Software process improvement in a financial organization: An action research approach
Introduction
The software industry is relatively new if compared to other industries, but it is continuously evolving. The quality of software development and maintenance processes is increasingly gaining attention of research and practitioners' communities, as well as the concern with team's management. For some approaches, the quality of a software product is mainly related to the process used to build it [1]. A software development process defines who is doing what, when and how, in order to achieve an established goal [2].
Kruchten, in [3], states that building and maintaining software is difficult and building quality software in a repeatable and predictable way is even more difficult. An effective process provides guidance to develop software with consistent quality [2]. Li and Lin, in [4], state that the information quality contributes positively to customers' satisfaction and also to the quality of business partnerships. The consequence of having information with quality has a direct impact on the decision making process of a variety of business reflecting all levels of the organizational management [5]. Watts Humphrey, in [6], justifies the need to strongly consider the human aspects because the most important asset of an organization that produces software is talented people.
Section snippets
Software processes
A software process is considered here as a necessary element for developing quality software [1] and is used as basis for implementing and evolving the way team works and conceives software products.
It is important to define a robust software process that produces quality software. Furthermore, it is important to deal with human interaction to ensure software quality too [7]. More than two decades ago, Schlesinger and Heskett [8] have stated that managers are “often resigned to the possibility
Research methodology
The goal of this research project was to define a new process that was able to increase software quality and the motivation of the technical people of a global financial institution.
Taking into account the characteristics of the research, the selected method was the Action-Research method, as described in [19]. This choice was made once the research has:
- •
Focus on research in action, rather than research about action: researchers work to solve organizational problems along with those who
Preliminary phase: context and purpose
This preliminary phase aimed at identifying the research context and purpose. This work took place within one of the teams of a financial company, which has more than ten thousand employees working directly with IT, placed in several centers around the world. The addressed team, like all others, follows the development method defined by the company worldwide, but the way each team works with the method, as a workflow, can be tailored to address their characteristics.
Up to the year 2010 every
First improvement cycle
The first improvement cycle used the phases proposed by the Action-Research method: data gathering, data feedback, data analysis, action planning, implementation and evaluation.
Second improvement cycle
The second improvement cycle had also followed the phases proposed by the Action-Research method, but had less emphasis on the data gathering, data feedback, and data analysis phases because the main focus was on the action planning, implementation and evaluation. In this last phase of the second cycle, when the second evaluation was performed, an extensive survey was conducted with the greater majority of the team members, from where it was possible to depict many characteristics of both
Detailed evaluation result discussion
As previously presented, each factor of the software process improvement was addressed by a question, from F1 to F13, and the analysis considering the results individually and grouped is discussed below. The three aspects for each factor were considered (minimum acceptable level, maximum desirable level and perceived level), providing more information to help the authors and one member of the team to demonstrate the grades, whenever possible, and to map the results with the issues found during
Final discussion and conclusions
The first attempt to change the process incorrectly meant that each cell was responsible only by their own activities. Once the activities assigned to the cell were finished, the level of commitment decreased and they felt they were no longer responsible for the overall success of the project. This was not the original intention, and it has changed on the second process. Several meetings were conducted to change this vision and to make clear that every member is responsible for the project
Andressa Ianzen has a Bachelor's degree in Information Systems and Master's in Informatics at the Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Paraná. She is a system analyst at HSBC Bank Brasil S.A and has experience in computer science, software engineering, systems development, and processes.
References (26)
- et al.
Accessing information sharing and information quality in supply chain management
Decision Support Systems
(2006) - et al.
A framework for evaluation and prediction of software process improvement success
Journal of Systems and Software
(2001) - et al.
Capability Maturity Model for Software: Guidelines for Improving the Software Process
(1994) - et al.
The Unified Software Development Process
(1999) The Rational Unified Process — An Introduction
(2000)- et al.
Information quality attributes associated with RFID-derived benefits in the retail supply chain
International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
(2007) A Discipline for Software Engineering
(1995)- et al.
Defect prevention activities and tools
- et al.
Breaking the cycle of failure in services
Sloan Management Review
(1991) International Organization For Standardization/International Electrotechnical Commission
ISO/IEC FDIS 26550: Software and Systems Engineering — Reference Model for Product Line Engineering and Management
(2013)
Model-driven development of complex software: a research roadmap
The Chaos Report
The True Cost of a Project
Cited by (11)
Building a hierarchical structure model of enablers that affect the software process improvement in software SMEs—A mixed method approach
2019, Computer Standards and InterfacesCitation Excerpt :It has also been observed that in recent year's software SMEs have emerged very swiftly and in most developing economies, the sector is dominated by small and young enterprises [3,4]. So, the only way to contribute to the success of projects is to define, implement and stabilize the development processes [5]. The challenges and advances in software engineering field have inspired the development of a myriad of software process improvement (SPI) frameworks ranging from traditional plan-driven to modern lean agile based frameworks.
Adopting integrated application lifecycle management within a large-scale software company: An action research approach
2019, Journal of Systems and SoftwareCitation Excerpt :In our study, we explicitly discuss the state before and after the ALM adoption to discuss the benefits. In general, there are a few action research studies in software engineering, the ones related to our study are the ones that are mostly Software Process improvement studies (Iversen et al., 2004; Ianzen et al., 2013; Serour and Henderson-Sellers, 2005; Bjarnason et al., 2012; Grant, 2012). Serour and Henderson-Sellers (2005) investigated the effect of human behavioral patterns during the organizational transition to object-oriented software development process covering a two-year period.
A process capability based assessment model for software workforce in emergent software organizations
2015, Computer Standards and InterfacesCitation Excerpt :Software process improvement frameworks enable software organizations to identify opportunities for improving the processes as well as establishing road maps for improvement [7]. However, software process improvement practice showed us again and again that to achieve a sustained, leveraged state, software organizations need to focus on people more than anything else [8–11]. Software process improvement frameworks address the people dimension indirectly through processes.
Action research applied to the management and engineering research. A literature review for Ibero-America
2022, Revista Venezolana de GerenciaSurvey to analyze the needs with respect to the deployment process of SMEs in Argentina
2021, CIbSE 2021 - XXIV Ibero-American Conference on Software EngineeringA Case Study to Validate Feasibility of Risk Proposal in the Deployment Process of Software Systems
2021, Communications in Computer and Information Science
Andressa Ianzen has a Bachelor's degree in Information Systems and Master's in Informatics at the Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Paraná. She is a system analyst at HSBC Bank Brasil S.A and has experience in computer science, software engineering, systems development, and processes.
Everson Carlos Mauda has a Bachelor's degree in Computer Science and Master's in Informatics at Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Paraná and has an experience in computer science, software engineering, reuse, component certification, and object-oriented languages.
Marco Antônio Paludo has a Bachelor's degree in Computer Science and Master's in Informatics at Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Paraná and has an experience in computer science, software engineering, software process improvement, software quality, components, and modeling.
Sheila Reinehr has a Bachelor's degree in Mechanical Engineering, Master's in Informatics and Doctorate in Engineering. Professor at Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Paraná and has an experience in computer science, software engineering, software process improvement, software quality, project management, software product lines, and metrics.
Andreia Malucelli has a Bachelor's degree in Informatics, Master's in Electrical Engineering and Doctorate in Electrical and Computing Engineering. He is a professor at Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Paraná and has an experience in computer science, software engineering, artificial intelligence, organizational learning, ontologies, multiagent systems and healthcare information systems.