A Conceptual Descriptive-Comparative Study of Models and Standards of Processes in SE, SwE, and IT Disciplines Using the Theory of Systems

International Journal of Information Technologies and Systems Approach (IJITSA)

Volumn 1, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 57-85

  Mora, Manuel ^a   Gelman, Ovsei ^b   O'conner, Rory ^c   Alvarez, Francisco ^a   Macas Levano, Jorge ^a  

^a UNIVERSIDAD AUTÓNOMA DE AGUASCALIENTES   (Mexico)

^b Center for Open University   (Mexico)

^c DUBLIN CITY UNIVERSITY   (Ireland)

Author keywords

information technology; ISO; software engineering; standards and models of process; systems engineering; theory of systems

Indexed keywords

EID: 85001544959     PISSN: 1935570X     EISSN: 19355718     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.4018/jitsa.2008070104     Document Type: Article

References (58)

1. Ackoff, R. (1971). Towards a system of systems concepts. Management Science, 17(11), 661–671.
2. Arnold, S., & Lawson, H. (2004). Viewing systems from a business management perspective: The ISO/IEC 15288 Standard. Systems Engineering, 7(3), 229–242.
3. Andoh-Baidoo, F., White, E., & Kasper, G. (2004). Information systems' cumulative research tradition: A review of research activities and outputs using proforma abstracts. In Proceedings of the Tenth Americas Conference on Information Systems, New York, NY (pp. 4195–4202).
4. Bar-Yam, Y. (2003). When systems engineering fails–toward complex systems engineering. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Systems, Man & Cybernetics (Vol. 2, pp. 2021–2028). Piscataway, NJ: IEEE Press, 2021–2028.
5. Bar-Yam, Y. et al. (2004). The characteristics and emerging behaviors of system of systems. In NECSI: Complex Physical, Biological and Social Systems Project (pp. 1–16). Cambridge, MA: New England Complex Systems Institute.
6. Bhaskar, R. (1975). A realist theory of science. Sussex: Harvester Press.
7. Boehm, B., & Basili, V. (2005). The CeBASE framework for strategic software development and evolution. EDSER-3 Position Paper.Retrieved from http://sunset.usc.edu/csse/TECHRPTS/2001/us-ccse2001–503/usccse2001–503.pdf.
8. Boehm, B., & Lane, J. (2006, May). 21st century processes for acquiring 21st century software-intensive systems of systems. Crosstalk: The Journal of Defense Software Engineering, 1–9.
9. Carlock, P., & Fenton, R. (2001). System of systems (SoS) enterprise system engineering for information-intensive organizations. Systems Engineering, 4(4), 242–261.
10. CIO UK. (2007). Late IT projects equals lower profts. Retrieved from http://www.cio.co.uk/concern/resources/news/index.cfm?articleid=1563.
11. Checkland, P. (2000). Soft systems methodology: A 30-year retrospective. In P. Checkland, Systems thinking, systems practice (pp. A1-A65). Chichester: Wiley.
12. Curtis, P., Phillips, M., & Weszka, J. (2002). CMMI - the evolution continues. Systems Engineering Journal, 5(1), 7–12.
13. Farr, J., & Buede, D. (2003). Systems engineering and engineering management: Keys to the effcient development of products and services. Engineering Management Journal, 15(3), 3–9.
14. Feingenbaum, D. (1968). The engineering and management of an effective system. Management Science, 14(12), 721–730.
15. Garcia, S. (1998). Evolving improvement paradigms: Capability maturity models & ISO/IEC 15504 (PDTR). Software Process Improvement and Practice, 3(1), 1–11.
16. Gelman O., & Negroe, G. (1982). Planning as a conduction process. Engineering National Academy Review, 1(4), 253–270.
17. Gelman, O., & Garcia, J. (1989). Formulation and axiomatization of the concept of general system. Outlet IMPOS (Mexican Institute of Planning and Systems Operation), 19(92), 1–81.
18. Glass, R., Armes, V., & Vessey, I. (2004). An analysis of research in computing disciplines. Communications of the ACM, 47(6), 89–94.
19. Gray, L. (1996). ISO/IEC 12207 software lifecycle processes. Crosstalk: The Journal of Defense Software Engineering, 8, 1–11.
20. Halvorsen, C., & Conrado, R. (2000). A taxiomatic attempt at comparing SPI frameworks. In Proceedings of the Norsk Informatikk Konferanse '2000 (NIK'2000), Bodø (pp. 101–116).
21. Hevner, A.R., March, S.T., Park, J., & Ram, S. (2004). Design science in information systems research. MIS Quarterly, 28(1), 75–105.
22. Humphrey, W. (1998, February). Three dimensions of process improvement. Part I: Process maturity. Crosstalk: The Journal of Defense Software Engineering, 1–7.
23. ISO. (1995). ISO/IEC 12207: Information technology-software life cycle processes. Geneva: ISO/IEC.
24. ISO. (2002). ISO/IEC 15288: Information technology-systems life cycle processes. Geneva: ISO/IEC.
25. ISO. (2005a). ISO/IEC 20000–1: Information technology-service management. Part 1: Specifcation. Geneva: ISO/IEC.
26. ISO. (2005b). ISO/IEC 20000–1: Information technology-service management. Part 2: Code of practice. Geneva: ISO/IEC.
27. ISO. (2006a). ISO/IEC 15504–5 information technology-process assessment. Part 5: An exemplar process assessment model. Geneva: ISO/IEC.
28. ISO. (2006b). ISO 9000 and ISO 14000 in plain language. Retrieved from www.iso.org.
29. ISO. (2007). Quality management principles. Retrieved from www.iso.org.
30. Johnson, K., & Dindo, J. (1998). Expanding the focus of software process improvement to include systems engineering. Crosstalk: The Journal of Defense Software Engineering, 1–13.
31. Keating, C. et al. (2003). System of systems engineering. Engineering Management Journal, 15(3), 36–45.
32. Manthorpe, W. (1996). The emerging joint system of systems: A systems engineering challenge and opportunity for APL. John Hopkins APL Technical Digest, 17(3), 305–313.
33. Menezes, W. (2002, February). To CMMI or not to CMMI: Issues to think about. Crosstalk: The Journal of Defense Software Engineering, 1–3.
34. Mingers, J. (2000). The contributions of critical realism as an underpinning philosophy for OR/MS and systems. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 51, 1256–1270.
35. Minnich, H. (2002). EIAIS 731 compared to CMMISE/SW. Systems Engineering Journal, 5(1), 62–72.
36. Mora, M., Gelman, O., Cervantes, F., Mejia, M., & Weitzenfield, A. (2003). A systemic approach for the formalization of the information system concept: Why information systems are systems? In J. Cano (Ed.), Critical refections of information systems: A systemic approach (pp. 1–29). Hershey, PA: Idea Group Publishing.
37. Mora, M., Gelman, O., O'Connor, R., Alvarez, F., & Macías, J. (2007a). On models and standards of processes in SE, SwE and IT&S disciplines: Toward a comparative framework using the systems approach. In K. Dhanda & R. Hackney (Eds.), Proceedings of the ISOneWorld 2007 Conference, Engaging Academia and Enterprise Agendas, Las Vegas, USA (pp. 49/1–18).
38. Mora, M., Gelman, O., O'Connor, R., Alvarez, F., & Macías, J. (2007b). A systemic model for the description and comparison of models and standards of processes in SE, SwE, and IT disciplines. In E-Proceedings of the International Conference on Complex Systems 2007, NECSI, Boston, MA, USA (pp. 1–8).
39. Mora, M., Gelman, O., O'Connor, R., Alvarez, F., & Macías, J. (2007c). An overview of models and standards of processes in SE, SwE, and IS disciplines In A. Cater-Steel (Ed.), Information technology governance and service management: Frameworks and adaptations (pp. 1–20). Hershey, PA: IGI Global. 1–20.
40. Mora, M., Gelman, O., Frank, M., Cervantes, F., & Forgionne, G. (2008). Toward an interdisciplinary engineering and management of complex IT-intensive organizational systems: A systems view. International Journal of Information Technologies and the Systems Approach, 1(1), 1–24.
41. Mora, M., & Gelman, O. (2008). The case for conceptual research in information systems. Paper submitted to the 2008 International Conference on Information Resources Management (Conf-IRM), Niagara Falls, Ontario, Canada (pp. 1–10).
42. OGC. (2007). The official introduction to the ITIL service lifecycle. London: TSO.
43. Paulk, M. (1995, January). How ISO 9001 compares with CMM. IEEE Software, 74–83.
44. Paulk, M. (1998). ISO 12207, ISO 15504, SW-CMM v1.1, SW-CMM v2 Draft C Mapping 1. SEI/CMU.
45. Paulk, M. (1999). Analyzing the conceptual relationship between ISO/IEC 15504 (software process assessment) and the capability maturity model for software. In Proceedings of the 1999 International Conference on Software Quality, Cambridge, MA (pp. 1–11).
46. Porter, M., & Millar, V. (1985). How information gives you a competitive advantage. Harvard Business Review, 63(4), 149–160.
47. Roedler, G. (2006). ISO/IEC JTC1/SC7: Status and plans of alignment of ISO/IEC 15288 and ISO/IEC 12207. Retrieved from www.15288.com.
48. Sage, A., & Cuppan, C. (2001). On the systems engineering and management of systems of systems and federations of systems. Information, Knowledge, Systems Management, 2, 325–345.
49. Software Engineering Institute. (2002). CMMI for systems engineering and software engineering. (CMU/SEI-2002-TR-001). Retrieved from www. sei.edu.
50. Sheard, S., & Lake, J. (1998). Systems engineering and models compared. Retrieved from www.software.org.
51. Spohrer, J., Maglio, P., Bailey, J., & Gruhl, D. (2007, January). Steps toward a science of service systems. IEEE Computer, 71–77.
52. Sommerville, I. (1998). Systems engineering for software engineers. Annals of Software Engineering, 6, 111–129.
53. Standish Group International. (2003). The Extreme CHAOS Report. Retrieved from www.standish-group.com.
54. Sterman, J. (2001). Systems dynamic modeling: Tools for learning in a complex world. California Management Review, 43(4), 8–25.
55. Teboul, J. (2007). Service is front stage: Positioning services for value advantage. Paris: INSEAD Business Press.
56. Wand, Y., & Woo, C. (1991). An approach to formalizing organizational open systems concepts. ACM
57. SIGOIS Bulletin, 12(2–3), 141–146. Retrieved from www.acm.org.
58. Wright, R. (1998, October). Process standards and capability models for engineering software-intensive systems. Crosstalk: The Journal of Defense Software Engineering, 1–10.