Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Towards a capability and maturity model for Collaborative Software-as-a-Service

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Innovations in Systems and Software Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) has been attracting providers and customers due to the facilities of cloud computing and the outsourcing of IT solutions. SaaS market and related business models are receiving more attention and becoming more mature, which have given rise to other emerging approaches. One of them refers to a more intense software services sharing when companies work in strategic alliances aiming at creating new software products or enhancing existing ones in different compositions. Working collaboratively at business level requires many changes in the way companies develop their software and share them as assets with each other. As companies use to be very different to each other, one way to leverage such type of collaboration is via software improvement models. The main premise is that resulting joint software is trustworthy enough if services are developed following good practices and reference models. However, current reference models and available standards are essentially oriented to traditional software development, not covering services-based developments at all. This paper presents a capability and maturity model for software process improvement in the so-called Collaborative SaaS as an attempt to cope with this gap. The developed model corresponds to a repository of the best practices to services development processes and collaboration, and it was developed based on well-known models and standards. The initial evaluation of the model by specialists raised evidences that the model is quite suitable and comprehensive to support and boost collaboration between SaaS/services providers and it can improve the confidence in the quality of the involved services when developers and customers access the developed SaaS-based software solution.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Raw data available at: http://bit.ly/2PebxfQ.

References

  1. Kourtesis D, Ramollari E, Dranidis D, Paraskakis I (2008) Discovery and selection of certified web services through registry-based testing and verification. In: Camarinha-Matos LM, Picard W (eds) Pervasive collaborative networks. PRO-VE 2008. IFIP - The international federation for information processing, vol 283. Springer, Boston, MA, pp 473–482

    Google Scholar 

  2. Yoo Y, Lyytinen K, Boland RJ (2008) Distributed innovation in classes of networks. In: 41st Hawaii international conference on system sciences, pp 58–58

  3. Anderson C (2006) The long tail: why the future of business is selling less of more. Hyperion Books, New York

    Google Scholar 

  4. Gansky L (2010) The Mesh: why the future of business is sharing. Penguin, London

    Google Scholar 

  5. Delgado A (2015) QoS modeling and automatic generation from SoaML service models for business process execution, services computing (SCC). In: IEEE international conference, pp 522–529

  6. Wahlster W, Grallert H-J, Wess S, Friedrich H, Widenka T (2014) Towards the internet of services: the THESEUS research program. Springer Publishing Company, incorporated 480 ISBN: 3319067540, 9783319067544

  7. Höfer CN, Karagiannis G (2011) Cloud computing services: taxonomy and comparison. J Internet Serv Appl 2(2):81–94

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Proano Orellana J, Caminero MB, Carrion C (2014) On the provision of SaaS-level quality of service within heterogeneous private clouds. In: 2014 IEEE/ACM 7th international conference on utility and cloud computing (UCC), 2014, 8–11 December, pp 146–155

  9. Laplante PA, Zhang J, Voas J (2008) What’s in a name? Distinguishing between SaaS and SOA. IT Prof 10(3):46–50

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Junjie P (2009) Comparison of several cloud computing platforms. In: Xuejun Z, Zhou L et al (eds) Information Science and Engineering (ISISE), China, pp 23–27

  11. Sun L, Singh J, Hussain OK (2012) Service level agreement (SLA) assurance for cloud services: a survey from a transactional risk perspective. In: Proceedings of the 10th international conference on advances in mobile computing multimedia. ACM, Bali, Indonesia, pp 263–266

  12. Dumas M, Rosa ML, Mendling J, Reijers HA (2013) Fundamentals of business process management. Springer Publishing Company, incorporated, 426 ISBN: 3642331424, 9783642331428

  13. Bishop J (2007) Increasing participation in online communities: a framework for human–computer interaction. Comput Hum Behav 23(4):1881–1893

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Briscoe G, De Wilde P (2006) Digital ecosystems: evolving service-oriented architectures. In: Suda T, Tschudin C (eds) Proceedings conference on bio inspired models of network, information and computing systems. IEEXplore, pp 1–6

  15. Cancian MH, Rabelo R, Von Wangenheim CG (2015) Collaborative business processes for enhancing partnerships among software services providers. Enterp Inf Syst 9:1–26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Wattal S, Kumar A (2014) Cloud computing: an emerging trend in information technology. In: 2014 international conference on issues and challenges in intelligent computing techniques (ICICT), 2014, 7–8 February, pp 168–173

  17. Papazoglou MP (2012) Web services and SOA, principles and technology, 2nd edn. Pearson Education, London, p 812

    Google Scholar 

  18. Fiammante M (2010) Dynamic SOA and BPM: best practices for business process management and SOA agility. IBM Press, Indianapolis

    Google Scholar 

  19. Erickson J, Siau K (2008) Web services, service oriented computing and service oriented architecture: separating hype from reality. J Database Manag 19(3):42–54

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Schönherr M (2004) Connecting EAI-domains via SOA: central vs. distributed approaches to establish flexible architectures. In: Bernus P, Fox M (eds) Knowledge sharing in the integrated enterprise. Springer, Berlin, pp 111–113

    Google Scholar 

  21. Krafzig D, Banke K, Slama D (2006) Enterprise SOA. Service-oriented architecture best practices. Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River

    Google Scholar 

  22. OASIS (2012) Reference architecture foundation for service oriented architecture version 1.0 committee specification 01., OASIS, Burlington, MA

  23. Cestari JMAP, Loures EFR, Santos EAP, Panetto H (2019) A capability model for public administration interoperability. Enterp Inf Syst. https://doi.org/10.1080/17517575.2018.1564154

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Chou T (2005) The end of software: transforming your business for the on-demand future. SAMS, Carmel

    Google Scholar 

  25. Greer MB (2009) Software as a service inflection point: using cloud computing to achieve business agility. iUniverse, Bloomington

    Google Scholar 

  26. Erl T, Utschig-Utschig C, Maier B, Normann H (2014) Next generation SOA: a real-world guide to modern service-oriented computing. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River

    Google Scholar 

  27. Gu Q, Lago P (2009) On service-oriented architectural concerns and viewpoints. In: Proceedings of European conference on software architecture. IEEExplore, Los Alamitos, CA, pp 289–292

  28. Saunders MNK, Lewis P, Thornhill A (2009) Research methods for business students, 5th edn. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River

    Google Scholar 

  29. Camarinha-Matos LM, Afsarmanesh H (2004) The emerging discipline of collaborative networks. In: Camarinha-Matos LM (ed) Virtual enterprises and collaborative networks. PRO-VE 2004. IFIP international federation for information processing, vol 149. Springer, Boston, MA, pp 3–16

    Google Scholar 

  30. Zhiqiang N (2010) Credibility evaluation of SaaS tenants. In: 3rd international conference on advanced computer theory and engineering (ICACTE). IEEE, pp 488–491

  31. Camarinha-Matos L (2005) Afsarmanesh, collaborative networks: a new scientific discipline virtual organizations. Springer, New York, pp 73–80

    Google Scholar 

  32. Camarinha-Matos LM, Afsarmanesh H, Ollus M (2005) Virtual organizations: systems and practices. Springer, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  33. Perin A, Rabelo RJ (2011) Supporting software services discovery and sharing in collaborative networks, PRO-VE 2010: collaborative networks for a sustainable world, pp 685–696

  34. Santanna-Filho J, Rabelo RJ, Pereira-Klen AA, Bernus P, Romero D (2015) Leveraging collaborative innovation in SOA-based software providers’ networks’. In: Proceedings of 21st ICE/IEEE international technology management conference. IEEE Xplore, Los Alamitos, CA, pp 1–9

  35. Rabelo RJ, Costa SN, Romero D (2014) A governance reference model for virtual enterprises. In: Proceedings 15th IFIP working conference on virtual enterprises, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Springer, pp 60–70

  36. Brown W, Laird R, Gee C, Mitra T (2009) SOA governance: achieving and sustaining business and IT agility. IBM Press, Indianapolis

    Google Scholar 

  37. Cancian MH, Rabelo RJ, Teixeira CP (2015) Supporting business processes for collaborative alliances of software service providers, PROVE 2015, Albi, France. In: 6th IFIP working conference on virtual enterprises, vol. 463. Springer International Publishing, France, pp 467–478

  38. Bezerra RO, Rabelo RJ, Cancian MH (2018) Supporting SOA resilience in virtual enterprises, collaborative networks of cognitive systems. In: 19th IFIP WG 5.5 working conference on virtual enterprises, PRO-VE 2018, Cardiff, UK

  39. Hirschheim R, Welke RJ, Schwarz A (2010) Service-oriented architecture: myths, realities, and a maturity model. MIS Q Exec 9(1):37–48

    Google Scholar 

  40. Augustsson NP, Nilsson A, Holmström J, Mathiassen L (2019) Managing digital infrastructures: negotiating control and drift in service provisioning. Int J Bus Inf Syst 30(1):51–78

    Google Scholar 

  41. Munkongsujarit S, Srivannaboon S (2011) Key success factors for open innovation intermediaries for SMEs: a case study of iTAP in Thailand. In: Proceedings of technology management in the energy smart world (PICMET), pp 1–8

  42. Munkongsujarit S, Srivannaboon S (2011) Key success factors for open innovation intermediaries for SMEs: a case study of iTAP in Thailand. In: Proceedings of technology management in the energy smart world (PICMET), pp 1–8

  43. Schwab K (2017) The fourth industrial revolution. World Economic Forum, Cologny

    Google Scholar 

  44. Janner T, Schorth C, Schmid B (2008) Modelling service systems for collaborative innovation in the enterprise software industry—the St. Gallen Media reference model applied. In: IEEE international conference on services computing, pp 145–152

  45. Hoyer V, Christ O (2007) Collaborative e-business process modelling: a holistic analysis framework focused on small and medium-sized enterprises. In: Proceedings of 10th international conference on business information systems. Poznan. Springer, pp 41–53

  46. Li Y, Shen J, Shi J, Shen W, Huang Y, Xu Y (2008) Multi-model driven collaborative development platform for service-oriented e-business systems. Adv Eng Inf 22(3):328–339

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Beecham S, Hall T, Britton C (2005) Using an expert panel to validate a requirements process improvement model. J Syst Softw 76(3):251–275

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Golubi S (2005) Influence of software development process capability on product quality. In: 8th international conference on telecommunications—ConTEL

  49. Knoke B (2013) A short paper on innovation capability maturity within collaborations. In: Knoke B (ed) CAiSE 2013 workshop NGEBIS. Valencia, Spain, pp 7–11

  50. ISO/IEC/IEEE 24765 (2010) Systems and software engineering: vocabulary. https://www.iso.org/standard/50518.html. Accessed 15 Feb 2018

  51. ISO/IEC (2004) International organization for standardization and international electrotechnical commission, ISO/IEC 25000: software engineering: software product quality requirements and evaluation (SQuaRE)

  52. SEI, Software Engineering Institute (SEI), CMMI for Development (CMMI-DEV) (2006) Carnegie Mellon University/Software Engineering Institute. Pittsburgh, p 198. http://www.sei.cmu.edu/reports/10tr033.pdf. Accessed 15 Feb 2018

  53. ISO/IEC, International Organization for Standardization and International Electrotechnical Commission, ISO/IEC 15504-5 (2008) Information technology—process assessment. Genebra

  54. ISO/IEC, International Organization for Standardization and International Electrotechnical Commission, ISO/IEC 12207 (2008) Systems and software engineering—software life cycle processes. New York, p 138

  55. Wangenheim CG, Von Hauck JCR, Salviano CF, Wangenheim AV (2010) Systematic literature review of software process capability/maturity models. In: SPICE conference 2010, vol 1. Pisa/Itália, pp 1–9

  56. Papazoglou MP, Heuvel W-JVD (2006) Service-oriented design and development methodology. Int J Web Eng Technol 2(4):412–442

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Salviano CF, Figueiredo AMCM (2008) Unified basic concepts for process capability models. In: 20th international conference on software engineering and knowledge engineering SEKE, San Francisco, USA, pp 173–178

  58. Tariq A, Khan SA, Iftikhar S (2014) Remapping of CMMI level-2 KPA’s for development process improvement of Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) cloud environment. In: 2014 international conference on open source systems and technologies (ICOSST), 2014. 18–20 December, pp 43–51

  59. Liu J, He W-G, Zhang X-Y, Zhang Y (2012) Research and implementation of power quality unified information platform based on SaaS model. In: 2012 China international conference on electricity distribution (CICED), 2012. 10–14 September, pp 1–6

  60. Pang Xiong W, LI D (2013) Quality model for evaluating SaaS service. In: 2013 fourth international conference on emerging intelligent data and web technologies (EIDWT), 2013. 9–11 September, pp 83–87

  61. Singh S, Chana I (2013) Consistency verification and quality assurance (CVQA) traceability framework for SaaS. In: 2013 IEEE 3rd international advance computing conference (IACC), 2013. 22–23 February, pp 1–6

  62. Sivakumar G, Abrahams F, Hogg K, Hartley J (2010) SOI (service oriented integration) and SIMM: service integration maturity model an analysis. Services (SERVICES-1), pp 178–182

  63. Kamel M, Laborde R, Benzekri A, Barrere FA (2008) Best practices-oriented approach for establishing trust chains within virtual organisations. In: Enterprise distributed object computing conference workshops, pp 167–174

  64. Arsanjani A, Holley K (2006) The service integration maturity model: achieving flexibility in the transformation to SOA. In: IEEE international conference on services computing, 2006. SCC’06, pp 515–530

  65. Min L, Liang-Jie Z, Fengyun L (2010) An insurance model for guaranteeing service assurance, integrity and QoS in cloud computing. In: IEEE international conference on web services (ICWS), pp 584–591

  66. Wei G, Ying W (2009) An incident management model for SaaS application in the IT organization. In: International conference on research challenges in computer science, 2009. ICRCCS’09, pp 137–140

  67. Anaby-Tavor A, Amid D, Sela A, Fisher A, Kuo Z, OU Tie J (2008) Towards a model driven service engineering process. In: IEEE congress on services—part I, 2008, pp 503–510

  68. Cui W, Xu M (2009) Software company process management and process audit research. In: International conference on management and service science, MASS’09, pp 1–4

  69. Narasimhalu AD (2006) RECAMM: a research capability maturity model for managing technological innovations. In: Technology management for the global future, 2006. PICMET 2006, pp 761–766

  70. Tapia RS, Daneva M, Eck PV, Wieringa R (2008) Towards a business-IT aligned maturity model for collaborative networked organizations. In: Proceedings of the 2008 12th enterprise distributed object computing conference workshops. IEEE Computer Society

  71. Santanen E, Kolfschoten G, Golla K (2006) The collaboration engineering maturity model. In: Proceedings of the 39th annual Hawaii international conference on system sciences, vol 01. IEEE Computer Society, pp 16–26

  72. Wangenheim CG, Hauck JCR, McCaffery F, Wangenheum A (2010) Creating software process capability maturity models. IEEE Softw 27(4):92–94

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. Hauck JCR, Wangenheim CGV, Caffery FM, et al (2010) Proposing a knowledge engineering based approach for process capability/maturity models customization. In: EuroSPI—European Systems and Software Process Improvement and Innovation

  74. Wangenheim CG, Hauck JCR, Salviano CF, Wangenheim A (2010) Systematic literature review of software process capability/maturity models. In: SPICE conference 2010, Pisa, Itália

  75. Preston S, Chapman C, Pinfold M, Smith G (2005) Knowledge acquisition for knowledge-based engineering systems. Int J Inf Technol Manag 4(1):1–11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. Kitchenham B (2007) Guidelines for performing systematic literature reviews in software engineering. http://www.cin.ufpe.br/~in1037/leitura/Kitchenham20201020-20tertiary20study.pdf. Accessed 22 Apr 2018

  77. ISO/IEC, International Organization for Standardization and International Electrotechnical Commission, ISO/IEC 15504-7 (2008) Assessment of organizational maturity. Genebra

  78. Rojas EPS, Barros AC, de Azevedo AL, Batocchio A (2012) Business model development for virtual enterprises. In: Camarinha-Matos LM, Xu L, Afsarmanesh H (eds) Collaborative networks in the internet of services. PRO-VE 2012. IFIP advances in information and communication technology, vol 380. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 624–634

    Google Scholar 

  79. Cancian MH, Rabelo RJ, Wangenheim CGV (2013) Supporting processes for collaborative SaaS. Collaborative systems for reindustrialization. Springer, Berlin, pp 183–190

    Book  Google Scholar 

  80. ISO/IEC, International Organization for Standardization and International Electrotechnical Commission, ISO/IEC 15504-2 (2008) Performing an assessment. Genebra

  81. Basili VR, Caldiera G, Rombach HD (1994) The goal question metric approach. Encycl Softw Eng

  82. Cortina JM (1993) What is coefficient alpha? An examination of theory and applications. J Appl Psychol 78(1):98

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank all the participants of the working group for their valuable contribution to this research and also to CAPES Brazilian Agency for Higher Education, under the project PrInt CAPES-UFSC Automation 4.0.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Estacio, Florianópolis, SC, Brazil

    Maiara Heil Cancian

  2. Federal University of Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, SC, Brazil

    Ricardo Jose Rabelo & Jean Carlo Rossa Hauck

Authors
  1. Maiara Heil Cancian
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ricardo Jose Rabelo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jean Carlo Rossa Hauck
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jean Carlo Rossa Hauck.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Cancian, M.H., Rabelo, R.J. & Hauck, J.C.R. Towards a capability and maturity model for Collaborative Software-as-a-Service. Innovations Syst Softw Eng 16, 245–261 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11334-020-00360-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11334-020-00360-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation