A practical application of the IDEALSM model

Software Process Improvement and Practice

Volumn 9, Issue 3, 2004, Pages 123-132

  Casey, Valentine ^a   Richardson, Ita ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LIMERICK   (Ireland)

Author keywords

Capability maturity model ; CMM ; Effective process change; IDEALSM Model; Process assessment; Process improvement; Small to medium sized enterprises; SME

Indexed keywords

LEARNING SYSTEMS; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; PROBLEM SOLVING; PROCESS CONTROL; PROJECT MANAGEMENT;

EFFECTIVE PROCESS CHANGE; PROCESS ASSESSMENTS; PROCESS IMPROVEMENT;

SOFTWARE ENGINEERING;

EID: 12844281891     PISSN: 10774866     EISSN: 10991670     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/spip.201     Document Type: Review

References (21)

1. Baskerville RL. 1997. Distinguishing action research from participative case studies. Journal of Systems and Information Technology 1(1): 25-45.
2. Baskerville RL. 1999. Investigating information systems with action research. Communications of the Association for Information Systems 2(19) 1-31.
3. Curtis B. 2000a. T11 software process improvement: best practices and lesson learned. Tutorial notes. ICSE 2000, Limerick, Ireland, June 2000a, 4-11.
4. nd International Conference on Software Engineering, Limerick, Ireland, June 2000b, 521-530.
5. Dunaway DK. 1996. CMM® Based Appraisal for Internal Process Improvement (CBA-IPI) Team Members Handbook. CUM/SEI-96-HB-005, Carnegie Mellon University, PA, USA.
6. Gill J, Johnson P. 1997. Research Methods for Managers, 2nd edn. Paul Chapman Publishing, London, UK.
7. Humphrey WS. 1989. Managing the Software Process. Addison Wesley, Boston, USA.
8. International Organization for Standardization. 1994. ISO9000-1 quality management and quality assurance standards, Part 1: Guidelines for selection and use. Geneva, Switzerland.
9. ISO/IEC. 1998a. Information technology - Software process assessment - Part 1: Concepts and introductory guide, ISO/IEC TR 15504-1.
10. ISO/IEC. 1998b. Information technology - Process assessment - Part 2: Performing an assessment, ISO/IEC TR 155042.
11. Jalote P. 2000. CMM® in Practice. Addison-Wesley, Boston, USA.
12. SM Model in small software enterprise. ICSE 2000, Limerick, Ireland, June 2000, 626-633.
13. SM A Users Guide for Software Process Improvement, Handbook, CMU/SEI-96-HB-001, Carnegie Mellon University, PA, USA.
14. O'Tinney M. 1997. Comparing ISO 9000, Malcom Baldrige and the SEI CMM® for Software. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, USA.
15. Paulk MC. 1994. A comparison of ISO 9001 and the capability maturity model for software. Technical Report CMU/SEI-94-TR-12 ESC-TR-94-12, SEI, Carnegie Mellon University, PA, USA.
16. Paulk MC, Charles Webber V, Curtis Bill Chrissis Mary Beth. 1995. The Capability Maturity Model, Guidelines for Improving the Software Process. Addison-Wesley, Boston, USA: (8th Reprint November 1997).
17. Phillips M. 2002. CMM®: improving process for better products, key note address. Profes 2002, Rovaniemi, Finland, December 2002, 9-11.
18. Richardson I. 2002. SPI models: What characteristics are required for small software development companies? Software Quality Journal 10(2): 101-114.
19. Susman G, Evered R. 1978. An assessment of the scientific merits of action research. The Administrative Science Quarterly 23(4): 582-603.
20. Varkoi TK, Mäkinen TK. 1998. Case study of CMM® and SPICE comparison in software process assessment, engineering and technology management, 1998. Pioneering new technologies: management issues and challenges in the third millennium. IEMC '98 Proceedings, International Conference, Puerto Rico, USA, October 1998, 11-13, 477-482.
21. Zahran S. 1998. Software Process Improvement, Practical Guidelines for Business Success. Addison-Wesley, Esser, UK.