Can ’Soft’ Organisational Problems Be Solved by ’Hard’ Process Reference Models?

  • David Tuffley
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 349)


Process Reference Models (PRM) and their associated Assessment Models (PAM) are best known for their application to well-defined input-process-output work-flows in the Systems and Software Engineering domains. Model-based process improvement (MBPI) is now well-established as a discipline within that domain. Arguably though, MBPI can be applied successfully to multiple domains. The question has been to find a way. This paper discusses a mature Process Reference Model and Assessment Model for the leadership of complex virtual teams, developed in accordance with the recognized standards (ISO/IEC 15504 [8] and ISO/IEC 24774 [9]), yet which is applied to difficult ‘soft’ organisational problems. Earlier work on this topic focused on how to develop a PRM in soft, organisational contexts [1]. This paper focuses on the derived Process Assessment Model which has had a three-level Capability Dimension added to the existing Performance Dimension, and with associated work-products identified. It reports on preliminary trials at Griffith University.


Process Assessment Model Process Reference Model Leadership Reference Model of Organizational Behavior ISO/IEC 15504 ISO/IEC 24774 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Tuffley, D.J.: Reference Models of Organisational Behavior: A new category of Process Reference Model. In: Proceedings of 10th International SPICE Conference 2010: Process Improvement and Capability Determination in Software, Systems Engineering and Service Management, Edizioni ETS, Pisa, Italy (2010)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Feiler, P.H., Humphrey, W.S.: Software Process Development and Enactment, Software Engineering Institute, Pittsburgh, CMU/SEY-92-TR-04, p. 11 (1992)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Tuffley, D.J.: Engineering Organisational Behaviour with Design Research. International Journal of Sociotechnology and Knowledge Development 3(2), 46–56 (1941) ISSN: 1941-6253Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Feiler, P.H., Humphrey, W.S.: Software Process Development and Enactment, Software Engineering Institute, Pittsburgh, CMU/SEY-92-TR-04, p. 11 (1992)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Jung, H.-W.: Evaluating the Internal Consistency of ISO/IEC TR 15504 Process Capability Measures. Software Process Improvement and Practice 8, 5–26 (2003), doi:10.1002/spip.166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Denscombe, M.: The Good Research Guide: For small-scale social research projects. Open University Press, United Kingdom (1998) ISBN: 9780335198061 Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    ISO/EIA 12207: Standard for Information Technology-Software Life Cycle Processes. This Standard was published in August 1998 (1998)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    ISO/IEC 15504: Information Technology: Process Assessment. Joint Technical Committee IT-015, Software and Systems Engineering. Part 2 Performing an Assessment. This Standard was published on 2 June 2005 (2005)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    ISO/IEC TR 24774: Software and systems engineering – Life cycle management – Guidelines for process description. This Standard was published in 2007 (2007)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • David Tuffley
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.School of ICTGriffith UniversityAustralia
  2. 2.Software Quality Institute (SQI-IIIS)Griffith UniversityAustralia

Personalised recommendations