An approach for concurrent evaluation of technical and social aspects of software development methodologies

Information and Software Technology

Volumn 51, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 528-545

  Vavpotic, Damjan ^a   Bajec, Marko ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LJUBLJANA   (Slovenia)

Author keywords

Method engineering; Methodology evaluation; Software development methodology; Software process improvement

Indexed keywords

CONCURRENCY CONTROL; SOCIAL ASPECTS; SOFTWARE DESIGN; SPACE DIVISION MULTIPLE ACCESS;

CASE STUDY APPROACHES; EVALUATION MODELS; METHOD ENGINEERING; METHODOLOGY EVALUATION; SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT METHODOLOGY; SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENTS; SOFTWARE PROCESS IMPROVEMENT; TECHNICAL EFFICIENCIES;

COMPUTER SOFTWARE SELECTION AND EVALUATION;

EID: 56349111803     PISSN: 09505849     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.infsof.2008.06.001     Document Type: Article

References (57)

1. Avison D.E., and Fitzgerald G. Information Systems Development: Methodologies, Techniques and Tools (2003), McGraw-Hill, London
2. Fitzgerald B. Am empirical investigation into the adoption of systems development methodologies. Information & Management 34 (1998) 317-328
3. Riemenschneider C.K., Hardgrave B.C., and Davis F.D. Explaining software developer acceptance of methodologies: a comparison of five theoretical models. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 28 (2002) 1135-1145
4. Aaen I. Software process improvement: blueprints versus recipes. IEEE Software 20 (2003) 86-93
5. Fitzgerald B. Formalized systems development methodologies: a critical perspective. Information Systems Journal 6 (1996) 3-23
6. Huisman M., and Iivari J. Deployment of systems development methodologies: perceptual congruence between IS managers and systems developers. Information & Management 43 (2006) 29-49
7. Khalifa M., and Verner J.M. Drivers for software development method usage. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 47 (2000) 360-369
8. Wynekoop J.L., and Russo N.L. Systems-development methodologies - unanswered questions. Journal of Information Technology 10 (1995) 65-73
9. Agarwal R., Tanniru M., and Wilemon D. Assimilating information technology innovations: strategies and moderating influences. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 44 (1997) 347-358
10. Niazi M., Wilson D., and Zowghi D. A maturity model for the implementation of software process improvement: an empirical study. Journal of Systems and Software 74 (2005) 155-172
11. Cockburn A. Agile Software Development (2002), Addison-Wesley, Boston
12. Fitzgerald B., Russo N.L., and O'Kane T. Software development method tailoring at motorola. Communications of the ACM 46 (2003) 64-70
13. McConnell S. Rapid Development: Taming Wild Software Schedules (1996), Microsoft Press, Redmond, WA
14. Low G., and Looi R. An investigation of client/server application development methodologies. Journal of Information Technology 12 (1997) 187-196
15. Gallivan M.J. The influence of software developers' creative style on their attitudes to and assimilation of a software process innovation. Information & Management 40 (2003) 443-465
16. Green G.C., Collins R.W., and Hevner A.R. Perceived control and the diffusion of software process innovations. Journal of High Technology Management Research 15 (2004) 123-144
17. P. Rawstorne, R. Jayasuriya, P. Caputi, Issues in predicting and exploring usage behaviours with the technology acceptance model and the theory of planned behaviour when usage is mandatory, in: Proc. of the Twenty first International Conference on Information Systems, Brisbane, Australia, 2000.
18. Sharma S., and Rai A. An assessment of the relationship between ISD leadership characteristics and IS innovation adoption in organizations. Information & Management 40 (2003) 391-401
19. D. Vavpotic, M. Bajec, M. Krisper, Measuring and improving software development methodology by considering technical and social suitability of its constituent elements, in: O. Vasilecas, A. Caplinskas, W. Wojtowski, W.G. Wojtowski, J. Zupancic, S. Wrycza (Eds.), Proc. of the Thirteenth International Conference on Information Systems Development, Technika, Vilnius, Vilnius, 2004.
20. Bajec M., Vavpotic D., Stefan F., and Krisper M. Software process improvement based on the method engineering principles. In: Ralyte J., and Brinkkemper S. (Eds). Situational Method Engineering: Fundamentals and Experiences. Proc. of the IFIP WG 8.1 Working Conference (2007), Springer, Berlin
21. Bajec M., Vavpotic D., and Krisper M. Practice-driven approach for creating project-specific software development methods. Information and Software Technology 49 (2007) 345-365
22. Henderson-Sellers B. Method engineering for OO systems development. Communications of the ACM 46 (2003) 73-78
23. J. Ralyte, R. Deneckere, C. Rolland, Towards a generic model for situational method engineering, in: Proc. of the 15th International Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering, 2003.
24. Brinkkemper S., Saeki M., and Harmsen F. Meta-modelling based assembly techniques for situational method engineering. Information Systems 24 (1999) 209-228
25. F. Harmsen, S. Brinkkemper, H. Oei, Situational Method Engineering for information system project approaches, in: Proc. of the IFIP WG8.1 Working Conference on Methods and Associated Tools for the Information Systems Life Cycle, Elsevier, Amsterdam, 1994, pp. 169-194.
26. Karlsson F., and Agerfalk P.J. Method configuration: adapting to situational characteristics while creating reusable assets. Information and Software Technology 46 (2004) 619-633
27. I. Mirbel, J. Ralyte, Situational method Engineering: Combining Assembly-based and Roadmap-driven Approaches, Projet EXECO, Rapport de recherche, 2004.
28. Hofstede H.A., and Verhoef T.F. On the feasibility of situational method engineering. Information Systems 22 (1997) 401-422
29. Rational Unified Process v 7.0.1 (IBM Rational Method Composer plugin), IBM Corp., 2006.
30. Ambler S.W., and Jeffries R. Agile Modeling: Effective Practices for Extreme Programming and the Unified Process (2002), Wiley, New York
31. ISO/IEC-15504, Information technology - software process assesment, 1998.
32. ISO/IEC-FCD-9126-1, Software product quality - Part 1: Quality model, 1998.
33. CMU/SEI-2002-TR-029, Capability Maturity Model ® Integration (CMMISM), Version 1.1, SEI, 2002.
34. Green G.C., Hevner A.R., and Collins R.W. The impacts of quality and productivity perceptions on the use of software process improvement innovations. Information and Software Technology 47 (2005) 543-553
35. M. Huisman, J. Iivari, The organisational deployment of systems development methodologies, in: Advances in Methodologies, Components, and Management, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, 2003, pp. 87-99.
36. Rogers E.M. Diffusion of Innovations (2003), Free Press, New York
37. Gallivan M.J. Organizational adoption and assimilation of complex technological innovations: development and application of a new framework. The DATABASE for Advances in Information Systems 32 (2001) 51-85
38. Ajzen I. The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 50 (1991) 179-211
39. Davis F.A. Perceived usefulness perceived ease of use and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly 8 (1989) 318-339
40. Venkatesh V., and Davis F.D. A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: four longitudinal field studies. Management Science 46 (2000) 186-204
41. Moore G., and Benbasat I. Development of an instrument to measure the perceptions of adopting an information technology innovation. Information Systems Research 2 (1991) 192-222
42. Fishbein M., and Ajzen I. Belief, Attitude, Intention, and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research (1975), Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA
43. Kruchten P. The Rational Unified Process (1999), Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA
44. Davis R. Business Process Modelling with ARIS: A Practical Guide (2001), Springer, Berlin
45. Klein K.J., and Sorra J.S. The challenge of innovation implementation. Academy of Management Review 21 (1996) 1055-1080
46. Huisman M., and Iivari J. The Individual Deployment of Systems Development Methodologies. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (2002), Springer, Berlin pp. 134-150
47. McChesney I.R., and Glass D. Post-implementation management of CASE methodology. European Journal of Information Systems 2 (1993) 201-209
48. Downs Jr. G.W., and Mohr L.B. Conceptual issues in the study of innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly 21 (1976) 700-714
49. Tesch D.B., Klein G., and Sobol M.G. Information-system professionals attitudes - development tools and concepts. Journal of Systems and Software 28 (1995) 39-47
50. Leonard-Barton D. Implementing structured software methodologies: a case of innovation in process technology. Interfaces 17 (1987) 6-17
51. G. Green, A.R. Hevner, Perceived control of software developers and its impact on the successful diffusion of information technology, Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, 1999.
52. Iivari J. Why are CASE Tools not used?. Communications of the ACM 39 (1996) 94-103
53. Rai A., and Howard G.S. Propagating CASE usage for software development: an empirical investigation of key organizational correlates. OMEGA 22 (1994) 133-147
54. J.M. Fernandes, F.J. Duarte, Using RUP for process-oriented organisations, product focused software process improvement, in: Proc. of the 5th International Conference, Springer, Berlin, 2004.
55. Bevan N. Quality in use: meeting user needs for quality. Journal of Systems and Software 49 (1999) 89-96
56. Yin R.K. Case Study Research: Design and Methods (2003), Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA
57. Nunally J.C. Psyhometric Theory (1978), McGraw-Hill, New York