The internal consistency and precedence of key process areas in the capability maturity model for software

Empirical Software Engineering

Volumn 13, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 125-146

  Jung, Ho Won ^a   Goldenson, Dennis R ^b  

^a Korea University   (South Korea)

^b CARNEGIE MELLON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Convergent and discriminant validities; Cronbach's alpha; Dimensionality; Factor analysis; Internal consistency; Partial least squares; SW CMM

Indexed keywords

COMPUTATIONAL METHODS; CONVERGENCE OF NUMERICAL METHODS; LEAST SQUARES APPROXIMATIONS; PROBLEM SOLVING; PROCESS ENGINEERING;

CONVERGENT AND DISCRIMINANT VALIDITIES; CRONBACH'S ALPHA; DIMENSIONALITY; FACTOR ANALYSIS; INTERNAL CONSISTENCY; PARTIAL LEAST SQUARES (PLS);

SOFTWARE PACKAGES;

EID: 43349106282     PISSN: 13823256     EISSN: 15737616     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10664-007-9049-1     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. Anderson JC, Gerbing DW (1991) Predicting the performance of measures in a confirmatory factor analysis with a pretest assessment of their substantive validities. J Appl Psychol 76(5):732-740
2. Bollinger T, McGowan C (1991) A critical look at software capability evaluation. IEEE Softw 8(4):25-41
3. Brodman JG, Johnson DI (1996) Return on investment from software process improvement as measured by U.S. industry. Crosstalk 9(4): 23-29. http://www.stsc.hill.af.mil/crosstalk/1996/04/index.html
4. Campbell DT, Fiske DW. (1959) Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychol Bull 56(1):81-105
5. Carmines EG, Zeller RA (1979) Reliability and validity assessment. Sage University paper series on quantitative applications in social sciences. Sage, Newbury Park, CA
6. Chin WW (1998) Issues and opinion on structural equation modeling. MIS Quarterly 22(1):vii-xvi
7. Chin WW, Newsted PR (1999) Structural equation modeling analysis with small samples using partial least squares. In: Hoyle R (ed) Statistical strategies for small sample research. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp 307-341
8. Chin WW, Marcolin BL, Newsted P (2003) A partial least squares latent variable modeling approach for measuring interaction effects: results from a Monte Carlo simulation study and an electronic-mail emotion/adoption study. Inf Syst Res 14(2):189-217
9. Clark B (1997) The effect of software process maturity on software development effort. Ph.D. Thesis. University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
10. Coffman A, Thompson K (1997) Air force software process improvement report. Crosstalk 10(1):25-27. http://www.stsc.hill.af.mil/crosstalk/1997/01/ index.html
11. Cohen J (1988) Statistical power analysis for the behavior sciences, 2nd edn. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ
12. Comrey A (1973) A first course on factor analysis. Academic, London
13. Cronbach L (1951) Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika 16(3):297-334
14. Curtis B (1996) Factor structure of the CMM and other latent issues. Proceedings of the 1996 SEPG Conference, Atlantic City, NJ, USA
15. Dunaway D, Baker M (2001) Analysis of CMM-based appraisal for internal process improvement (CBA IPI) assessment feedback. Technical report CMU/SEI-2001-TR-021. Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA. http://www.sei.cmu.edu/publications/documents/01.reports/ 01tr021.html
16. El-Emam K (1998) The internal consistency of the ISO/IEC 15504 software process capability scale. Proceedings of the 5th International Symposium on Software Metrics, Los Alamitos, CA, USA, pp 72-81
17. El-Emam K, Goldenson D (1995) SPICE: an empiricist's perspective. Proceedings of the Second IEEE International Software Engineering Standards Symposium, Los Alamitos, CA, USA, pp 84-97
18. El-Emam K, Goldenson D (2000) An empirical review of software process assessments. Adv Comput 5(3):319-423
19. El-Emam K, Madhavji N (1995) The reliability of measuring organizational maturity. Softw Process Improv Pract 1(1):3-25
20. El-Emam K, Simon J-M, Rousseau S, Jacquet E (1998) Cost implications of interrater agreement for software process assessment. Proceedings of the 5th International Symposium on Software Metrics, Los Alamitos, CA, USA, pp 38-51
21. Fayad M, Laitinen M (1997) Process assessment considered wasteful. Commun ACM 40(11):125-128
22. Fornell C, Larcker DF (1981) Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement errors. J Mark Res 18(1):39-50
23. Fusaro P, El-Emam K, Smith B (1998) The internal consistencies of the 1987 SEI maturity questionnaire and the SPICE capability dimension. Empirical Software Engineering 3(2):179-210
24. Gefen D, Straub D (2005) A practical guide to factorial validity using pls-graph: tutorial and annotated example. Communications of the Association for Information Systems 16:91-109
25. Goldenson D, El-Emam K (2000) What should you measure first? Lessons learned from the software CMM. Software Engineering Symposium, September 2000
26. Gray E, Smith W (1998) On the limitations of software process assessment and the recognition of a required re-orientation for global process improvement. Softw Qual J 7(1):21-34
27. Hattie J (1985) Methodology review: assessing unidimensionality of tests and items. Appl Psychol Meas 9:139-164
28. Herbsleb J, Zubrow D, Goldenson D, Hayes W, Paulk M (1997) Software quality and the capability maturity model. Commun ACM 40(6):30-40
29. Humphrey W, Curtis B (1991) Comments on 'A Critical Look'. IEEE Softw 8(4):42-46
30. Igbaria M, Zinatelli N, Cragg P, Cavaye A (1997) Personal computing acceptance factors in small firms: a structural equation model. MIS Quarterly 21(3):279-302
31. ISO, ISO/IEC PDTR 15504. 1996. Information technology-software process assessment: part 1-part 9. ISO/IEC JTC1/SC7/WG10
32. Jöreskog KG, Sörbom D (1993) LISREL 8: structural equation modeling with the SIMPLIS command language. SSI Scientific Software International, Chicago
33. Jung H-W, Hunter R (2003) Evaluating the SPICE rating scale with regard to the internal consistency of capability measures. Softw Process Improv Pract 8(3):169-178
34. Jung H-W, Hunter R, Goldenson D, El-Emam K (2001) Findings from phase 2 of the SPICE trials. Softw Process Improv Pract 6(2):205-242
35. Kotrlik J, Williams H (2003) The incorporation of effect size in information technology, learning, and performance research. Inf Technol Learn Perform J 21(1):1-7
36. Krishnan MS, Kellner MI (1999) Measuring process consistency: implications for reducing software defects. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 25(6):800-815
37. Kuder GF, Richardson MW (1937) The theory of the estimation of test reliability. Psychometrika 2(3):151-160
38. Kwok WC, Sharp DJ (1998) A review of construct measurement issues in behavior accounting research. J Account Lit 17:137-174
39. Likert R, Roslow S (1934) The effects upon the reliability of attitude scales of using three, five, seven alternatives. Working paper, New York University, New York
40. Lissitz RW, Green SB (1975) Effects of the number of scale points on reliability: a Monte Carlo approach. J Appl Psychol 60(1):10-13
41. Marcoulides GA, Saunders C (2006) PLS: a silver bullet? MIS Quarterly 30(2):iii-x
42. McIver JP, Carmines GE (1981) Unidimensional scaling. Sage University paper series on quantitative applications in social sciences. Sage, Newbury Park, CA
43. Nunnally JC, Bernstein IH (1994) Psychometric theory, 3rd edn. McGraw-Hill, New York
44. Paulk M, Webber C, Curtis B, Chrissis MB (1994) The capability maturity model: guidelines for improving the software process. Addison-Wesley, New York
45. Saiedian H, Kuzara R (1995) SEI capability maturity models' impact on contractors. Computer 28(1):16-26
46. SEI (2006) CMMI® for Development (CMMI-DEV), Version 1.2, Technical Report, CMU/SEI-2006-TR-008, Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA
47. Sharma S (1996) Applied multivariate techniques. Wiley, New York
48. Spector PF (1992) Summated rating scale construction: an introduction. Sage University paper series on quantitative applications in social sciences. Sage, Newbury Park, CA
49. Trochim WM (2001) The research methods knowledge base, 2nd edn. http://automicdogpublishinh.com
50. Van DeVen AH, Ferry DL (1980) Measuring and assessing organizations. Wiley, New York
51. Werts CE, Linn RL, Jöreskog KG (1974) Intraclass reliability estimates: testing structural assumptions. Educ Psychol Meas 34:25-33
52. Wold H (1982) Soft modeling: intermediate between traditional model building and data analysis. Mathematical Statistics 6:333-346
53. Zeller RA, Carmines EG (1980) Measurement in the social sciences: the link between theory and data. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge