Abstract
The emerging International Standard ISO/IEC 330xx family can be utilized to assess process quality characteristics, i.e., properties of processes such as process safety, efficiency, effectiveness, security, integrity and sustainability as well as capability like in ISO/IEC 15504. For development of scientific and consistent measurement framework for process quality characteristics, ISO/IEC 33003 defines requirements for a measurement framework in accordance to composite measure development steps. This study addresses some important principles of composite measures, identifies aggregation locales for process quality level (e.g., capability level in ISO/IEC 33020), and defines two types of aggregation methods. The aim is to improve understandability of process measurement frameworks of process quality characteristics.
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.
References
ISO/IEC 33003: Information Technology — Process Assessment — Requirements for Process Measurement Frameworks. ISO/IEC JTC1/SC 7 WG10 (2014)
ISO/IEC 33001: Information Technology — Process Assessment — Concepts and Terminology. ISO/IEC JTC1/SC 7 WG10 (2014)
ISO/IEC 15504-5: Information Technology — Process Assessment — Part 5: An Exemplar Process Assessment Model. Geneva, Switzerland, ISO (2012)
Trochim, W.M.K., Donnelly, J.P.: The Research Methods Knowledge Base. Thomson Custom Pub. (2007)
Cooper, D.R., Schindle, P.S.: Business Research Methods, 11th edn. McGraw-Hill, Singapore (2011)
Jung, H.-W.: Investigating Measurement Scales and Aggregation Methods in SPICE Assessment Method. Information and Software Technology 55(8), 1450–1461 (2013)
ISO/IEC 33020: Information Technology — Process Assessment — Process Measurement Framework for Assessment of Process Capability and Organizational Process Maturity. ISO/IEC JTC1/SC 7 WG10 (2014)
Edwards, J.R.: Multidimensional Constructs in Organizational Behavior Research: An Integrative Analytical Framework. Organizational Research Methods 4(2), 144–192 (2001)
Bandura, R.: A Survey of Composite Indices Measuring Country Performance, Update. A UNDP/ODS Working Paper (2008), http://goo.gl/4se8yY
Nardo, M., Saisana, M., Saltelli, A., Tarantola, S., Hoffman, A., Giovannini, E.: Handbook on Constructing Composite Indicators: Methodology and User Guide. OECD publishing, http://www.oecd.org/std/42495745.pdf
Bollen, K.A., Lennox, R.: Conventional Wisdom on Measurement: A Structural Equation Perspective. Psychological Bulletin 110(2), 305–314 (1991)
Diamantopoulos, A., Siguaw, J.A.: Formative Versus Reflective Indicators in Organizational Measure Development: A Comparison and Empirical Illustration. British Journal of Management 17(4), 263–282 (2006)
ISO/IEC 15939: Information Technology — Process Assessment — Part 10: Safety Extension. Geneva, Switzerland, ISO (2007)
Edwards, J.R.: The Fallacy of Formative Measurement. Organizational Research Methods 14(2), 370–388 (2011)
Fayers, P.M., Hand, D.J.: Causal Variables, Indicator Variables and Measurement Scales: An Example from Quality of Life. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A (Statistics in Society) 165(2), 233–253 (2002)
Nunnally, J.C., Bernstein, H.H.: Psychometric Theory. McGraw-Hill, New York (2004)
Nardo, M., Saisana, M., Saltelli, A., Tarantola, S.: Tools for Composite Indicators Building. European Commission-Joint Research Centre, EUR 21682 (2005)
Bollen, K.A.: Indicator: Methodology. International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences, 7282–7287 (2001)
Rijsdijk, S.A., Hultink, E.J., Diamantopoulos, A.: Product Intelligence: Its Conceptualization, Measurement and Impact on Consumer Satisfaction. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 35(3), 340–356 (2007)
Fayers, P.: Quality-of-Life Measurement in Clinical Trials: The Impact of Causal Variables. Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics 14(1), 155–176 (2004)
Gerbing, D.W., Anderson, J.C.: An Updated Paradigm for Scale Development Incorporating Unidimensionality and Its Assessment. Journal of Marketing Research 25(2) (1988)
Yoon, K.P., Hwang, C.-L.: Multiple Attribute Decision Making: An Introduction. Sage University Paper Series on Quantitative Applications in Social Sciences Thousand Oaks, CA (1995)
Saaty, T.L.: How to Make a Decision: The Analytic Hierarchy Process. European Journal of Operational Research 48(1), 9–26 (1990)
Jung, H.W.: Rating the Process Attribute Utilizing Ahp in SPICE-Based Process Assessments. Software Process: Improvement and Practice 6(2), 111–122 (2001)
Yoon, M.-S., Jung, H.-W.: A Study on the Utilization of Compatibility Metric in the Ahp: Applying to Software Process Assessments. In International Symposium on the Analytic Hierarchy Process (ISAHP 2005), Honolulu, Hawaii (2005), http://goo.gl/JUhMEc
Carmines, E., Zeller, R.: Reliability and Validity Assessment. Sage University Paper Series on Quantitative Applications in Social Sciences Thousand Oaks, CA (1979)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this paper
Cite this paper
Jung, HW., Varkoi, T., McBride, T. (2014). Constructing Process Measurement Scales Using the ISO/IEC 330xx Family of Standards. In: Mitasiunas, A., Rout, T., O’Connor, R.V., Dorling, A. (eds) Software Process Improvement and Capability Determination. SPICE 2014. Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol 477. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-13036-1_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-13036-1_1
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-13035-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-13036-1
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)