Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

FLEX-RCA: a lean-based method for root cause analysis in software process improvement

  • Published:
Software Quality Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Software process improvement (SPI) is an instrument to increase the productivity of, and the quality of work, in software organizations. However, a majority of SPI frameworks are too extensive or provide guidance and potential improvement areas at a high level, indicating only the symptoms, not the causes. Motivated by the industrial need of two Swedish automotive companies to systematically uncover the underlying root causes of high-level improvement issues identified in an SPI project—assessing inter-departmental interactions in large-scale software systems development—this paper advances a root cause analysis (RCA) method building on Lean Six Sigma, called Flex-RCA. Flex-RCA is used to delve deeper into challenges identified to find root causes as a part of the evaluation and subsequent improvement activities. We also demonstrate and evaluate Flex-RCA’s industrial applicability in a case study. An overall conclusion is that the use of Flex-RCA was successful, showing that it had the desired effect of both producing a broad base of causes on a high level and, more importantly, enabling an exploration of the underlying root causes.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • ABG. (1994). V-model: development standard for IT-systems of the Federal Republic of Germany. Lifecycle Process Model,

  • Abran, A., Moore, J. W., et al. (2004). Guide to the software engineering body of knowledge (SWEBOK®). IEEE Computer Society Guide.

  • Almefelt, L., Berglund, F., Nilsson, P., & Malmqvist, J. (2006). Requirement management in practice: findings from an empirical study in the auto-motive industry. Research in Engineering Design, 17(3), 113–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andersen, B., & Fagerhaug, T. (2000). Roo1 cause analysis: simplified tools and techniques. Milwaukee: ASQ Quality Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Automotive SIG. (2010). The SPICE User Group, Automotive SPICE Process Assessment Model v2.5 and Process Reference Model v4.5, Available on: http://www.automotivespice.com. Accessed on Dec 2017.

  • Basili, V. R. (1985). Quantitative evaluation of software methodology. College Park: University of Maryland.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Beck, K. (2004). Extreme programming explained: embrace change (2nd ed.). Addison-Wesley.

  • Breyfogle, F. W. (1999). Implementing Six Sigma: smarter solutions using statistical methods. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Broy, M., Kruger, I. H., Pretschner, A., & Salzmann, C. (2007). Engineering automotive software. Proceedings of the IEEE, 95(2), 2007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Calvo-Manzano, J. A., Cuevas, G., San Feliu, T., De Amescua, A., & Pérez, M. (2002). Experiences in the application of software process improvement in SMES. Software Quality Journal, 10(3), 261–273.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Card, D. N. (1998). Learning from our mistakes with defect causal analysis. IEEE Softw., 15(1), 56–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Charfi, F., Sellami, F. (2004). Overview on dependable embedded systems in modern automotive. In: Proc. of the 2004 I.E. Int. Conference on Industrial Technology.

  • CMMI. (2010). Capability Maturity Model Integration version 1.3. Technical report CMU/SEI-2010-TR-033. Software Engineering Institute (SEI). Available on: http://www.sei.cmu.edu/cmmi/. Accessed on Dec 2017.

  • Conradi, R., & Fugetta, A. (2002). Improving software process improvement. IEEE Software, 19(4), 92–100.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dybå, T., & Dingsøyr, T. (2008). Empirical studies of agile software development: a systematic review. Journal of Information and Software Technology, 50(9-10), 833–859.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Gorschek, T., & Wohlin, C. (2004). Packaging software process improvement issues—a method and a case study. Software: Practice & Experience, 34, 1311–1344.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gorschek, T., Wohlin, C. (2003). Identification of improvement issues using a lightweight triangulation approach. In: The European Software Process Improvement Conference. Graz. Austria.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grimm, K. (2003). Software technology in an automotive company—major challenges. In: Proc. of the 25th International Conference on Software Engineering, IEEE.

  • Hoerl, R. W. (1998). Six Sigma and the future of the quality profession. Quality Progress, 31, 35–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Humphrey, W. S. (1989). Managing the software process. Reading: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • ISO/IEC Std. 15504 (1998–2005): Information technology-process assessment, part 1 to part 5, International Organization for Standardization.

  • Jalote, P., & Agrawal, N. (2005). Using defect analysis feedback for improving quality and productivity in iterative software development. In: Proc. of the Information Science and Communications Technology (ICICT 2005) (pp. 701–714).

    Google Scholar 

  • Kotonya, G., & Sommerville, I. (1998). Requirements engineering: processes and techniques. New York: John Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kraut, R., & Streeter, L. A. (1995). Coordination in software development. Communications of the ACM, 38(3), 69–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuilboer, J. P., & Ashrafi, N. (2000). Software process and product improvement: an empirical assessment. Information and Software Technology, 42(1), 27–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leszak, M., Perry, D. E., & Stoll, D. (2000). A case study in root cause defect analysis. Proc. of the 2000 International Conference on Software Engineering, 428–437.

  • Mays, R. G. (1990). Applications of defect prevention in software development. IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, 8(2), 164–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, J., & Bering-Jones, M. (2009). Lean Six Sigma for dummies. Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, J. M., & Liker, J. K. (2006). The Toyota product development system: integrating people, process, and technology. New York: Productivity.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Paulk, M. C., Curtis, B., Chrissis, M. B., & Weber, C. V. (1994). The capability maturity model: guidelines for improving the software process. Reading: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pernstal, J., Magazinius, A., & Gorschek, T. (2012). A study investigating challenges in the interface between product development and manufacturing in the development of software intensive automotive systems. International Journal of Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering, 22(7), 965–1004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pernstal, J., Gorschek, T., Florén, D., & Feldt, R. (2013a). Software process improvement in inter-departmental development of software-intensive automotive systems—a case study, Product-focused software process improvement/lecture notes in computer science (Vol. 7983, pp. 93–107). Springer.

  • Pernstal, J., Feldt, J., & Gorschek, T. (2013b). The lean gap: a review of lean approaches to large-scale software systems development. Journal of Systems and Software, 86(11), 2797–2821.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petersen, K., Feldt, R., Mujtaba, S., & Mattsson, M. (2008). Systematic mapping studies in software engineering. In 12th International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering (pp. 71–80).

    Google Scholar 

  • Pettersson, F., Ivarsson, M., Gorschek, T., & Öhman, P. (2008). A practitioner’s guide to light weight software process assessment and improvement planning. The Journal of Systems and Software, 81(6), 972–995.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pino, F., Garcia, F., & Piattini, M. (2008). Software process improvement in small and medium software enterprises: a systematic review. Software Quality Journal, 16(2), 237–261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pino, F. J., Pedreira, O., García, F., Rodríguez Luaces, M., & Piattini, M. (2010). Using Scrum to guide the execution of software process improvement in small organizations. Journal of Systems and Software, 83(10), 1662–1677.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poppendieck, M., & Poppendieck, T. (2003). Lean software development: an agile toolkit. Addison-Wesley.

  • Robson, C. (2002). Real world research: a resource for social scientists and practitioners-researchers (2nd ed.). Blackwell.

  • Runesson, P., & Höst, M. (2009). Guidelines for conducting and reporting case study research in software engineering. Empirical Software Engineering, 14(2), 131–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • SCAMPI-ADT. (2001). Standard CMMI Appraisal Method for Process Improvement (SCAMPI) version 1.1 (CMU/SEI-2001-HB-001) (p. 245). Pittsburgh: Carnegie Mellon SEI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwaber, K., & Beedle, M. (2001). Agile software development with Scrum. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sivie, J., Forrester, E. (2004). Enabling technology transition using Six Sigma. In Bergey, J et al., Results of SEI independent research and development projects and report on emerging technologies and technology trends, (chapter 5) (CMU/SEI-2004-TR-018). Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh. Available on: http://www.sei.cmu.edu/library/abstracts/reports/04tr018.cfm. Accessed on Dec 2016.

  • Sumantran, V. (2004). Accelerating product development in the automobile industry. Int. Journal of Manufacturing Technology and Management, 6(3/4), 361.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Unterkalmsteiner, M., Gorschek, T., Islam, M., Cheng, C., Permadi, R., & Feldt, R. (2012). Evaluation and measurement of software process improvement—a systematic literature review. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 38(2), 398–424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vanden Heuvel, L. N., Lorenzo, D. K., Hanson, W. E., Jackson, L. O., Rooney, J. R., & Walker, D. A. (2008). Root cause analysis handbook—a guide to efficient and effective incident investigation (3rd edn.). ABS Consulting ed.). Houston: Rothstein Associates Inc..

  • Venkatesh Prasad, K., Broy, M., Krueger, I. (2010). Scanning advances in aerospace & automobile software technology. Proc. of the IEEE 2010; 98, 510–514.

  • Volvo Cars. (2016). Available on https://www.media.volvocars.com/global/enhanced/en-gb/Media/Preview.aspx?mediaid=41678. Accessed on Dec. 2017.

  • Volvo Trucks. (2016). Available on: http://www.volvotrucks.com/trucks/global/en-gb/newsmedia/quick_facts_about_volvo_trucks/pages/quick_facts_about_volvo_trucks.aspx . Accessed on Dec. 2017.

  • Wangenheim, C. G., Weber, S., Rossa Hauck, J. C., & Trentin, G. (2006). Experiences on establishing software processes in small companies. Information and Software Technology, 48(9), 890–900.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wheelwright, S. C., & Clark, K. B. (1992). Revolutionizing product development-quantum leaps in speed, efficiency, and quality. New York: Free.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, P. F., Dell, L. D., & Anderson, G. F. (1993). Root cause analysis—a tool for total quality management. Milwaukee: American Society for Quality.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R. (2003). Case study research: design and methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications Inc..

    Google Scholar 

  • Zahran, S. (1998). Software process improvement: practical guidelines for business success. Reading: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to express their gratitude to all those somehow involved in this study and especially the participants at Volvo Cars and Volvo Trucks.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Volvo Cars, SE-405 31, Gothenburg, Sweden

    J. Pernstål & D. Florén

  2. Chalmers University of Technology, SE-412 90, Gothenburg, Sweden

    R. Feldt

  3. Blekinge Institute of Technology, SE-371 79, Karlskrona, Sweden

    T. Gorschek

Authors
  1. J. Pernstål
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. R. Feldt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. T. Gorschek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. D. Florén
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to J. Pernstål.

Appendices

Appendix 1. Structure of the causal variables and root causes and their classification and links to goals

The tree diagram in Fig. 12 shows the structure of the causal variables and root causes, and Table 10 summarizes each root causes’ classification and links to the goals. The goals are described and triangulated in Table 11.

Table 10 Overview of root causes
Full size table
Table 11 Goal triangulation matrix
Full size table

Appendix 2 Questionnaire

The questionnaire consists of two parts and is used to gather feedback on the method used for root cause analysis and to collect issues regarding the communication between R&D and manufacturing. Section A collects background information. In Section B, the root cause analysis method is evaluated through capturing your view of using the method.

figure e

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Pernstål, J., Feldt, R., Gorschek, T. et al. FLEX-RCA: a lean-based method for root cause analysis in software process improvement. Software Qual J 27, 389–428 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11219-018-9408-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11219-018-9408-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation