Skip to main content

GQM-Based Definition and Evaluation of Software Project Success Indicators

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Software Technologies (ICSOFT 2015)

Part of the book series: Communications in Computer and Information Science ((CCIS,volume 586))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

KPI (Key Process Indicators) are usually defined very early in the project’s life, when little details about the project are known. Moreover, the definition of KPI does not always follow a systematic and effective methodology. As a result, KPI and project success indicators are often defined in a rather generic and imprecise manner. We need to precisely define KPI and project success indicators, guarantee that the data upon which they are based can be effectively and efficiently measured, and assure that the computed indicators are adequate with respect to project objectives, and represent the viewpoints of all the involved stakeholders. In this paper a complete and coherent process for managing KPI and success indicators lifecycle is proposed. The process is instrumented by well integrated techniques and tools, including the Goal/Question/Metrics (GQM) method for the definition of measures and the R statistic language and environment for analyzing data and computing indicators. The proposed process was applied in the evaluation of the research project MUSES. The MUSES case study shows that the proposed process provides an easy and well supported path to the definition and implementation of effective KPI and project success indicators.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. MUSES project. https://www.musesproject.eu/

  2. Basili, V., Weiss, D.: A methodology for collecting valid software engineering data. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 10(6), 728–738 (1984)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Basili, V., Rombach, H.D.: The TAME project: towards improvement-oriented software environments. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 14(6), 758–773 (1988)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Basili, V., Caldiera, G., Rombach, H.D.: Goal/Question/Metric paradigm. In: Marciniak, J.J. (ed.) Encyclopedia of Software Engineering, vol. 1. Wiley, New York (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Fuggetta, A., Lavazza, L., Morasca, S., Cinti, S., Oldano, G., Orazi, E.: Applying G/Q/M in an industrial software factory. ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. Methodol. 7(4), 411–448 (1998)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Birk, A., van Solingen, R., Jarvinen, J.: Business impact, benefit, and cost of applying gqm in industry: an in-depth, long-term investigation at Schlumberger RPS. In: 5th International Symposium on Software Metrics (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Birk, A., Hamann, D., Pfahl, D., Jrvinen, J., Oivo, M., Vierimaa, M., van Solingen, R.: The Role of GQM in the PROFES Improvement Methodology (1999)

    Google Scholar 

  8. van Solingen, R., Berghout, E.: Integrating goal-oriented measurement in industrial software engineering: industrial experiences with and additions to the Goal/Question/Metric method (GQM). In: 7th International Software Metrics Symposium (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Lavazza, L.: Multi-scope evaluation of public administration initiatives in process automation. In: 5th European Conference on Information Management and Evaluation (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Lavazza, L., Mauri, M.: Software process measurement in the real world: dealing with operating constraints. In: Wang, Q., Pfahl, D., Raffo, D.M., Wernick, P. (eds.) SPW/ProSim 2006. LNCS, vol. 3966, pp. 80–87. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  11. Lavazza, L., Barresi, G.: Automated support for process-aware definition and execution of measurement plans. In: International Conference on Software Engineering (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Likert, R.: Technique for the measure of attitudes. Arch. Psychol. 22(140), 1–55 (1932)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Brooke, J.: SUS: a “quick and dirty” usability scale. In: Jordan, P., Thomas, B., Weerdemeester, B. (eds.) Usability Evaluation in Industry. Taylor and Francis, London (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Lewis, J.R., Sauro, J.: The factor structure of the system usability scale. In: Kurosu, M. (ed.) HCD 2009. LNCS, vol. 5619, pp. 94–103. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  15. Venkatesh, V., Bala, H.: Technology acceptance model 3 and a research agenda on interventions. Decis. Sci. 39(2), 273–312 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Ripley, B., Lapsley, M.: Package RODBC - ODBC Database Access (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Basili, V.: Applying the Goal/Question/Metric paradigm in the experience factory. In: 10th Annual CSR Workshop, Application of Software Metrics and Quality Assurance in Industry (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Muench, J., Heidrich, J.: Software project control centers: concepts and approaches. J. Syst. Softw. 70(1), 3–19 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Nicho, M., Cusack, B.: A metrics generation model for measuring the control objectives of information systems audit. In: 40th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Park, R.E., Goethert, W.B., Florac, W.A.: Goal-Driven Software Measurement. A Guidebook. Software Engineering Inst., Carnegie-Mellon Univ. (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  21. ISACA: COBIT 5: A Business Framework for the Governance and Management of Enterprise IT (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Tsunoda, M., Matsumura, T., Matsumoto, K.I.: Modeling software project monitoring with stakeholders. In: 9th International Conference on Computer & Information Science (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Basili, V., Lindvall, M., Regardie, M., Seaman, C., Heidrich, J., Munch, J., Rombach, D., Trendowicz, A.: Linking software development and business strategy through measurement. Computer 43(4), 57–65 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Souza Cardoso, E.C.: Towards a methodology for goal-oriented enterprise management. In: Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Conference Workshops (2013)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Ihaka, R., Gentleman, R.: R: a language for data analysis and graphics. J. Comput. Graphical Stat. 5(3), 299–314 (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  26. The R Project for Statistical Computing. http://www.r-project.org

Download references

Acknowledgements

The work presented here was partly supported by the EU Collaborative project MUSES – Multiplatform USable Endpoint Security, under grant agreement n. 318508 and by project “Metodi, tecniche e strumenti per l’analisi, l’implementazione e la valutazione di sistemi software,” funded by Università degli Studi dell’Insubria.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Luigi Lavazza .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this paper

Cite this paper

Lavazza, L., Frumento, E., Mazza, R. (2016). GQM-Based Definition and Evaluation of Software Project Success Indicators. In: Lorenz, P., Cardoso, J., Maciaszek, L., van Sinderen, M. (eds) Software Technologies. ICSOFT 2015. Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol 586. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-30142-6_13

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-30142-6_13

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-30141-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-30142-6

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics