Skip to main content
Register
Springer Professional
SEARCH
Menu 1 2 3 4
Top

Hint

Swipe to navigate through the chapters of this book

Published in:
NDT-Agile: An Agile, CMMI-Compatible Framework for Web Engineering Read chapter Read first chapter

2017 | Supplement | Chapter

Comparing SPI Survival Studies in Small Settings

Authors : Xabier Larrucea, Izaskun Santamaria

Published in: Software Process Improvement and Capability Determination

Publisher: Springer International Publishing

Login to get access
share
SHARE

Abstract

Small organisations have been applying several quality approaches such as CMMI-DEV or ISO/IEC 15504-5 with quite diverse results. In order to build an experience factory we are gathering our experiences in a database containing the assessment results of more than 90 initiatives. This paper provides an empirical comparison of survival analysis for different improvement initiatives in the context of very small entities. We compare the Cox Proportional Hazard Regression models of our 90 initiatives, and we discriminated them by the reference model used: ISO/IEC29110, CMMI-DEV or ITMark.
previous chapter Towards the Development of a Sequential Framework for Agile Adoption
next chapter Assessment Model for HCI Practice Maturity in Small and Medium Sized Software Development Companies
Literature
1.
2.
3.
O’Connor, R.V., Coleman, G.: Ignoring “Best Practice”: why Irish software SMEs are rejecting CMMI and ISO 9000. Australas. J. Inf. Syst. 16(1), 7–30 (2009) MathSciNet
4.
Laporte, C.Y., O’Connor, R.V.: A systems process lifecycle standard for very small entities: development and pilot trials. In: Barafort, B., O’Connor, R.V., Poth, A., Messnarz, R. (eds.) EuroSPI 2014. CCIS, vol. 425, pp. 13–24. Springer, Heidelberg (2014). doi: 10.​1007/​978-3-662-43896-1_​2
5.
Polgar, P.B., Kazinci, F.: Report on an assessment experience based on ISO/IEC 29110. J. Softw.-Evol. Process. 26, 313–320 (2014) CrossRef
6.
Tripathi, N., Annanperä, E., Oivo, M., Liukkunen, K.: Exploring processes in small software companies: a systematic review. In: Clarke, P.M., O’Connor, R.V., Rout, T., Dorling, A. (eds.) SPICE 2016. CCIS, vol. 609, pp. 150–165. Springer, Cham (2016). doi: 10.​1007/​978-3-319-38980-6_​12
7.
ISO/IEC: ISO/IEC TR 29110-1. Software engineering — Lifecycle profiles for Very Small Entities (VSEs) — 2011 (2011)
8.
Larrucea, X., O’Connor, R.V., Colomo-Palacios, R., Laporte, C.Y.: Software process improvement in very small organizations. IEEE Softw. 33, 85–89 (2016) CrossRef
9.
Charette, R.N.: Why software fails (software failure). IEEE Spectr. 42, 42–49 (2005) CrossRef
10.
Boronowsky, M., Mitasiunas, A., Ragaisis, J., Woronowicz, T.: An approach to development of an application dependent SPICE conformant process capability model. In: Woronowicz, T., Rout, T., O’Connor, R.V., Dorling, A. (eds.) SPICE 2013. CCIS, vol. 349, pp. 61–72. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). doi: 10.​1007/​978-3-642-38833-0_​6 CrossRef
11.
12.
13.
Larrucea, X., Santamaria, I.: Towards a survival analysis of very small organisations. In: Presented at the EuroSPI 2017, Ostrava (2017). (to be published)
14.
ISO/IEC: ISO/IEC 29110-4-1. Software engineering — Lifecycle profiles for Very Small Entities (VSEs) (2011)
15.
Ribaud, V., Saliou, P., O’Connor, R.V., Laporte, C.Y.: Software engineering support activities for very small entities. In: Riel, A., O’Connor, R., Tichkiewitch, S., Messnarz, R. (eds.) EuroSPI 2010. CCIS, vol. 99, pp. 165–176. Springer, Heidelberg (2010). doi: 10.​1007/​978-3-642-15666-3_​15 CrossRef
16.
Pino, F.J., García, F., Piattini, M.: Software process improvement in small and medium software enterprises: a systematic review. Softw. Qual. J. 16, 237–261 (2008) CrossRef
17.
Sánchez-Gordón, M.-L., Colomo-Palacios, R., de Amescua Seco, A., O’Connor, R.V.: The route to software process improvement in small- and medium-sized enterprises. In: Kuhrmann, M., Münch, J., Richardson, I., Rausch, A., Zhang, H. (eds.) Managing Software Process Evolution, pp. 109–136. Springer, Cham (2016) CrossRef
18.
Varkoi, T.: Process assessment in very small entities. In: 2010 Seventh International Conference on the Quality of Information and Communications Technology Process, pp. 436–440 (2010)
19.
Sánchez-Gordón, M.-L., O’Connor, R.V., Colomo-Palacios, R., Sanchez-Gordon, S.: A learning tool for the ISO/IEC 29110 standard: understanding the project management of basic profile. In: Clarke, P.M., O’Connor, R.V., Rout, T., Dorling, A. (eds.) Software Process Improvement and Capability Determination, pp. 270–283. Springer, Cham (2016)
20.
Sanchez-Gordón, M.-L., O’Connor, R.V., Colomo-Palacios, R., Herranz, E.: Bridging the gap between SPI and SMEs in educational settings: a learning tool supporting ISO/IEC 29110. In: Kreiner, C., O’Connor, R.V., Poth, A., Messnarz, R. (eds.) Systems, Software and Services Process Improvement, pp. 3–14. Springer, Cham (2016) CrossRef
21.
Moreno-Campos, E., Sanchez-Gordón, M.-L., Colomo-Palacios, R., de Amescua Seco, A.: Towards measuring the impact of the ISO/IEC 29110 standard: a systematic review. In: Barafort, B., O’Connor, R.V., Poth, A., Messnarz, R. (eds.) EuroSPI 2014. CCIS, vol. 425, pp. 1–12. Springer, Heidelberg (2014). doi: 10.​1007/​978-3-662-43896-1_​1
22.
O’Connor, R.V., Laporte, C.Y.: Software project management in very small entities with ISO/IEC 29110. In: Winkler, D., O’Connor, R.V., Messnarz, R. (eds.) EuroSPI 2012. CCIS, vol. 301, pp. 330–341. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). doi: 10.​1007/​978-3-642-31199-4_​29 CrossRef
23.
Althouse, A.D.: Basic principles of survival analysis with composite endpoints: why you must use the “first” event, not the “worst” event. Int. J. Cardiol. 201, 319–320 (2015) CrossRef
24.
Fenech, J.P., Yap, Y.K., Shafik, S.: Modelling the recovery outcomes for defaulted loans: a survival analysis approach. Econ. Lett. 145, 79–82 (2016) CrossRef
25.
Datta, S., del Carmen Pardo, M., Scheike, T., Yuen, K.C.: Special issue on advances in survival analysis. Comput. Stat. Data Anal. 93, 255–256 (2016) MathSciNetCrossRef
26.
Sentas, P., Angelis, L., Stamelos, I.: A statistical framework for analyzing the duration of software projects. Empir. Softw. Eng. 13, 147–184 (2008) CrossRef
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
Dingsoyr, T., Moe, N.B., Fægri, T.E., Seim, E.A.: Exploring software development at the very large-scale: a revelatory case study and research agenda for agile method adaptation. Empir. Softw. Eng. 22, 1–31 (2017) CrossRef
33.
Choetkiertikul, M., Dam, H.K., Tran, T., Ghose, A.: Predicting the delay of issues with due dates in software projects. Empir. Softw. Eng. 22, 1223–1263 (2017) CrossRef
34.
Carver, J.: The use of grounded theory in empirical software engineering. In: Basili, V.R., Rombach, D., Schneider, K., Kitchenham, B., Pfahl, D., Selby, R.W. (eds.) Empirical Software Engineering Issues. Critical Assessment and Future Directions. LNCS, vol. 4336, p. 42. Springer, Heidelberg (2007). doi: 10.​1007/​978-3-540-71301-2_​15 CrossRef
35.
Wohlin, C., Runeson, P., Höst, M., Ohlsson, M.C., Regnell, B., Wesslén, A.: Experimentation in Software Engineering. Springer, Heidelberg (2012) CrossRefMATH
36.
Larrucea, X., Santamaría, I., Colomo-Palacios, R.: Assessing ISO/IEC29110 by means of ITMark: results from an experience factory. J. Softw. Evol. Process. 28, 969–980 (2016) CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Comparing SPI Survival Studies in Small Settings
Authors
Xabier Larrucea
Izaskun Santamaria
Copyright Year
2017
Book
Software Process Improvement and Capability Determination

Print ISBN: 978-3-319-67382-0

Electronic ISBN: 978-3-319-67383-7

Copyright Year: 2017

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-67383-7_4

Premium Partner

Neuer Inhalt
    Image Credits