Ian Sommerville
Abstract
This article describes an empirical study in industry of requirements engineering process maturity assessment and improvement. Our aims were to evaluate a requirements engineering process maturity model and to assess if improvements in requirements engineering process maturity lead to business improvements. We first briefly describe the process maturity model that we used and modifications to this model to accommodate process improvement. We present initial maturity assessment results for nine companies, describe how process improvements were selected and present data on how RE process maturity changed after these improvements were introduced. We discuss how business benefits were assessed and the difficulties of relating process maturity improvements to these business benefits. All companies reported business benefits and satisfaction with their participation in the study. Our conclusions are that the RE process maturity model is useful in supporting maturity assessment and in identifying process improvements and there is some evidence to suggest that process improvement leads to business benefits. However, whether these business benefits were a consequence of the changes to the RE process or whether these benefits resulted from side-effects of the study such as greater self-awareness of business processes remains an open question.
- Ahern, D. M., Clouse, A., and Turner, R. 2001. CMMI Distilled. Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass.Google Scholar
- Boehm, B. W. 1983. The economics of software maintenance. In Proceedings of Software Maintenance Workshop (Washington, D.C.), 9--37.Google Scholar
- Coallier, F. 1999. TRILLIUM: A model for the assessment of telecom product development and support capability. In Software Process Improvement, R. B. Hunter and R. H. Thayer, Eds. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos, Calif.Google Scholar
- Deming, W. E. 1982. Out of the Crisis. MIT Press International, Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
- El Emam, K., Drouin, J., and Welo, M. 1997. SPICE: The Theory and Practice of Software Process Improvement and Capability Determination. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos, Calif. Google Scholar
- Espiti. 1996. Software process improvement on the right road with ESPITI---The ESPITI European Survey Results. ESPITI Newsletter Issue 2. Available at: http://www.cse.dcu.ie/cse/international/trispin/News2.html#espiti.Google Scholar
- Haase, V., Messnarz, R., Koch, G., Kugler, H. J., and Decrinis, P. 1994. Bootstrap: Fine tuning process assessment. IEEE Software 11, 4, 25--35. Google Scholar
- Hall, T., Beecham, S., and Rainer, A. 2002. Requirements problems in twelve software companies: An empirical analysis. IEE Proceedings: Softw. 149, 5, 153--60.Google Scholar
- Humphrey, W. 1989. Managing the Software Process. Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass. Google Scholar
- Koch, G. 1993. Process assessment: The 'BOOTSTRAP' approach. Inf. Softw. Tech. 35, 6/7, 387--403.Google Scholar
- Konrad, M. and Paulk, M. 1995. An overview of SPICE's model for process management. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Software Quality (Austin, Tex.).Google Scholar
- Kuvaja, P., Similä, J., Krzanik, L., Bicego, A., Saukkonen, S., and Koch, G. 1994. Software Process Assessment and Improvement: The BOOTSTRAP Approach. Blackwell Publishers, Oxford.Google Scholar
- Lutz, R. R. 1993. Analysing software requirements errors in safety-critical embedded systems. In Proceedings of RE'93 (San Diego Calif.).Google Scholar
- Paulk, M. C., Curtis, B., Chrissis, M. B., and Weber, C. V. 1993. Capability maturity model, Version 1.1. IEEE Softw. 10, 4, 18--27. Google Scholar
- Paulk, M. C. and Konrad, M. 1994. An overview of ISO's SPICE project. IEEE Comput. 27, 4, 68--70.Google Scholar
- Paulk, M. C., Weber, C. V., Curtis, B., and Chrissis, M. B. 1995. The Capability Maturity Model: Guidelines for Improving the Software Process. Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass. Google Scholar
- Sawyer, P., Viller, S., and Sommerville, I. 1998. Requirements process improvement through the phased introduction of good practice. Softw. Proc. J. 3, 1, 19--34.Google Scholar
- Sawyer, P., Sommerville, I., and Kotonya, G. 1999a. Improving market-driven RE processes. In Proceedings of International Conference on Product-Focused Software Process Improvement (Profes '99) (Oulu, Finland), 222--236.Google Scholar
- Sawyer, P., Sommerville, I., and Viller, S. 1999b. Capturing the benefits of requirements engineering. IEEE Softw. 16, 2, 78--85. Google Scholar
- Sommerville, I. and Sawyer, P. 1997. Requirements Engineering: A Good Practice Guide. Wiley, Chichester. Google Scholar
Index Terms
- An empirical study of industrial requirements engineering process assessment and improvement
Recommendations
Defining a Requirements Process Improvement Model
Both software organisations and the academic community are aware that the requirements phase of software development is in need of further support. We address this problem by creating a specialised Requirements Capability Maturity Model (R-CMM 1 ). The ...
A systematic approach to requirements engineering process improvement in small and medium enterprises: an exploratory study
PROFES'11: Proceedings of the 12th international conference on Product-focused software process improvementRequirements Engineering (RE) studies have demonstrated that requirements errors affect the quality of software developed, making software requirements critical determinants of software quality. Requirements Engineering Process Improvement (REPI) models ...
A market-driven requirements engineering process: Results from an industrial process improvement programme
AbstractIn market-driven software evolution, the objective of a requirements engineering process include the envisioning and fostering of new requirements on existing packaged software products in a way that ensures competitiveness in the marketplace. ...
Comments