Skip to main content
Log in

Integration of strategic management, process improvement and quantitative measurement for managing the competitiveness of software engineering organizations

  • Published:
Software Quality Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Strategic management is a key discipline that permits companies to achieve their competitive goals. An effective and explicit alignment and integration of business strategy with SPI initiatives based on measurement is essential to prevent loss of income, customers and competitiveness. By integrating SPI models and measurement techniques in the strategy management process, an organization’s investments will be better aligned with strategy, optimizing the benefits obtained as a result of an SPI program. In this paper, the authors propose BOQM (Balanced Objective-Quantifiers Methodology) that integrates properly strategic management, process improvement and quantitative measurement to manage the competitiveness of software engineering organizations. Finally, this paper presents and discusses the results from implementing BOQM in a software development organization.

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

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Asgarkhani, M. (2006). Current trends in strategic management of ICTs. IEEE international conference on management of innovation and technology, doi:10.1109/ICMIT.2006.262205.

  • Basili, V., Heidrich, J., Lindvall, M., Münch, J., Regardie, M., Rombach, D., et al. (2009). Linking software development and business strategy through measurement. IEEE computer (Accepted article).

  • Belk, R. W. (Ed.). (2007). Handbook of qualitative research methods in marketing. Cheltenham, UK, Northampton, MA, USA: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Capell, P. (2004) Benefits of improvement efforts, SEI SPECIAL REPORT CMU/SEI-2004-SR-010, Sep 2004.

  • Card, D. (2003). Practical software measurement. Proceedings of the 25th international conference on software engineering (ICSE’03), IEEE computer society, (pp. 738).

  • Chastek, J. G., Donohoe, P., & McGregor, D. J. (2009). Formulation of a production strategy for a software product line.

  • Dybå, T. (2005). An empirical investigation of the key factors for success in software process improvement. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 31(5), 410–424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ebert, C., & Dumke, R. (2007). Software measurement: Establish–extract–evaluate–execute. Springer, XII, 561 p. 157 illus, ISBN: 978-3-540-71648-8.

  • El-Emam, K. (2007). TrialStat corporation: On schedule with high quality and cost savings for the customer. Performance results from process improvement, DACS Journal, Vol. 10, no. 1.

  • El-Emam, K., Goldenson, D., McCurley, J., & Herbsleb, J. (2001). Modelling the likelihood of software process improvement: An exploratory study. Empirical Software Engineering, 6(3), 207–229.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Fahey, L. (2007). Connecting strategy and competitive intelligence: Refocusing intelligence to produce critical strategy inputs. Strategy & Leadership, Emerald, 35(1), 4–12.

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Goethert, W., & Fisher, M. (2003). Deriving enterprise-based measures using the balanced scorecard and goal-driven measurement techniques. Carnegie Mellon University, Software Eng. Inst. http://www.sei.cmu.edu/pub/documents/03.reports/pdf/03tn024.pdf. Accessed 15 May 2009.

  • Goethert, W. & Siviy, J. (2004). Applications of the indicator template for measurement and analysis. Carnegie Mellon University, Software Eng. Inst. http://www.sei.cmu.edu/pub/documents/04.reports/pdf/04tn024.pdf. Accessed 15 May 2009.

  • Gopal, A., Mukhopadhyay, T., & Krishnan, M. S. (2005). The impact of institutional forces on software metrics programs. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 31(8), 679–694.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harjumaa, L., Markkula, J., & Oivo, M. (2008). How does a measurement programme evolve in software organizations? PROFES 2008, LNCS 5089 (pp. 230–243).

  • ISO/IEC 15504-4:2004 (2004). Information technology—process assessment—Part 4: Guidance on use for process improvement and process capability determination.

  • ISO/IEC 15939:2007 (2007). Software engineering—software measurement process.

  • ISO/IEC 9001:2008 (2008). Quality management systems—requirements, international standards organization.

  • Issac, G., Rajendran, C., & Anantharaman, R. N. (2006). An instrument for the measurement of customer perceptions of quality management in the software industry: An empirical study in India. Software Quality Journal, Springer, 14(4), 291–308.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahraman, C., Demirel, N. C., & Demirel, T. (2007). Prioritization of e-Government strategies using a SWOT-AHP analysis: The case of Turkey. European Journal of Information Systems, 16, 284–298.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kamel, S. H., Rateb, D., & El-Tawil, M. (2009). The impact of ICT investments on economic development in Egypt. The Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries, 36(1), 1–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kanji, G. K., & e Sá, P. M. (2007). Performance measurement and business excellence: The reinforcing link for the public sector. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 18(1 & 2), 49–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, R. S., & Cooper, R. (1997). Cost and effect: Using integrated cost systems to drive profitability and performance, activity-based costing: Introduction (79–110). Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, R. S. & Norton, D. P. (2005) The office of strategy management, Harvard Business Review Article, doi:10.1225/R0510D.

  • Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (2006). Alignment: Using the balanced scorecard to create corporate synergies. Boston, MA, USA: Harvard Business Press Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (2008). Plan the strategy: Aligning the organization for effective strategy execution. Harvard Business Press, Book Chapter, Prod. #: 7686BC-PDF-ENG.

  • Kojima, T., Hasegawa, T., Misumi, M., & Nakamura, T. (2007). Risk analysis of software process measurements. Software Quality Journal, Springer, 16(3), 361–376.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuppusamy, M., Pahlavani, M., & Salman, A. S. (2008). Fostering ICT development for growth: Measuring the payoffs for Australia and the Asean-5 Countries. American Journal of Applied Sciences, 5(12), 1676–1685.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lamb, R. B. (2008). Competitive strategic management. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Long, J. O. (2008). ITIL version 3 at a glance, Springer US.

  • McGarry, J. (2002). Practical software measurement: Objective information for decision makers, Addison-Wesley.

  • Mcloone, P. J., & Rohde S. L. (2007). Performances outcomes of CMMI-based process improvements. Performance results from process improvement, DACS Journal, Vol. 10, no. 1.

  • Mehra, S., & Inman, R. A. (2004). Purchasing management and business competitiveness in the coming decade. Production Planning & Control, 15(7), 710–718.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mishra, D., & Mishra, A. (2008). Software process improvement methodologies for small and medium enterprises. Product-focused software process improvement, Springer Berlin, Heidelberg, LNCS, 5089, (pp. 273–288).

  • Oliveira, S. B., Valle, R., & Mahler, C. F. (2009). A comparative analysis of CMMI software project management by Brazilian, Indian and Chinese companies. Software Quality Journal, Springer, doi:10.1007/s11219-009-9087-6.

  • Peng, G. C. A., & Nunes, M. B. (2007). Using PEST analysis as a tool for refining and focusing contexts for information systems research. Proceedings of the 6th European conference on research methods for business and management studies (pp. 229–236).

  • Porter, M. E. (1979). How competitive forces shape strategy. Harvard Business Review, 57, Mar–Apr, 86–93.

  • Qi, L. A. (2007). Motorola software group’s china center: Value added by CMMI. Performance results from process improvement, DACS Journal, Vol. 10, no. 1.

  • Shull, F., Seaman, C., & Zelkowltz, M. (2006). Victor R. Basili’s contributions to software quality. Software IEEE, 23(1), 16–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Software Engineering Institute (2006). Standard CMMI Appraisal method for process improvement (SCAMPI) A, version 1.2: Method definition document. CMU/SEI-2006-HB-002. http://www.sei.cmu.edu/pub/documents/06.reports/pdf/06hb002.pdf. Accessed 15 May 2009.

  • Trienekens, J. J. M., Kusters, R., Kriek, D., & Siemons, P. (2009). Entropy based software processes improvement. Software Quality Journal, Springer, 17(3), 231–243.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tuan, H. W., Liu, C. Y., & Chen, C. M. (2006). Using ABC model for software process improvement: A balanced perspective. HICSS ‘06: Proceedings of the 39th annual Hawaii international conference on system sciences, IEEE Computer Society, 9, 229.3.

  • Watson, H. J., & Wixom, B. H. (2007). The current state of business intelligence. IEEE Computer, 40(9), 96–99.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work has been partially funded by the Spanish Ministry of Science and Technology through the TIC2004-7083 and TIN2009-10700 projects and the Spanish Ministry of Industry through project PPT-430000-2008-54. This work was also supported by PROGRESION SMP (UC3M 2006/03617/001). Moreover, we thank Dr. Victor R. Basili from Fraunhofer Center for Experimental Software Engineering, who reviewed this article.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Javier García Guzmán.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Guzmán, J.G., Mitre, H.A., Amescua, A. et al. Integration of strategic management, process improvement and quantitative measurement for managing the competitiveness of software engineering organizations. Software Qual J 18, 341–359 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11219-010-9094-7

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11219-010-9094-7

Keywords

Navigation