Skip to main content

SPI Sustainment Model Validation: Two Exploratory Case Studies

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Book cover Software Process Improvement and Capability Determination (SPICE 2016)

Abstract

Research has shown that adopting and implementing Software Process Improvement (SPI) reference frameworks can produce benefits in software product quality and delivery. However, limited attention has been given to sustaining SPI over time and the influence of the organizational context on SPI activities. The authors have previously proposed a theoretical SPI Sustainment Model derived from the literature to address this gap. This paper extends that work by empirically validating the model using longitudinal case studies of companies that have adopted CMMI. The validation supports the underlying theory of the model that SPI program benefits can be reinforced and sustained by nurturing influential factors, identified in the model, in the organizational context in which the SPI activities take place. The paper concludes that viewing SPI more broadly as an organizational investment rather than just an incremental product or process improvement tool may support sustained benefits.

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. Gupta, J.N., Sharma, S.K., Hsu, J.: An overview of knowledge management. In: Jennex, M. (ed.) Knowledge Management: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools, and Applications. Information Science Reference, Hershey, PA (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Turban, E., Aronson, J.E., Liang, T.-P.: Knowledge management. In: Decision Support Systems and Intelligent Systems, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Potter, N., Sakry, M.: Developing a plan. In: Making Process Improvement Work, pp. 1–19. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Morgan, P.: Process improvement: Is it a lottery? methods & tools, practical knowledge for the software developer. Tester Proj. Manag. 15(1), 3–12 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Calvo-Manzano, J.A., Cuevas, G., Gómez, G., Mejia, J., Muñoz, M., Feliu, T.S.: Methodology for process improvement through basic components and focusing on the resistance to change. J. Softw. Evol. Process. 24(5), 511–523 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Conradi, H., Fuggetta, A.: Improving software process improvement. IEEE Softw. 19(4), 92–99 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Khurshid, N., Bannerman, P.L.: Modeling SPI sustainment in software-developing organizations: a research framework. In: Mitasiunas, A., Rout, T., O’Connor, R.V., Dorling, A. (eds.) SPICE 2014. CCIS, vol. 477, pp. 214–225. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Ogasawara, H., Takumi, K., Minoru, A.: Proposal and practice of software process improvement framework – toshiba’s software process improvement history since 2000. J. Softw. Evol. Process. 26(5), 521–529 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Clarke, P., O’Connor, R.V., Leavy, B., Yilmaz, M.: Exploring the relationship between software process adaptive capability and organisational performance. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 41(12), 1169–1183 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Standard CMMI Appraisal Method for Process Improvement (SCAMPI), Version 1.1: Method Definition Document (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Yin, R.K.: Case Study Research: Design and Methods, 5th edn. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Bryman, A.: Social Research Methods, 4th edn. Oxford University Press, New York, NY (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Corbin, J., Strauss, A.: Grounded Theory Research: Procedures, Canons, and Evaluative Criteria. Qual. Sociol. 13(1), 3–21 (1990)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was partly supported by NICTA, funded by the Australian Government through the Department of Communications and the Australian Research Council through the ICT Centre of Excellence Program.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nazrina Khurshid .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this paper

Cite this paper

Khurshid, N., Bannerman, P.L. (2016). SPI Sustainment Model Validation: Two Exploratory Case Studies. In: Clarke, P., O'Connor, R., Rout, T., Dorling, A. (eds) Software Process Improvement and Capability Determination. SPICE 2016. Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol 609. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-38980-6_24

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-38980-6_24

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-38979-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-38980-6

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics