Abstract
Many methods, techniques, standards and tools exist for controlling software development, but large, complex projects may face extra problems due to continuous, rapid changes during the project life cycle. Such changes must be tracked, analysed, and reconciled to ensure high quality in the end-product; otherwise problems may be lost or ignored in the overall complexity. A large software company needs to develop effective procedures to control their whole organisation's projects; for example to control more than 100 different types of projects at the same time is a big challenge for most large software companies. This paper is a case study on how a large company benefits from using quality assurance processes and quality standards. It provides details of the process engineering system running in Kent Ridge Digital Labs (KRDL). Most of project managers and top directors in KRDL believe that “Good quality software will save millions of dollars!” This paper also highlights the benefits of KRDL being able to handle more than 100 projects at the same time and still provide high quality software.
Similar content being viewed by others
eferences
Hawkins, C., Ross, M., Staples, G., Thompson, J. B. 1998. Process improvement through trainin and education. Proc. SQM'98, British Computer Society.
Jing, M. 1998. Project experience report for the Singapore IT project management certification. Kent Ridge Digital Labs KRDL quality management system.
Li, H. 1998. Project experience report for the Singapore IT project management certification.
Manns, T., and Coleman, M. 1988. Software Quality Assurance, Macmillan Education LTD.
McCarthy, J. 1998. Risk management, April.
IEEE Computer Society. 1996. Workshops on Enabling Technologies: Infrastructure for Collaborative Enterprises. The Concurrent Engineering Research Centre, West Virginia University, June 19–22.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Li, H., Ross, M., King, G. et al. Quality Approaches in a Large Software House. Software Quality Journal 8, 21–35 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008922801973
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008922801973