Identifying high perceived value practices of CMMI level 2: An empirical study

Information and Software Technology

Volumn 51, Issue 8, 2009, Pages 1231-1243

  Niazi, Mahmood ^a   Babar, Muhammad Ali ^b  

^a KEELE UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF LIMERICK   (Ireland)

Author keywords

CMMI; Empirical study; Perceived value

Indexed keywords

CMMI; EMPIRICAL STUDIES; EMPIRICAL STUDY; IMPLEMENTATION APPROACH; LEVEL 2; MALAYSIA; MALAYSIANS; MEDIUM SIZE; PERCEIVED VALUE; PROCESS CAPABILITIES; RELATIVE VALUE; REQUIREMENTS MANAGEMENT; SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES; SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT; SOFTWARE PROCESS IMPROVEMENTS; TRANSITION MECHANISM; VIET NAM;

COMPUTER SOFTWARE;

EID: 67349214927     PISSN: 09505849     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.infsof.2009.03.001     Document Type: Article

References (64)

1. M. Ali-Babar, L. Bass, I. Gorton, Factors influencing industrial practices of software architecture evaluation: an empirical investigation, in: Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Quality of Software Architectures (QoSA), 2007.
2. Ashrafi N. The impact of software process improvement on quality: in theory and practice. Information & Management 40 7 (2003) 677-690
3. Baddoo N., and Hall T. De-Motivators of software process improvement: an analysis of practitioner's views. Journal of Systems and Software 66 1 (2003) 23-33
4. Barry E.J., Mukhopadhyay T., and Slaughter S.A. Software project duration and effort: an empirical study. Information Technology and Management 3 1-2 (2002) 113-136
5. Batista J., and Dias D.F. Software process improvement in a very small team: a case with CMM. Software Process - Improvement and Practice 5 (2000) 243-250
6. Beecham S., Hall T., and Rainer A. Software process problems in twelve software companies: an empirical analysis. Empirical Software Engineering 8 (2003) 7-42
7. Biffl S., Aurum A., Boehm B., Erdogmus H., and Grunbacher P. Value-Based Software Engineering (2005), Springer
8. Brodman J.G., and Johnson D.L. What small businesses and small organizations say about the CMMI. Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE) (1994), IEEE Computer Society
9. G. Caprihan, Managing software performance in the globally distributed software development paradigm, in: International Conference on Global Software Engineering, 2006, pp. 83-91.
10. CCTA. Managing Successful Projects with Prince 2 (2001), Central Computer and Telecommunications Agency
11. Chrissis M., Konrad M., and Shrum S. CMMI Guidelines for Process Integration and Product Improvement (2003), Addison Wesley
12. Conradi R., and Fuggetta A. Improving software process improvement. IEEE Software July/August (2002) 92-99
13. H. Coolican, Research Methods and Statistics in Psychology, Hodder and Stoughton, London, 1999.
14. DeBillis M., and Haapala C. User-centric software engineering. IEEE Expert 10 1 (1995) 34-41
15. K. El Emam, H.N. Madhavji, A field study of requirements engineering practices in information systems development, in: Second International Symposium on Requirements Engineering, 1995, pp. 68-80.
16. Florence A. Lessons learned in attempting to achieve software CMM level 4. CrossTalk August (2001) 29-30
17. D. Goldenson, J. Jarzombek, T. Rout, Measurement and analysis in capability maturity model integration models and software process improvement. CrossTalk, July 2003.
18. Hall T., Beecham S., and Rainer A. Requirements problems in twelve software companies: an empirical analysis. IEE Proceedings - Software August (2002) 153-160
19. Hughes B. Practical Software Measurement (2000), McGraw-Hill
20. A. Jarvis, V. Crandall, INROADS to Software Quality, Prentice-Hall Inc., 1997. ISBN: 0132384035.
21. Jiang J., Klein G., Hwang H.-G., Huang J., and Hung S.-Y. An exploration of the relationship between software development process maturity and project performance. Information & Management 41 (2004) 279-288
22. John S.R. Critical success factors in software projects. IEEE Software May/June (1999) 18-23
23. June V., Karl C., Steven B., and Narciso C. Requirements engineering and software project success: an industrial survey in Australia and the US. AJIS 13 1 (2005) 225-238
24. K. Kautz, P.A. Nielsen, Implementing software process improvement: two cases of technology transfer, in: Proceedings of the 33rd Hawaii Conference on System Sciences, vol. 7, Maui, USA, 2000, pp. 1-10.
25. B. Kitchenham, S.L. Pfleeger, Principles of Survey Research, Parts 1 to 6, Software Engineering Notes, 2001-2002.
26. Lethbridge T.C. Studying software engineers: data collection techniques for software field studies. Empirical Software Engineering 10 (2005) 311-341
27. Linda W., Mark K., and Arun R. Understanding software project risk: a cluster analysis. Information & Management 42 1 (2004) 115-125
28. Louis R., and François B. Project management information systems: an empirical study of their impact on project managers and project success. International Journal of Project Management 26 2 (2008) 213-220
29. Martin B. An Introduction to Medical Statistics. third ed. (2000), Oxford Medical Publications
30. F. McCaffery, G. Coleman, Analysing the cost of lightweight SPI assessments, in: Proceedings of the European Software Process Improvement (EuroSPI), Dublin, Ireland, 2008.
31. Ngwenyama O., and Nielsen P.A. Competing values in software process improvement: an assumption analysis of CMM from an organizational culture perspective. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 50 1 (2003) 100-112
32. M. Niazi, An empirical study for the improvement of requirements engineering process, in: The 17th International Conference on Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering, July 14-16, 2005, Taipei, Taiwan, Republic of China, 2005, pp. 396-399.
33. Niazi M., and Ali-baber M. De-motivators for software process improvement: an empirical investigation. Software Process Improvement and Practice Journal (Perspectives on Global Software Development: Special Issue on PROFES 2007) 13 3 (2008) 249-264
34. M. Niazi, M. Ali-baber, S. Ibrahim, An empirical study identifying high perceived value practices of CMMI level 2, in: International Conference on Product Focused Software Process Improvement PROFES 2008, Italy, LNCS, vol. 5089, 2008, pp. 427-441.
35. M. Niazi, M. Ali Babar, De-motivators for software process improvement: an analysis of Vietnamese practitioners' views, in: International Conference on Product Focused Software Process Improvement PROFES 2007, LNCS, vol. 4589, 2007, pp. 118-131.
36. Niazi M., Cox K., and Verner J. An empirical study identifying high perceived value requirements engineering practices. Fourteenth International Conference on Information Systems Development (ISD'2005) (2005), Karlstad University, Sweden 15-17
37. M. Niazi, S. Shastry, Role of requirements engineering in software development process: an empirical study, in: IEEE International Multi-Topic Conference (INMIC03), 2003, pp. 402-407.
38. Niazi M., Wilson D., and Zowghi D. A framework for assisting the design of effective software process improvement implementation strategies. Journal of Systems and Software 78 2 (2005) 204-222
39. 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 2 (2005) 155-172
40. Niazi M., Wilson D., and Zowghi D. Critical success factors for software process improvement: an empirical study. Software Process Improvement and Practice Journal 11 2 (2006) 193-211
41. Pereira J., Verner J.M., Cerba N., Rivas M., and Procaccino J.D. What do software practitioners really think about project success: a cross-cultural comparison. Journal of Systems and Software 81 6 (2008) 897-907
42. Pino F.J., Garcia F., and Piattini M. Software process improvement in small and medium software enterprises: a systematic review. Software Quality Journal 16 2 (2008) 237-261
43. Pitterman B. Telcordia Technologies: the journey to high maturity. IEEE Software 17 4 (2000) 89-96
44. Procaccino J.D., and Verner J.M. Software project managers and project success: an exploratory study. The Journal of Systems and Software 79 2 (2006) 1541-1551
45. Procaccino J.D., Verner J.M., Shelfer K.M., and Gefen D. What do software practitioners really think about project success: an exploratory study. The Journal of Systems and Software 78 2 (2005) 194-203
46. Rainer A., and Hall T. Key success factors for implementing software process improvement: a maturity-based analysis. Journal of Systems & Software 62 2 (2002) 71-84
47. SEI. Process Maturity Profile of the Software Community (2002), Software Engineering Institute
48. Sommerville I. Software Engineering. fifth ed. (1996), Addison-Wesley
49. Sommerville I., and Ransom J. An empirical study of industrial requirements engineering process assessment and improvement. ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology 14 1 (2005) 85-117
50. Standish-Group, Chaos - The State of the Software Industry, Standish Group International Technical Report, 1995, pp. 1-11.
51. Standish-Group, Chaos: A Recipe for Success, Standish Group International, 1999.
52. Standish-Group, Chaos Report, 2006.
53. Staples M., Niazi M., Jeffery R., Abrahams A., Byatt P., and Murphy R. An exploratory study of why organizations do not adopt CMMI. Journal of Systems and Software 80 6 (2007) 883-895
54. Stark G., Skillicorn A., and Ameele R. An examination of the effects of requirements changes on software maintenance releases. Journal of Software Maintenance: Research and Practice 11 (1999) 293-309
55. Sun-Jen H., and Wen-Ming H. Exploring the relationship between software project duration and risk exposure: a cluster analysis. Information & Management 45 3 (2008) 175-182
56. Sweeney A., and Bustard D.W. Software process improvement: making it happen in practice. Software Quality Journal 6 4 (1997) 265-273
57. A. Taylor, IT projects: sink or swim, Computer Bulletin (January), 2000.
58. The-Royal-Academy-of-Engineering, The Challenges of Complex IT Projects, The Report of a Working Group from The Royal Academy of Engineering and The British Computer Society, UK, 2004. ISBN 1-903496-15-2.
59. D. Trewin, Small Business in Australia: 2001, Australian Bureau of Statistics Report 1321.0, 2002.
60. Verner J., and Evanco W.M. In-house software development: what software project management practices lead to success?. IEEE Software 22 1 (2005) 86-93
61. Wilkie F.G., McFall D., and McCaffery F. An evaluation of CMMI process areas for small to medium-sized software development organisations. Software Process Improvement and Practice 10 (2005) 189-201
62. D. Zowghi, N. Nurmuliani, A study of the impact of requirements volatility on software project performance, in: Ninth Asia-Pacific Software Engineering Conference, 2002, pp. 3-11.
63. D. Zowghi, N. Nurmuliani, S. Powell, The impact of requirements volatility on software development lifecycle, in: Software Engineering Conference, Proceedings 2004, Australian, 2004, pp. 28-37.
64. Zwikael O., and Sadeh A. Planning effort as an effective risk management tool. Journal of Operations Management 25 4 (2007) 755-767