A Harmonized Multimodel Framework for Safety Environments

  • Xabier Larrucea
  • Izaskun Santamaria
  • Paolo Panaroni
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 301)


Safety critical systems developments are dealing with complex environments especially when they are satisfying with a wide range of models, regulations and standards at the same time. Therefore there is an evident impact in software process improvement (SPI) settings. These multimodel environments are not just specific for critical systems but for a wide set of environments. Some experiences adopting two different standards or models have been reported during these recent years. Basically they are based on mappings between process models at a high level. However these works are appropriated for people with a huge knowledge on two specific standards, but they do not provide a roadmap on how to effectively apply to company settings. This paper is focused on to provide a harmonised framework not only covering practices based process models but also covering products characteristics. In addition we reconcile this framework for safety critical systems.


Multimodel framework quality models process improvement 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Cater-Steel, A., Tan, W.-G., Toleman, M.: Challenge of adopting multiple process improvement frameworks. In: 2010 Second International Conference on Computer Engineering and Applications (2010)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Latif, A.A., Din, M.M., Ismail, R.: Challenges in adopting and integrating ITIL and CMMi in ICT Division of a Public Utility Company. In: 2010 Second International Conference on Computer Engineering and Applications (2010)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Rozman, I., Horvat, R.V., Gyorkos, J., Hericko, M.: PROCESSUS – Integration of SEI CMM and ISO quality models. Software Quality Journal 6, 37–63 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kirwan, P., Siviy, J., Morley, J., Marino, L.: Maximizing your Process Improvement ROI through Harmonization,
  5. 5.
    Siviy, J., Kirwan, P., Marino, L., Morley, J.: The Value of Harmonizing Multiple Improvement Technologies: A Process Improvement Professional’s View (May 2008),
  6. 6.
    Siviy, J., Kirwan, P., Marino, L., Morley, J.: Strategic Technology Selection and Classification in Multimodel Environments,
  7. 7.
    Kirwan, P., Siviy, J., Marino, L., Morley, J.: Improvement Technology Classification and Composition in Multimodel Environments.,
  8. 8.
    Kirwan, P., Siviy, J., Marino, L., Morley, J.: Process Architecture in a Multimodel Environment,
  9. 9.
    Kirwan, P., Siviy, J., Marino, L., Morley, J.: Implementation Challenges in a Multimodel Environment,
  10. 10.
    Baldassarre, M.T., Caivano, D., Pino, F.J., Piattini, M., Visaggio, G.: Harmonization of ISO/IEC 9001:2000 and CMMI-DEV: from a theoretical comparison to a real case application. Software Qual. J., doi:10.1007/s11219-011-9154-7Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Voas, J.: Assuring Software Quality Assurance. IEEE Software (2003)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Harju, H., Lahtinen, J., Ranta, J., Nevalainen, R., Johansson, M.: Software Safety Standards for the Basis of Certification in the Nuclear Domain. In: 2010 Seventh International Conference on the Quality of Information and Communications Technology (QUATIC) (2010), ISBN: 978-1-4244-8539-0, doi:10.1109/QUATIC.2010.22Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Maibaum, T., Wassyng, A.: A Product-Focused Approach to Software Certification. Computer 41(2), 91–93 (2008), doi:10.1109/MC.2008.37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Software Engineering Institute, +SAFE, V1.2 A Safety Extension to CMMI-DEV, V1.2 (March 2007),
  15. 15.
    IEC 61508-. International Standard. Functional safety of electrical/electronic/programmable electronic safety-related systems Edition 2 (April 2010) Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Tuohey, W.: Benefits and Effective Application of Software Engineering Standards. Software Quality Journal 10, 47–68 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Trienekens, J., Kusters, R., Van Solingen, R.: Product Focused Software Process Improvement: Concepts and Experiences from Industry. Software Quality Journal 9, 269–281 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Software Engineering Institute. Capability Maturity Model Integration for development v1.3,
  19. 19.
    Software Engineering Institute. +SAFE. A Safety Extension to CMMI-DEV, V1.2,
  20. 20.
    ISO9001:2008. Quality management systems – Requirements,
  21. 21.
    ISO26262. Road vehicles – Functional safety – Part 1: Vocabulary,
  22. 22.
    Hall, T., Rainer, A., Baddoo, N.: Implementing software process improvement: an empirical study. Software Process Improvement and Practice (2002) Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Paulk, M., Weber, C., Curtis, B., Chrissis, M.: A High Maturity Example: Space Shuttle Onboard Software. In: The Capability Maturity Model: Guidelines for Improving Software Process. Addison-Wesley (1994) Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Niazi, M., Wilson, D., Zowghi, D.: A maturity model for the implementation of software process improvement: an empirical study. Journal of Systems and Software - Special Issue: The New Context for Software Engineering Education and Training 74(2) (2005)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    ISO/IEC 15504. Information technology – Process assessment,
  26. 26.
    DO178 Software Considerations in Airborne Systems and Equipment Certification. RTCASC-167 EUROCAE WG-12 Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Paulk, M.: A History of the Capability Maturity Model for Software,

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Xabier Larrucea
    • 1
  • Izaskun Santamaria
    • 1
  • Paolo Panaroni
    • 2
  1. 1.Software Systems EngineeringTECNALIABizkaiaSpain
  2. 2.SpA. Salita del Poggio LaurentinoINTECSRomaItaly

Personalised recommendations