[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/ skip to main content
10.1145/940071.940092acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesfseConference Proceedingsconference-collections
Article

Factors of software process improvement success in small and large organizations: an empirical study in the scandinavian context

Published: 01 September 2003 Publication History

Abstract

Existing software engineering and organization development literature acknowledges that there are fundamental operational differences between small and large organizations. Despite this recognition, there has been no attempt to verify whether small and large software organizations implement software process improvement (SPI) programs differently in order to advance their businesses.This study examines whether an organization's size affects its SPI implementation strategy and the degree of SPI success. Based on an extensive literature review of critical factors of quality management, organizational learning, and SPI, a survey questionnaire was developed and data on the implementation of six organizational factors and the resulting organizational performance was collected through a mail survey of 120 software organizations. The findings show that small organizations reported that they implement SPI elements as effectively as large organizations, and in turn, achieve high organizational performance. The main lesson to be learned from this study is that to implement SPI at least as effectively as their large counterparts, small software organizations should capitalize on their relative strengths in employee participation and exploration of new knowledge.

References

[1]
T. K. Abdel-Hamid and S. E. Madnick (1990) The Elusive Silver Lining: How We Fail to Learn from Software Development Failures, Sloan Management Review, Vol. 32, No. 1, Fall, pp. 39--48.
[2]
S. L. Ahire and D. Y. Golhar (1996) Quality Management in Large vs. Small Firms: An Empirical Investigation, Journal of Small Business Management, Vol. 34, No. 2, pp. 1--13.
[3]
C. Argyris and D. A. Schön (1996) Organizational Learning II: Theory, Method, and Practice, Reading, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley.
[4]
P. G. Armour (2001) The Laws of Software Process, Communications of the ACM, Vol. 44, No. 1, pp. 15--17.
[5]
Y. Baruch (1999) Response Rate in Academic Studies - A Comparative Analysis, Human Relations, Vol. 52, No. 4, pp. 421--438.
[6]
J. Batista and A. D. de Figueiredo (2000) SPI in a Very Small Team: a Case with CMM, Software Process -- Improvement and Practice, Vol. 5, No. 4, pp. 243--250.
[7]
M. Berry and R. Jeffery (2000) An Instrument for Assessing Software Measurement Programs, Empirical Software Engineering, Vol. 5, No. 3, November, pp.183--200.
[8]
J. G. Brodman and D. L. Johnson (1994) What Small Businesses and Small Organizations Say About the CMM, Proceedings of the Sixteenth International Conference on Software Engineering, IEEE Computer Society Press, pp. 331--340.
[9]
J. S. Brown and P. Duguid (2000) Balancing Act: How to Capture Knowledge without Killing It, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 78, No. 3, pp. 73--80.
[10]
L. J. Cronbach (1951) Coefficient Alpha and the Internal Consistency of Tests, Psychometrica, Vol. 16, pp. 297--334, September.
[11]
R. M. Cyert and J. G. March (1992) A Behavioral Theory of the Firm, Second Edition, Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
[12]
T. Dybå (2000a) An Instrument for Measuring the Key Factors of Success in Software Process Improvement, Empirical Software Engineering, Vol. 5, No. 4, December, pp. 357--390.
[13]
T. Dybå (2000b) Improvisation in Small Software Organizations, IEEE Software, Vol. 17, No. 5, September-October, pp. 82--87.
[14]
R. L. Glass (1995) Software Creativity, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
[15]
L. Groth (1999) Future Organizational Design: The Scope for the IT-Based Enterprise, Chichester: Wiley.
[16]
D. J. Hoch, C. R. Roeding, G. Purkert, and S. K. Lindner (2000) Secrets of Software Success: Management Insights from 100 Software Firms around the World, Boston, Massachusetts: Harvard Business School Press.
[17]
J. M. Juran and A. B. Godfrey (Eds.) (1999) Juran's Quality Handbook, Fifth Edition, New York: McGraw-Hill.
[18]
R. E. Kraut and L. Streeter (1995) Coordination in Software Development, Communications of the ACM, Vol. 38, No. 3, pp. 69--81.
[19]
M. Laitinen, M. Fayad, and R. Ward (2000) Software Engineering in the Small, IEEE Software, Vol. 17, No. 5, pp. 75--77.
[20]
T. K. Lant and S. J. Mezias (1992) An Organizational Learning Model of Convergence and Reorientation, Organization Science, Vol. 3, No. 1, pp. 47--71.
[21]
E. E. Lawler III (1997) Rethinking Organization Size, Organizational Dynamics, Vol. 26, No. 2, pp. 24--35.
[22]
J. G. March and R. I. Sutton (1997) Organizational Performance as a Dependent Variable, Organization Science, Vol. 8, No. 6, pp. 698--706.
[23]
H. Mintzberg (1989) Mintzberg on Management: Inside Our Strange World of Organizations, New York: The Free Press.
[24]
L. Raymond, F. Bergeron, and S. Rivard (1998) Determinants of Business Process Reengineering Success in Small and Large Enterprises: An Empirical Study in the Canadian Context, Journal of Small Business Management, Vol. 36, No. 1, pp. 72--85.
[25]
S. D. Teasley, L. A. Covi, M. S. Krishnan, and J. S. Olson (2002) Rapid Software Development through Team Collocation, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, Vol. 28, No. 7, pp. 671--683.
[26]
M. Terziovski and D. Samson (2000) The Effect of Company Size on the Relationship between TQM Strategy and Organizational Performance, The TQM Magazine, Vol. 12, No. 2, pp. 144--148.
[27]
M. L. Tushman and E. Romanelli (1985) Organizational Evolution: A Metamorphosis Model of Convergence and Reorientation, in L. L. Cummings and B.M Staw (Eds.), Research in Organizational Behavior, Vol. 7, Greenwich, Connecticut: JAI Press, pp. 171--222.

Cited By

View all
  • (2022)Organizational governance: Resolving insufficient practice and quality expectation in Small Software Companies.Proceedings of the 2022 European Symposium on Software Engineering10.1145/3571697.3571700(17-24)Online publication date: 27-Oct-2022
  • (2022)Theory on Non-Technical Characteristics Affecting Process Adoption in Small Software Companies: A Grounded Theory StudyIEEE Access10.1109/ACCESS.2022.320967310(103382-103400)Online publication date: 2022
  • (2020)Measuring the maturity of Indian small and medium enterprises for unofficial readiness for capability maturity model integration‐based software process improvementJournal of Software: Evolution and Process10.1002/smr.226132:9Online publication date: 3-Sep-2020
  • Show More Cited By

Recommendations

Comments

Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences
ESEC/FSE-11: Proceedings of the 9th European software engineering conference held jointly with 11th ACM SIGSOFT international symposium on Foundations of software engineering
September 2003
394 pages
ISBN:1581137435
DOI:10.1145/940071
  • cover image ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes
    ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes  Volume 28, Issue 5
    September 2003
    382 pages
    ISSN:0163-5948
    DOI:10.1145/949952
    Issue’s Table of Contents
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Sponsors

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 01 September 2003

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. critical success factors
  2. learning software organization
  3. software process improvement
  4. survey research

Qualifiers

  • Article

Conference

ESEC/FSE03
Sponsor:

Acceptance Rates

ESEC/FSE-11 Paper Acceptance Rate 33 of 168 submissions, 20%;
Overall Acceptance Rate 112 of 543 submissions, 21%

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)12
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)1
Reflects downloads up to 22 Dec 2024

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2022)Organizational governance: Resolving insufficient practice and quality expectation in Small Software Companies.Proceedings of the 2022 European Symposium on Software Engineering10.1145/3571697.3571700(17-24)Online publication date: 27-Oct-2022
  • (2022)Theory on Non-Technical Characteristics Affecting Process Adoption in Small Software Companies: A Grounded Theory StudyIEEE Access10.1109/ACCESS.2022.320967310(103382-103400)Online publication date: 2022
  • (2020)Measuring the maturity of Indian small and medium enterprises for unofficial readiness for capability maturity model integration‐based software process improvementJournal of Software: Evolution and Process10.1002/smr.226132:9Online publication date: 3-Sep-2020
  • (2019)Factors affecting development process in small software companiesProceedings of the 2nd Symposium on Software Engineering in Africa10.1109/SEiA.2019.00011(16-23)Online publication date: 28-May-2019
  • (2019)Building a hierarchical structure model of enablers that affect the software process improvement in software SMEs—A mixed method approachComputer Standards & Interfaces10.1016/j.csi.2019.04.00966:COnline publication date: 1-Oct-2019
  • (2018)Empirical study of software process improvement in Malaysian small and medium enterprises: The human aspectsJournal of Software: Evolution and Process10.1002/smr.195330:10Online publication date: 16-Apr-2018
  • (2017)Defining an Iterative ISO/IEC 29110 Deployment Package for Game DevelopersInternational Journal of Information Technologies and Systems Approach10.4018/IJITSA.201701010610:1(107-125)Online publication date: Jan-2017
  • (2016)Software SMEs' unofficial readiness for CMMI®-based software process improvementSoftware Quality Journal10.1007/s11219-015-9277-324:4(997-1023)Online publication date: 1-Dec-2016
  • (2016)Understanding SPI in small organizationsJournal of Software: Evolution and Process10.1002/smr.177528:5(372-390)Online publication date: 1-May-2016
  • (2014)XP in a Small Software Development Business: Adapting to Local ConstraintsNordic Contributions in IS Research10.1007/978-3-319-09546-2_2(14-29)Online publication date: 2014
  • Show More Cited By

View Options

Login options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media