Abstract
After a software process assessment is performed there are two main problems decision-makers face. First, how reliable are the assessment results presented. Though assessments are often performed by an independent competent third party, it is still important to be able to judge the validity of the determined capability profile and to assure that a faithful picture of the organisation has been captured. Second, in consideration of the results, identify what are the process-related risks for the organisation so they can guide the establishment of the priorities for a process improvement. This paper presents a method based on the dependencies between processes in order to support the validation of the assessment results and the identification of business critical processes for improvement.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Automotive SIG: Automotive SPICE Process Reference Model, Manchester (2007), http://www.automotivespice.com
Devic, M.-O., Escorial Rico, D., Richter, S.: Reflecting on ten years of Software Process Assessment and Improvement initiatives by the European Space Agency. In: 18th EuroSPI Conference Industrial Proceedings (2011)
European Cooperation for Space Standardization: Space project management, Risk Management, ECSS-M-ST-80C, Noordwijk (2008)
European Cooperation for Space Standardization: Space product assurance, Software process assessment and improvement – Part 1: Framework, ECSS-Q-HB-80-02 Part 1 A, Noordwijk (2010)
European Cooperation for Space Standardization: Space product assurance, Software process assessment and improvement – Part 2: Assessor instrument, ECSS-Q-HB-80-02 Part 2 A, Noordwijk (2010)
Flood, D., McCaffery, F., Casey, V.: Understanding the Relationships Within the Medi SPICE Framework. In: The Seventh International Conference on Software Engineering Advances (ICSEA 2012), Lisbon, Portugal, pp. 254–259 (2012)
ISO 15504, Information technology – Process assessment, Geneva (2003-2012)
ISO 31000, Risk management – Principles and guidelines, Geneva (2009)
Kelemen, Z.D., Kusters, R., Trienekens, J., Balla, K.: Towards Complexity Analysis of Software Process Improvement Frameworks, Technical Report TR201301, Budapest (2013)
Miler, J., Gorski, J.: Risk-driven Software Process Improvement - a Case Study. In: Proc. of. 11th European Software Process Improvement Conference, EuroSPI 2004, Trondheim (2004)
Voelcker, C., Ouared, R., Stienen, H.: R4S – Risk Reduction with SPiCE for SPACE. TN7 Part C of ESA study contract No 10662/93/NL/NB WO6-CCN5, Noordwijk (2001)
Wholey, J.S., Hatry, H.P., Newcomer, K.E.: Handbook of practical program evaluation, San Francisco, vol. 19 (2010)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Richter, S., Escorial Rico, D. (2014). Software Process Assessment Validation and Improvement Prioritization. In: Barafort, B., O’Connor, R.V., Poth, A., Messnarz, R. (eds) Systems, Software and Services Process Improvement. EuroSPI 2014. Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol 425. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-43896-1_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-43896-1_9
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-662-43895-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-662-43896-1
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)