The use of an electronic process guide in a medium-sized software development company

Software Process Improvement and Practice

Volumn 11, Issue 1, 2006, Pages 21-34

  Moe, Nils Brede ^a   Dybå, Tore ^a  

^a SINTEF ICT   (Norway)

Author keywords

Case study; Electronic process guide; Grounded theory; Software methodology infusion; Software process improvement

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER SOFTWARE; INDUSTRIAL MANAGEMENT; INTEGRATION; PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT; PROJECT MANAGEMENT;

CASE STUDY; ELECTRONIC PROCESS GUIDE (EPG); GROUNDED THEORY; SOFTWARE METHODOLOGY INFUSION; SOFTWARE PROCESS IMPROVEMENT;

SOFTWARE ENGINEERING;

EID: 33646054094     PISSN: 10774866     EISSN: 10991670     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/spip.250     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Ajzen I. 1991. The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 50(2): 179-211.
2. Davis FD. 1989. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly 13(3): 319-340.
3. Dingsøyr T, Moe NB. 2004. The process workshop - a tool to define electronic process guides in small companies. Proceedings of the Australian Software Engineering Conference (ASWEC), Melbourne, FL, IEEE Press: 350-357.
4. Dingsøyr T, Moe NB, Dybå T, Conradi R. 2004. A workshop-oriented approach for defining electronic process guides - a case study. In Software Process Modelling, Acuña ST, Juriste N (eds). Kluwer Academic Publishers: Boston, MA, 187-205.
5. Dybå T, Moe NB, Mikkelsen EM. 2004. An empirical investigation on factors affecting software developer acceptance and utilization of electronic process guides. Proceedings of the International Software Metrics Symposium (METRICS), Chicago, IL, 220-231.
6. Fichman RG, Kemerer CF. 1993. Adoption of software engineering process innovations - the case of object orientation. Sloan Management Review 34(2): 7-22.
7. Kellner MI, Becker-Kornstaedt U, Riddle WE, Tomal JMV. 1998. Process guides: effective guidance for process participants. Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on the Software Process: Computer Supported Organizational Work, Lisle, IL, 11-25.
8. Krutchen P. 2000. The Rational Unified Process: An Introduction. Addison-Wesley: MA, USA.
9. Moe NB, Dybå T. 2004. The adoption of an electronic process guide in a company with voluntary use. Proceedings of the European Software Process Improvement Conference (EuroSPI), Trondheim, Norway, Springer-Verlag: 114-125.
10. Moe NB, Dingsøyr T. 2005. The impact of process workshop involvement on the use of an electronic process guide: A case study. To Appear in EuroMicro, Porto, Portugal.
11. Moe NB, Dingsøyr T, Dybå T, Johansen T. 2002. Process guides as software process improvement in a small company. Proceedings of the European Software Process Improvement Conference (EuroSPI), Nürnberg, Germany, 177-188.
12. Paulk MC, Weber CV, Curtis B, Chrissis MB. 1995. The Capability Maturity Model: Guidelines for Improving the Software Process. Addison-Wesley: Reading, MA.
13. Rogers EM. 2003. Diffusion of Innovations. The Free Press: New York.
14. Scott L, Carvalho L, Jeffery R, D'Ambra J, Becker-Kornstaedt U. 2002. Understanding the use of an electronic process guide. Information and Software Technology 44(10): 601-616.
15. Strauss A, Corbin J. 1998. Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory. Sage Publications: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA.
16. Thompson RL, Higgins CA, Howell JM. 1991. Personal computing - toward a conceptual-model of utilization. MIS Quarterly 15(1): 125-143.
17. Venkatesh V, Davis FD. 2000. A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: four longitudinal field studies. Management Science 46(2): 186-204.
18. Yin RK. 1994. Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Sage Publications: Newbury Park, CA, USA.