Use of methods and CASE-tools in Norway: Results from a survey

Automated Software Engineering

Volumn 3, Issue 3-4, 1996, Pages 347-367

  Krogstie, John ^a  

^a NORWEGIAN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY   (Norway)

Author keywords

CASE; Methodology; Survey investigation

Indexed keywords

ADMINISTRATIVE DATA PROCESSING; PRODUCTIVITY; SURVEYS;

FUNCTIONAL MAINTENANCE;

COMPUTER AIDED SOFTWARE ENGINEERING;

EID: 0030218443     PISSN: 09288910     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/BF00132572     Document Type: Review

References (28)

1. Arnold, R.S. and Parker, D.A. 1982. The dimensions of healthy maintenance. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE), IEEE Computer Society Press, pp. 10-17.
2. Bergersen, L. 1990. Prosjektadministrasjon i Systemutvikling. Aktiviteter i Planlegning sfasen Som Pȧvirker Suksess. (In Norwegian), Ph.D. Thesis, ORAL, NTH, Trondheim, Norway.
3. Central Bureau of Statistics of Norway. 1992. Statistical Yearbook of Norway. Statistisk sentralbyrȧ, Oslo, Norway.
4. Dekleva, S.M. 1992a. Delphi study of software maintenance problems. In Proceedings of the Conference on Software Maintenance (CSM'92), pp. 10-17.
5. Dekleva, S.M. 1992b. The influence of the information systems development approach on maintenance. MIS Quarterly, pp. 355-372.
6. Dekleva, S.M. 1992c. Software maintenance: 1990 status. Journal of Software Maintenance, 4:233-247.
7. Hardy, C., Stobart, S., Thompson, B., and Edwards, H. 1995. A comparison of the results of two surveys on software development and the role of CASE in the UK. In Proceedings of the Seventh International Workshop on Computer-Aided Software Engineering (CASE'95), H.A. Müller and R.J. Norman (Eds.), IEEE Computer Society Press, Toronto, Canada, pp. 234-238.
8. Henne, A. 1992. Information systems maintenance - Problems or opportunities?. In Proceedings of Norsk Informatikk Konferanse 1992 (NIK'92), Tromsø, Norway, pp. 91-104.
9. Hewett, J. and Durham, T. 1989. CASE: The next steps. Technical report, OVUM.
10. House, C. 1993. Case studies in the CASE industry. Keynote Speech CASE'93.
11. Krogstie, J. 1994a. Information systems development and maintenance in Norway: A survey investigation. Norsk Konferanse for Organisasjoners Bruk av Informasjonsteknologi (NOKOBIT'94), Bergen, Norway, pp. 1-22.
12. Krogstie, J. 1994b. Survey investigation: Development and maintenance of information systems in Norway. Technical Report 0802-6394 6/94, IDT, NTH, Trondheim, Norway.
13. Krogstie, J. 1995a. Conceptual Modeling for Computerized Information Systems Support in Organizations. Ph.D. Thesis, IDT, NTH, Trondheim, Norway.
14. Krogstie, J. 1995b. On the distinction between functional development and functional maintenance. To be published in Journal of Software Maintenance.
15. Krogstie, J. 1995c. Use of development methodology and CASE-tools in Norway: Results from a survey. In Proceedings of the Seventh International Workshop on Computer-Aided Software Engineering (CASE'95), H.A. Müller and R.J. Norman (Eds.), Toronto, Canada, pp. 239-248.
16. Krogstie, J. and Sølvberg, A. 1994. Software maintenance in Norway: A survey investigation. In Proceedings of International Conference of Software Maintenance (ICSM'94), H.A. Müller and M. Georges (Eds.), IEEE Computer Society Press, pp. 304-313. Received "Best Paper Award".
17. Kusters, R.J. and Wijers, G.M. 1993. On the practical use of CASE-tools. Results of a Survey, in Lee, Reid, and Jarzabek (1993), pp. 2-10.
18. Lee, H.Y., Reid, T., and Jarzabek, S. (Eds.) 1993. In Proceedings of the 6th International Workshop on Computer-Aided Software Engineering (CASE'93), IEEE Computer Society Press, Singapore.
19. Lientz, B.P. and Swanson, E.B. 1980. Software Maintenance Management. Addison Wesley.
20. Norusis, M.J. 1992. SPSS for Windows: Base System User's Guide. Chicago, Illinois, USA: SPSS Inc.
21. Norusis, M.J. 1993. SPSS for Windows: Professional Statistics. Chicago, Illinois, USA: SPSS Inc.
22. Nosek, J.T. and Palvia, P. 1990. Software maintenance management: Changes in the last decade. Journal of Software Maintenance 2:157-174.
23. Parkinson, J. 1990. Making CASE work. In CASE on Trial, K. Spurr and P. Layzell (Eds.), John Wiley & Sons, pp. 213-242.
24. Stobart, S.C., Thompson, J.B., and Smith, P. 1991. Use, problems, benefits, and future direction of computer-aided software engineering in the United Kingdom. Information and Software Technology, 33(9):629-636.
25. Stobart, S.C., van Reeken, A.J., Low, G.C., Trienekens, J.J.M., Jenkins, J.O., Thompson, J.B., and Jeffery, D.R. 1993. An empirical evaluation of the use of CASE tools. In Lee et al. (1993), pp. 81-87.
26. Swanson, E.B. and Beath, C.M. 1989. Maintaining Information Systems in Organizations. Wiley Series in Information Systems, John Wiley & Sons.
27. van Swede, V. and van Vliet, H. 1994. Consistent development: Results of a first empirical study of the relation between project scenario and success. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering (CAiSE'94), G. Wijers, S. Brinkkemper, and T. Wasserman (Eds.), Springer Verlag, Utrecth, Netherlands, pp. 80-93.
28. Wijers, G.M. and van Dort, H.E. 1990. Experience with the use of CASE-tools in the Netherlands. In Proceedings of the Second Nordic Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering (CAiSE'90), B. Steinholtz et al. (Eds.), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Springer-Verlag, Stockholm, Sweden, 436:5-20.