Advertisement

The Meaning of Success for Software SMEs: An Holistic Scorecard Based Approach

  • Paul Clarke
  • Rory V. O’Connor
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 172)

Abstract

Software processes support the work of software development and software process improvement (SPI) is concerned with improving the operation of the software process. One of the primary reasons for conducting SPI is to increase the success of a software development company [1], [2]. While evidence of the benefits of SPI exists, project/senior managers report that their motivation for conducting SPI would be strengthened by the provision of further evidence of the positive impact of SPI on business success [3]. This paper proposes a new approach that utilises the Holistic Scorecard (HSC) [4] to systematically examine business success in software development companies. Furthermore, we relate the experience of applying this new approach to software small to medium sized enterprises (SMEs). This novel approach to examining success in software development companies provides a suitable mechanism for SPI researchers and practitioners seeking to establish evidence of the business benefits of SPI.

Keywords

Software Process Improvement Business Success Software SMEs 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Rico, D.: Using Cost Benefit Analyses to Develop Software Process Improvement (SPI) Strategies. Wright-Patterson Air Force Base: A DACS State-of-the-Art Report, Air Force Research Laboratory – Information Directorate, Dayton, Ohio, USA (2000) Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Horvat, R., Rozman, I., Gyorkos, J.: Managing the Complexity of SPI in Small Companies. Software Process: Improvement and Practice 5(1), 45–54 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Baddoo, N., Hall, T.: De-Motivators for Software Process Improvement: An Analysis of Practitioners’ Views. Journal of Systems and Software 66(1), 23–33 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Sureshchandar, G.S., Leisten, R.: Holistic Scorecard: Strategic Performance Measurement and Management in the Software Industry. Measuring Business Excellence 9(2), 12–29 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Van Solingen, R.: The Cost and Benefits of Software Process Improvement. In: Proceedings of the 8th European Conference on Information Technology Evaluation, pp. 455–465. MCIL, Reading (2001)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Baddoo, N., Hall, T.: Motivators of Software Process Improvement: An Analysis of Practitioners’ Views. Journal of Systems and Software 62(2), 85–96 (2002)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hart, S.: Dimensions of Success in New Product Development: An Exploratory Investigation. Journal of Marketing Management 9(1), 23–41 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Van Solingen, R.: Measuring the ROI of Software Process Improvement. IEEE Software 21(3), 32–38 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Biro, M., Ivanyos, J., Messnarz, R.: Pioneering Process Improvement Experiment in Hungary. Software Process: Improvement and Practice 5(4), 213–229 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sanders, M. (ed.) The SPIRE handbook, better, faster, cheaper software development in small organisations. Centre for Software Engineering Limited, DCU, Dublin, Ireland (1998)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Von Wangenheim, C.G., Weber, S., Hauck, J.C.R., Trentin, G.: Experiences on Establishing Software Processes in Small Companies. Information and Software Technology 48(9), 890–900 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Maidique, M.A., Zirger, B.J.: The New Product Learning Cycle. Research Policy 14(6), 299–313 (1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Morgan, R.E., Strong, C.A.: Business Performance and Dimensions of Strategic Orientation. Journal of Business Research 56(3), 163–176 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Parker, C.: Performance Measurement. Work Study 49(2), 63–66 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Jennings, D.F., Seaman, S.L.: High and Low Levels of Organizational Adaptation: An Empirical Analysis of Strategy, Structure, and Performance. Strategic Management Journal 15(6), 459–475 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ghalayini, A.M., Noble, J.S.: The Changing Basis of Performance Measurement. International Journal of Operations & Production Management 16(8), 63–80 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Reid, G.C., Smith, J.A.: What Makes a New Business Start-Up Successful? Small Business Economics 14(3), 165–182 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ansoff, H.I.: Corporate strategy. McGraw-Hill, New York (1965)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Nonaka, I., Toyama, R.: The Theory of the Knowledge-Creating Firm: Subjectivity, Objectivity and Synthesis. Industrial and Corporate Change 14(3), 419–436 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hayes, R.H., Abernathy, W.J.: Managing our Way to Economic Decline. Harvard Business Review 58(4), 67–77 (1980)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Bharadwaj, S.G., Varadarajan, P.R., Fahy, J.: Sustainable Competitive Advantage in Service Industries: A Conceptual Model and Research Propositions. The Journal of Marketing 57(4), 83–99 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Eccles, R.G.: The Performance Measurement Manifesto. Harvard Business Review 69(1), 131–137 (1991)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Bourne, M., Mills, J., Wilcox, M., Neely, A., Platts, K.: Designing, Implementing and Updating Performance Measurement Systems. International Journal of Operations & Production Management 20(7), 754–771 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Lynch, R.L., Cross, K.F.: Measure up! yardstick for continuous improvement. Basil Blackwell, Cambridge (1990)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Brown, M.G.: Keeping score: Using the right metrics to drive world-class performance. Quality Resources, New York (1996)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Neely, A.D., Adams, C., Kennerley, M.: The performance prism: The scorecard for measuring and managing business success. Prentice Hall, London (2002)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kaplan, R.S., Norton, D.P.: The Balanced Scorecard - Measures that Drive Performance. Harvard Business Review 70(1), 71–79 (1992)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Kennerley, M., Neely, A.: Performance measurement frameworks: A review. In: Business Performance Measurement - Theory and Practice. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2002)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    De Waal, A.A.: Behavioural Factors Important for the Successful Implementation and use of Performance Management Systems. Management Decision 41(8), 688–699 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Hudson, M., Smart, A., Bourne, M.: Theory and Practice in SME Performance Measurement Systems. International Journal of Operations & Production Management 21(8), 1096–1115 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Pandey, I.M.: Balanced Scorecard: Myth and Reality. Vikalpa 30(1), 51–66 (2005)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Gautreau, A., Kleiner, B.H.: Recent Trends in Performance Measurement Systems - the Balanced Scorecard Approach. Management Research News 24(3), 153–156 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    McKenzie, F., Shilling, M.: Avoiding Performance Measurement Traps: Ensuring Effective Incentive Design and Implementation. Compensation and Benefits Review 30(4), 57–65 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Chow, C.W., Haddad, K.M., Williamson, J.E.: Applying the Balanced Scorecard to Small Companies. Management Accounting 79(2), 21–27 (1997)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Andersen, H., Cobbold, I., Lawrie, G.: Balanced Scorecard implementation in SMEs: reflection in literature and practice. In: Proceedings of the Fourth SMESME Conference, Department of Production, 2GC Limited, pp. 103–112. Aalborg University, Aalborg (2001)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    ADB: Balanced scorecard for state-owned enterprises. Asian Development Bank, Technical Assistance Project Team 3933-PRC, Philippines (2007) Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Lim, A.H.L., Lee, C.S.: Integrated Model Driven Business Evaluation Methodology for Strategic Planning. International Journal of Business Information Systems 3(4), 333–355 (2008)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Barnes, D., Hinton, M.: The benefits of e-business performance measurement systems. CIMA Publishing, Oxford (2008)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Tapanya, S.: Examining the Factors which Influence Performance Measurement and Management in the Thai Banking Industry: An Application of the Balanced Scorecard Framework (2004)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Malim, T., Birch, A. (eds.): Research methods and statistics. MacMillan Press Ltd., Basingstoke (1997)Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Heiman, G.W. (ed.): Understanding research methods and statistics. Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston (2001)Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Coleman, G., O’Connor, R.: Investigating Software Process in Practice: A Grounded Theory Perspective. Journal of Systems and Software 81(5), 772–784 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Paul Clarke
    • 1
  • Rory V. O’Connor
    • 2
    • 3
  1. 1.Lero Graduate School in Software EngineeringDublin City UniversityIreland
  2. 2.Dublin City UniversityIreland
  3. 3.Lero, the Irish Software Engineering Research CentreIreland

Personalised recommendations