pande, P.S.: The Six Sigma Way Team Fieldbook, December, 2001. McGraw-Hill, New York (2001)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Computer Applications of Numerical Methods, Bosung Moonhwasa (1977)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lecture 14 - Interpolation Methods (June 29, 2001), http://stommel.tamu.edu/~esandt/Teach/Summer01/CVEN302
  13. 13.
    Holistic Numerical Methods institude, Newton’s Divided Difference Polynomial Method, http://numericalmethods.eng.usf.edu
  14. 14.

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ji-Hyub Park
    • 1
  • Ki-Won Song
    • 1
  • Kyung Whan Lee
    • 1
  • Sun-Myung Hwang
    • 2
  1. 1.School of Computer Science and EngineeringChung-Ang University 
  2. 2.Division of Computer and Communications EngineeringDae-Jeon University 

Personalised recommendations