A taxonomy to compare SPI frameworks

Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics)

Volumn 2077, Issue , 2001, Pages 217-235

  Halvorsen, Christian Printzell ^a   Conradi, Reidar ^b  

^a Galaxy Republic AS   (Norway)

^b NORWEGIAN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY   (Norway)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

TAXONOMIES;

ASSOCIATED SOFTWARES; COMPARISON METHODS; SOFTWARE PROCESS IMPROVEMENTS;

SOFTWARE DESIGN;

EID: 84937434715     PISSN: 03029743     EISSN: 16113349     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1007/3-540-45752-6_17     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (30)

1. Ares Juan, Garcia Rafael, Juristo Natalia, López Marta, Moreno Ana M., A more rigorous and comprehensive approach to software process assessment. Software Process -Improvement and Practice. Vol. 5, No. 1 (March 2000), pp 3-30.
2. Arthur Lowell J., Improving Software Quality - An Insider's Guide to TQM. John Wiley, 1993.
3. Bamford Robert C., Deibler William J., Comparing, contrasting ISO 9001 and the SEI capability maturity model, Computer, Vol. 26, No. 10, Oct. 1993.
4. Basili Victor R. The Experience Factory and its Relationship to Other Improvement Paradigms. 4th European Software Engineering Conf. (ESEC'93), Springer Verlag LNCS 517, 1993, pp 68-83.
5. Basili Victor R., Caldiera Gianluigi, Rombach H.-Dieter, Goal Question Metric Approach. Encyclopedia of Software Engineering (John J. Marciniak, Ed.), John Wiley, 1994, Vol. 1, pp. 528-532.
6. Cattaneo F., Fuggetta A. and Sciuto D., Pursuing Coherence in Software Process Assessment and Improvement. Forthcoming in Software Process - Improvement and Practice, 2001, 46 p.
7. Curtis, Bill, The Global Pursuit of Process Maturity, IEEE Software, Vol. 17, No. 4 (July/Aug. 2000), p. 76-78 (introduction to special issue on SPI results).
8. Emam Khaled El and Briand Lionel, Chapter 7 - Costs and Benefits of Software Process Improvement (part of future book). Fraunhofer IESE, Kaiserslautern, Germany, 1997.
9. Emam Khaled El, Drouin Jean-Normand, Melo Walcelio, SPICE - The Theory and Practice of Software Process Improvement and Capability dEtermination. IEEE CS-Press, Nov. 1997, 450 p.
10. Halvorsen Christian P. and Conradi Reidar, A Taxonomy for SPI Frameworks, 24th NASA Software Engineering Workshop, Greenbelt/Washington, USA, 1--2 Dec.1999, 4 p. See http://sel.gsfc.nasa.gov/website/sew/1999/program.html. Also as NTNU SU-report 19/99.
11. Haase V. H., Software process assessment concepts. Journal of Systems Architecture, Vol. 42, Nr. 8, Dec. 1996, pp 621-631.
12. Herbsleb James D. and Goldenson Dennis R., A Systematic Survey of CMM Experience and Results. 18th Int'l Conf. on Software Engineering (ICSE'96), Berlin, March 1996, IEEE-CS Press, pp 323-330.
13. Herbsleb James, Carleton Anita, Rozum James, Siegel Jane, Zubrow David, Benefits of CMM-Based Software Process Improvement: Initial Results. Tech. Report CMU/SEI-94-TR-13, Aug. 1994, 53 p.
14. Humphrey Watts S., Managing the Software Process. Addison-Wesley, 1989.
15. Kautz Karlheinz and Larsen Even Aby, Diffusion and Use of Quality Assurance and Software Process Improvement Approaches in Norway: A Survey-Based Study. (Report no 906, 25 p. Norwegian Computing Center, Oslo, April 1996. ESPITI project.)
16. Kitchenham B. A., Evaluating Software Engineering Methods and Tools. ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes, 1996.
17. L0ken Cecilie B. and Skramstad Torbjorn, ISO 9000 Certification - Experiences from Europe. 11 p. First World Congress for Software Quality, San Francisco, June 1995.
18. Lonchamp Jacques, A Structured Conceptual and Terminological Framework for Software Process Engineering. Second Int'l Conference on the Software Process. IEEE-CS Press, 1993, pp 41-53.
19. McGarry Frank and Thomas Martyn, Top-Down vs. Bottom-Up Process Improvement. IEEE Software, July 1994, pp 12-13.
20. Oskarsson Ósten, Glass Robert L., An ISO 9000 Approach to Building Quality Software. Prentice Hall. 1996.
21. Paulk Mark C., How ISO 9001 Compares with the CMM, IEEE Software, Vol. 12, No. 1 (Jan 1995), pp 74-82.
22. Paulk Mark C., Weber Charles V., Curtis Bill, Chrissis Mary Beth et al., The Capability Maturity Model: Guidelines for Improving the Software Process. Addison-Wesley, 1995.
23. Software Engineering Institute, Top-Level Standards Map - ISO 12207, ISO 15504 (Jan 1998 TR), Software CMM v1.1 and v2 Draft C. (Internal report Software Engineering Institute, Feb. 28, 1998.)
24. Sorumgard Sivert, Verification of Process Conformance in Empirical Studies of Software Development. IDI doctoral thesis 1997:14, NTNU, 252 p.
25. SPICE 1998, Software Process Improvement and Capability dEtermination Web Site. [Online]. Accessible from: http://www.seq.iit.nrc.ca/spice/[Last accessed: 12.01.2001]
26. Dyba Tore (ed.): SPIQ - Software Process Improvement for better Quality: Method Handbook (in Norwegian) (SINTEF/NTNU/UiO), Trondheim/Oslo, ISSN 0802-6394, Jan. 2000, ca. 250 p.
27. Tichy Walter F., Should Computer Scientists Experiment More? IEEE Computer, May 1998, pp 32-40.
28. Tingey Michael O., Comparing ISO 9000, Malcolm Baldridge, and the SEI CMM for software: a reference and selection guide. Upper Saddle River: Prentice-Hall, 1997.
29. Zahran Sami, Software Process Improvement - Practical Guidelines for Business Success. Essex: Addison Wesley Longman, 1998.
30. Zelkowitz Marvin V. and Wallace Dolores, Experimental validation in software engineering. Information and Software Technology, Vol. 39, 1997, pp 735-743.