Software process improvement assesment for multimodel environment: tool to diagnose an organization

Las organizaciones que implementan procesos de mejora para el desarrollo de software de calidad, en la mayoría de los casos buscan métodos de evaluación tipo SCAMPI para diagnosticarse, planificarse o certificarse. Sin embargo, actualmente existe una necesidad que va más allá de una evaluación y es el diagnóstico de la madurez cuando se utiliza más de un modelo o estándar para mejorar los procesos o implementar buenas prácticas asociadas a la mejora, es decir un entorno multi-modelo. La implementación y definición de un entorno multi-modelo no es una tarea fácil porque exige la armonización de modelos o estándares de mejora con enfoques y estructuras diferentes. Por tal motivo, el diagnóstico de la madurez de una organización que defina e implemente un entorno multi-modelo tampoco es una tarea fácil. En este trabajo se pretende mostrar una herramienta de software que facilite el diagnóstico de una organización que utilice o pretenda definir un entorno multi-modelo para mejora de procesos incluyendo estándares y modelos ágiles y tradicionales. Con el diseño de esta herramienta se pretende ofrecer un diagnóstico de la madurez de los procesos de la organización, a la luz de diferentes estándares y modelos, buscando evolucionar hacia una metodología que permita recomendar prácticas y herramientas para mejora de procesosOrganizations that implement improvement processes to develop quality software usually appeal to SCAMPI-like evaluation methods in order to diagnose, plan and certify themselves. However, nowadays there is a need that goes beyond the evaluation, and it is the need to diagnose the processes maturity of the software development organizations that use more than one process improvement model or standard, i.e. a multi-model environment. Implementing a multi-model environment for software process improvement is not an easy task since it demands the harmonization of models or standards with dissimilar structures, hence diagnosing the maturity of an organization that defines and implements a multi-model environment it not an easy task either. This work depicts a software tool to accomplish a diagnostic of an organization that uses or pretends to define a software process improvement multi-model environment that includes both traditional and agile models and standards. Such diagnostic determines the processes maturity level of an organization and allows us to define a methodology for recommending tools and techniques for software process improvemen

Proceedings of the 1st international workshop on software process education, training and professionalism (SPETP 2015)

These Proceedings contain the papers accepted for publication and presentation at the first 1st International Workshop on Software Process Education, Training and Professionalism (SPETP 2015) held in conjunction with the 15th International Conference on Software Process Improvement and Capability dEtermination (SPICE 2015), Gothenburg, Sweden, during June 15-17, 2015. During the 14th International Conference on Software Process Improvement and Capability dEtermination (SPICE 2014) held in Vilnius, Lithuania, at a post conference dinner, a group of key individuals from education and industry started to discuss the challenges faced for software process education, training and professionalism, especially with the background of the new modes of learning and teaching in higher education. Further discussions held post conference with key players in the relevant professional and personal certification fields led to a consensus that it is time for the industry to rise to the new challenges and set out in a manifesto a common vision for educators and trainers together with a set of recommendations to address the challenges faced. It was therefore agreed co-located the 1st International Workshop on Software Process Education, Training and Professionalism with the 15th International Conference on Software Process Improvement and Capability dEtermination. This workshop focused on the new challenges for and best practices in software process education, training and professionalism. The foundation for learning of software process should be part of a university or college education however software process is often treated as ‘add one’ module to the core curriculum. In a professional context, whilst there have been a number of initiatives focused on the certification related to the software process professional these have had little success for numerous reasons. Cooperation in education between industry, academia and professional bodies is paramount, together with the recognition of how the education world is changing and how education is resourced, delivered (with online and open learning) and taken up. Over the next 10 years on-line learning is projected to grow fifteen fold, accounting for 30% of all education provision, according to the recent report to the European Commission on New modes of learning and teaching in higher education. It is a great pleasure to see the varied contributions to this 1st International Workshop on Software Process Education, Training and Professionalism and we hope that our joint dedication, passion and innovation will lead to success for the profession through the publication of the manifesto as a key outcome from the workshop. On behalf of the SPETP 2015 conference Organizing Committee, we would like to thank all participants. Firstly all the authors, whose quality work is the essence of the conference, and the members of the Program Committee, who helped us with their expertise and diligence in reviewing all of the submissions. As we all know, organizing a conference requires the effort of many individuals. We wish to thank also all the members of our Organizing Committee, whose work and commitment were invaluable

Process Based Unification for Multi-Model Software Process Improvement

A number of differences among quality approaches exist and there can be various situations in which the usage of multiple approaches is required, e.g. to strengthen a particular process with multiple quality approaches or to reach certification of the compliance to a number of standards. First of all it has to be decided which approaches have potential for the organization. In many cases one approach does not contain enough information for process implementation. Consequently, the organization may need to use several approaches and the decision has to be made how the chosen approaches can be used simultaneously. This area is called Multi-model Software Process Improvement (MSPI). The simultaneous usage of multiple quality approaches is called the multi-model problem. In this dissertation we propose a solution for the multi-model problem which we call the Process Based Unification (PBU) framework. The PBU framework consists of the PBU concept, a PBU process and the PBU result. We call PBU concept the mapping of quality approaches to a unified process. The PBU concept is operationalized by a PBU process. The PBU result includes the resulting unified process and the mapping of quality approaches to the unified process.Comment: PhD Thesi

Towards A Metamodel For Integrating Multiple Models For Process Improvement

Software Process Improvement (SPI) has been used successfully in software intensive organizations usually based on a single pre-defined reference model, such as, for example, a CMMI or ISO/IEC 15504 (SPICE) model. However, it has increased the need for utilization of multiple reference models for process improvement. The current solutions usually embrace the previous creation of a new model that integrates a set of specific models. This paper presents a Process Capability Profiles Metamodel for dynamic integration of elements from multiple reference models during a process improvement cycle. The metamodel uses Model Driven Engineering (MDE) as theoretical reference applied for process improvement instead of for software development. The metamodel provides a basis for evolving current SPI methodologies towards a Modeling Driven Process Improvement methodology. This paper also presents the rationality, specification, implementation strategy, current implementation and examples of the metamodel. © 2012 IEEE.315318ASELSAN A.S.,Turkish Aerospace Industries, Inc. (TAI),Sci. Technol. Res. Counc. Turkey (TUBITAK)Unterkalmsteiner, M., Gorschek, T., Islam, A.K.M.M., Cheng, C.K., Permadi, R.B., Feldt, R., Evaluation and Measurement of Software Process Improvement - A Systematic Literature Review (2012) IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, pp. 1-27(2010) CMMI for Development, Version 1.3, , SEI, Bedford, Hanscom AFB(2010) Automotive SPICE Process Assessment Model, Version 2.5, , SPICE, Brussels(2005) ISO/IEC 15504-5: Information Technology - Process Assessment - Part 5 - An Exemplar Process Assessment Model, , ISO/IEC, GeneveSalviano, C.F., A Multi-Model Process Improvement Methodology Driven by Capability Profiles (2009) COMPSAC - The 33rd Annual IEEE Int. Computer Software and Applications Conference, pp. 636-637. , 20-24 JulyBanhesse, E.L., Salviano, C.F., Jino, M., Integrating Elements of Multiple Models with Process Capability Profiles Metamodel (2012) SBQS, pp. 128-142. , published in 11-15 JuneBanhesse, E.L., Salviano, C.F., (2012) Towards A Process Capability Profile Metamodel, , Technical Report, Available in pro2pi.wikidot.com"," Campinas, SP, BrasilFavre, J.-M., (2005) Foundations of Meta-Pyramids: Languages vs. Metamodels - Episode II: Story of Thotus the Baboon, , Grenoble, FranceBézivin, J., Model Driven Engineering: An Emerging Technical Space (2006) Generative and Transformational Techniques in Soft. Engineering, 4143, pp. 36-64Card, D.N., Research Directions in Software Process Improvement (2004) 28th IEEE COMPSAC Conference, pp. 238-239. , 27-30 SeptemberSalviano, C.F., Figueiredo, A.M., Unified Basic Concepts for Process Capability Models (2008) SEKE, pp. 173-178. , 1-3 JulyDavis, A.M., (1993) Software Requirements: Objects, Functions and States, , Prentice Hal