Abstract
We present a refined version of a meta-model process modeling framework that can be effectively used to identify key practices to initiate and sustain a software process improvement effort focused on a single process area. Our approach moves away from the overall software development process and computation of maturity levels and focuses on a particular process area or task and its key practices. In determining process key practices our framework considers process dimension, and quality and usability/costumer satisfaction of the products produced or services provided by the process. The refined version of the model gives suggested types of key practices and useful questions and hints for constructing these key practices. We show the completeness, flexibility and ease of using this proposed meta-model by applying it to two particular process areas, generating a set of key practices we believe adequately cover the key issues to properly drive a process improvement effort.
IDEALsm is a service mark of Carnegie Mellon University.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
R. Basque. CBA IPI: How to build software process improvement success in the evaluation phase?, IEEE Computer Society Software Process Newsletter, 5 (Winter 1996).
I. Burnstein, T. Suwannasart and C. Carlson. Developing a testing maturity model: part I. CrossTalk, 9(8) (1996) 21–24
I. Burnstein, T. Suwannasart and C. Carlson. Developing a testing maturity model: part II. CrossTalk, 9(9) (1996) 19–26
D. Bustard, R. Oakes and Z. He. Models to promote effective system change, in Proceedings of International Conference of Software Maintenance, Oxford, UK, September 1999, pp. 297–304
C. Cook and M. Visconti. What to do after the assessment report?, in Proceedings of the 17th Pacific Northwest Software Quality Conference, Portland, Oregon, October 1999 (PNSQC, Portland, 1999), pp. 214–228
C. Debou and A. Kuntzmann-Combelles. Linking software process improvement to business strategies: experiences from industry. Software Process Improvement and Practice, 5(1) (2000) 55–64
J. Favaro and S.L. Pfleeger. Making software development investment decisions. ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes 23(5) (1998) 69–74
B.S._Ghotra. Software Configuration Management (SCM) Support Process Capability Maturity Model, Master’s Project (Computer Science Department, Oregon State University, 2001)
R. Grady. Successful software process improvement (Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, 1997)
E.M. Gray and W.L. Smith. On the limitations of software process assessments and the recognition of a required re-orientation for global process improvement. Software Quality Journal 7 (1998) 21–34
R. McFeely. IDEAL: a user’s guide for software process improvement. Technical Report CMU/SEI-96-HB-001 (CMU/SEI, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, 1996)
M. Paulk, B. Curtis, M. Chrissis and C. Weber. Capability Maturity Model, version 1.1. IEEE Software, 10(4) (1993) 18–27
M. Paulk, C. Weber, S. Garcia, M. Chrissis and M. Bush. Key practices of the Capability Maturity Model version 1.1. Technical Report CMU/SEI-93-TR-025 (CMU/SEI, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, 1993)
S. Shrum. Choosing a CMMI Model Representation. CrossTalk, 13(7) (2000) 6–7
J. Trienekens, R. Kusters and R. Van Solingen. Product Focused Software Process Improvement: Concepts and Experiences from Industry. Software Quality Journal 9 (2001), 269–281
M. Visconti and C. Cook. Evolution of a maturity model-critical evaluation and lessons learned. Software Quality Journal 7(3/4) (1998), 223–237
M. Visconti and C. Cook. A meta-model for software process maturity, in Proceedings of FESMA-AEMES Software Measurement Conference 2000, October 2000, Madrid, Spain
M. Visconti and C. Cook. A meta-model framework for software process modeling, Technical Report 02-60-02, Computer Science Department, Oregon State University, March 2002
J. Voas. Can clean pipes produce dirty water?. IEEE Software, 14(4) (1997) 93–95
K. Wiegers and D. Sturzenberger. A modular software process mini-assessment method. IEEE Software, 17(1) (2000) 62–69
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2002 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Visconti, M., Cook, C.R. (2002). A Meta-model Framework for Software Process Modeling. In: Oivo, M., Komi-Sirviö, S. (eds) Product Focused Software Process Improvement. PROFES 2002. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 2559. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-36209-6_44
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-36209-6_44
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-00234-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-36209-8
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive