Skip to main content
Top

Hint

Swipe to navigate through the chapters of this book

2017 | Supplement | Chapter

The Maturity of Usability Maturity Models

Authors : Carmen L. Carvajal, Ana M. Moreno

Published in: Software Process Improvement and Capability Determination

Publisher: Springer International Publishing

share
SHARE

Abstract

The integration of usability practices in software development is not a straightforward process. In this context, the application of usability maturity models (UMM) in a software organization can provide insightful information to improve such integration. This paper discusses the design and application characteristics of the UMMs used over the last decade. The analysis of recent UMMs confirms that, even when the UMM field is a matter of interest and is getting adapted to new development contexts (for instance, agile or open source). UMMs lack detailed empirical evidence and supporting documentation for their objective application. In addition, our study also identifies other open issues related such as the level of prescriptiveness or mutability of UMMs. Consequently this paper identifies different opportunities for improving the maturity of UMMs. The application of mature UMMs would contribute to a better incorporation of usability and user experience practices in software organizations.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference ISO, International Software Quality Standard, ISO/IEC 25010. Systems and software engineering-Systems and software Quality Requirements and Evaluation (SQuaRE) (2011) ISO, International Software Quality Standard, ISO/IEC 25010. Systems and software engineering-Systems and software Quality Requirements and Evaluation (SQuaRE) (2011)
2.
go back to reference Hoo, M.H., Jaafar, A.: Usability in practice: perception and practicality of management and practitioners. In: International Conference on Pattern Analysis and Intelligent Robotics (ICPAIR), vol. 2, pp. 211–216 (2011) Hoo, M.H., Jaafar, A.: Usability in practice: perception and practicality of management and practitioners. In: International Conference on Pattern Analysis and Intelligent Robotics (ICPAIR), vol. 2, pp. 211–216 (2011)
3.
go back to reference Nielsen, J., et al.: Return on Investment (ROI) for Usability, 4th edn. Nielsen Norman Group, Fremont (2008) Nielsen, J., et al.: Return on Investment (ROI) for Usability, 4th edn. Nielsen Norman Group, Fremont (2008)
4.
go back to reference Bornoe, N., Stage, J.: Usability Engineering in the Wild: How Do Practitioners Integrate Usability Engineering in Software Development? In: Sauer, S., Bogdan, C., Forbrig, P., Bernhaupt, R., Winckler, M. (eds.) HCSE 2014. LNCS, vol. 8742, pp. 199–216. Springer, Heidelberg (2014). doi: 10.​1007/​978-3-662-44811-3_​12 Bornoe, N., Stage, J.: Usability Engineering in the Wild: How Do Practitioners Integrate Usability Engineering in Software Development? In: Sauer, S., Bogdan, C., Forbrig, P., Bernhaupt, R., Winckler, M. (eds.) HCSE 2014. LNCS, vol. 8742, pp. 199–216. Springer, Heidelberg (2014). doi: 10.​1007/​978-3-662-44811-3_​12
5.
go back to reference Becker, J., Knackstedt, R., Pöppelbuß, D.: Developing maturity models for IT management. Bus. Inf. Syst. Eng. 1(3), 213–222 (2009) CrossRef Becker, J., Knackstedt, R., Pöppelbuß, D.: Developing maturity models for IT management. Bus. Inf. Syst. Eng. 1(3), 213–222 (2009) CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Wendler, R.: The maturity of maturity model research: a systematic mapping study. Inf. Softw. Technol. 54(12), 1317–1339 (2012) CrossRef Wendler, R.: The maturity of maturity model research: a systematic mapping study. Inf. Softw. Technol. 54(12), 1317–1339 (2012) CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Petersen, K., et al.: Systematic mapping studies in software engineering. In: 12th International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering, vol. 17(1) (2008) Petersen, K., et al.: Systematic mapping studies in software engineering. In: 12th International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering, vol. 17(1) (2008)
8.
go back to reference Hox, J.J., Boeije, H.R.: Data collection, primary vs. secondary. In: Encyclopedia of Social Measurement, vol. 1, pp. 593–599 (2005) Hox, J.J., Boeije, H.R.: Data collection, primary vs. secondary. In: Encyclopedia of Social Measurement, vol. 1, pp. 593–599 (2005)
9.
go back to reference Wieringa, R., et al.: Requirements engineering paper classification and evaluation criteria: a proposal and a discussion. Requirements Eng. 11, 102–107 (2006) CrossRef Wieringa, R., et al.: Requirements engineering paper classification and evaluation criteria: a proposal and a discussion. Requirements Eng. 11, 102–107 (2006) CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Condori, N., et al.: A systematic mapping study on empirical evaluation of software requirements specifications techniques. In: 3rd International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement, pp. 502–505. IEEE Computer Society (2009) Condori, N., et al.: A systematic mapping study on empirical evaluation of software requirements specifications techniques. In: 3rd International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement, pp. 502–505. IEEE Computer Society (2009)
12.
go back to reference Fraser, P., Moultrie, J., Gregory, M.: The use of maturity models/grids as a tool in assessing product development capability. In: Engineering Management Conference, pp. 244–249. IEEE International (2002) Fraser, P., Moultrie, J., Gregory, M.: The use of maturity models/grids as a tool in assessing product development capability. In: Engineering Management Conference, pp. 244–249. IEEE International (2002)
13.
go back to reference Mettler, T., Rohner, P., Winter, R.: Towards a classification of maturity models in information systems. In: Management of the interconnected world, pp. 333–340. Physica-Verlag HD (2010) Mettler, T., Rohner, P., Winter, R.: Towards a classification of maturity models in information systems. In: Management of the interconnected world, pp. 333–340. Physica-Verlag HD (2010)
14.
go back to reference De Bruin, T., et al.: Understanding the main phases of developing a maturity assessment model. In: 16th Australasian conference on information systems. Sydney (2005) De Bruin, T., et al.: Understanding the main phases of developing a maturity assessment model. In: 16th Australasian conference on information systems. Sydney (2005)
15.
go back to reference Pöppelbuß, J., Röglinger, M.: What makes a useful maturity model? A framework of general design principles for maturity models and its demonstration in business process management. In: 19th European Conference on Information Systems. Finland (2011) Pöppelbuß, J., Röglinger, M.: What makes a useful maturity model? A framework of general design principles for maturity models and its demonstration in business process management. In: 19th European Conference on Information Systems. Finland (2011)
16.
go back to reference Earthy, J.: Usability Maturity Model: Human Centredness Scale. INUSE Project deliverable D5.1.4(s). Version 1.2., Lloyd’s Register of Shipping, London IE2016 INUSE Deliverable D5.1.4s (1998) Earthy, J.: Usability Maturity Model: Human Centredness Scale. INUSE Project deliverable D5.1.4(s). Version 1.2., Lloyd’s Register of Shipping, London IE2016 INUSE Deliverable D5.1.4s (1998)
17.
go back to reference Petersen, K., Vakkalanka, S., Kuzniarz, L.: Guidelines for conducting systematic mapping studies in software engineering: an update. Inf. Soft. Technol. 64, 1–18 (2015) CrossRef Petersen, K., Vakkalanka, S., Kuzniarz, L.: Guidelines for conducting systematic mapping studies in software engineering: an update. Inf. Soft. Technol. 64, 1–18 (2015) CrossRef
Metadata
Title
The Maturity of Usability Maturity Models
Authors
Carmen L. Carvajal
Ana M. Moreno
Copyright Year
2017
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-67383-7_7

Premium Partner