Your browser does not support JavaScript!
http://iet.metastore.ingenta.com
1887

Efficient software review process for small and medium enterprises

Efficient software review process for small and medium enterprises

For access to this article, please select a purchase option:

Buy article PDF
£12.50
(plus tax if applicable)
Add to cart
Buy Knowledge Pack
10 articles for £75.00
(plus taxes if applicable)
Add to cart

IET members benefit from discounts to all IET publications and free access to E&T Magazine. If you are an IET member, log in to your account and the discounts will automatically be applied.

Learn more about IET membership 

Recommend Title Publication to library

You must fill out fields marked with: *

Librarian details
Name:*
Email:*
Your details
Name:*
Email:*
Department:*
Why are you recommending this title?
Select reason:
 
 
 
 
 
IET Software — Recommend this title to your library

Thank you

Your recommendation has been sent to your librarian.

© The Institution of Engineering and Technology
Published

A considerable amount of software is produced world-wide by small and medium enterprises (SMEs). These organisations do not have enough resources to implement a rigorous quality plan. It has been established that reviews of various artifacts play a very important role in ensuring the quality of software. Traditional review methods are rigorous and their implementation is cumbersome for SMEs. A new review process which is easy to implement and requires almost no documentation is introduced. It is based on reviewers' efforts to produce high-quality software while minimising the inspection cost. Additionally, people who are conducting this review need not be present at the same place during most phases of the review process. This process has been successfully implemented in a CMM level 3 software development company intending to achieve CMMI level 5 and results are found to be quite encouraging.

Inspec keywords: software quality; business data processing

Other keywords: software review process; medium enterprises; small enterprises; CMM level 3 software development company; inspection cost; software quality

Subjects: Business and administrative computing; Software management; Software engineering techniques

References

    1. 1)
      • C. Gresse , T. Punter , A. Anacleto . (2003) Software measurement for small and medium enterprises – A Brazilian–German view on extending the GQM method.
    2. 2)
      • McCarthy, P., Porter, A., Siy, H., Votta, L.G.: `An experiment to assess cost-benefits of inspection meetings and their alternatives: a pilot study', Proc. Int. Metrics Symp., 1996, IEEE CS Press, Berlin, p. 100–111.
    3. 3)
      • C.K. Tyran , J.F. George . Improving software inspections with group process support. Commun. ACM , 87 - 92
    4. 4)
      • P. McBreen . (2003) Quality assurance and testing in agile projects.
    5. 5)
      • J.C. Knight , E.A. Myers . An improved inspection technique. Commun. ACM , 11 , 51 - 61
    6. 6)
    7. 7)
      • Ballman, K., Votta, L.G.: `Organizational congestion in large-scale software development', Proc. 3rd Int. Conf. on the Software Process Applying the Software Process, 1994, IEEE CS Press, p. 23–34.
    8. 8)
      • L.P.W. Land , R. Jeffery , C. Saucer . (1997) Validating the defect detection performance of group designs for software reviews: Report of a replicated experiment.
    9. 9)
      • J. Miller , F. MacDonald , J. Ferguson . ASSISTing management decisions in the software inspection process. J. Inf. Technol. Manage. , 67 - 83
    10. 10)
      • P. Johnson . An instrumented approach to improving software quality through formal technical review.
    11. 11)
      • G.W. Russel . (1991) Experience with inspection in ultra large-scale developments.
    12. 12)
      • D.W. Parnas , D.M. Weiss . (1989) Active design review.
    13. 13)
      • C. Sauer , R.D. Jaffery , L. Land , P. Yetton . The effectiveness of software development technical reviews: a behaviorally motivated program of research. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. , 1 , 1 - 14
    14. 14)
      • R.S. Pressman . (2002) Software engineering–a practitioner's approach.
    15. 15)
      • ISO/IES 9126: ‘Information technology – software product evaluation – quality characteristics and guidelines for their use’. International Organisation for Standardisation, 1991.
    16. 16)
      • O'Neill, D.: `National software quality experiment: results 1992–1996', Proc. Quality Week Europe Conf., 1997, Brussels, p. 1–25.
    17. 17)
      • F. MacDonald , J. Miller . A comparison of tool-based and paper-based software inspection. Empirical Softw. Eng. , 233 - 253
    18. 18)
      • A.A. Porter , P.M. Johnson . Assessing software review meetings: results of a comparative analysis of two experimental studies. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. , 3 , 129 - 145
    19. 19)
      • P.M. Johnson , D. Tjahjono . (1993) CSRS users guide.
    20. 20)
      • `IEEE Standard for Software Reviews and Audits (IEEE STD 1028-1997)', , 1997.
    21. 21)
      • `IEEE Standard for Software Reviews and Audits (IEEE STD 1028-1988)', , 1988.
    22. 22)
      • T. Gilb , D. Graham . (1993) Software inspection.
    23. 23)
      • F. MacDonald . (1995) A review of tool support for software inspection’. In software manage. network.
    24. 24)
      • L. Tripp , W. Struck , B. Pflung . (1991) The application of multiple team inspections on a safety-critical software standard.
    25. 25)
      • G.M. Schneider , J. Martin , W.T. Tsai . An experimental study of fault detection in user requirements documents. ACM Trans. Softw. Eng. , 2 , 188 - 204
    26. 26)
      • Votta, L.G.: `Does every inspection need a meeting?', Proc. 1st ACM SIGSOFT Symp. on the Foundations of Software Engineering, 1993, p. 107–114.
    27. 27)
      • (2001) Quality and productivity of the Brasilian software sector (in Portuguese).
    28. 28)
      • D.A. Wheeler , B. Brykczynski , R.N. Meeson . (1996) Software inspection: an industry best practice.
    29. 29)
      • T.C. Jones . (1986) Programming productivity.
    30. 30)
      • W. Humphrey . (1989) Managing the software process.
    31. 31)
      • D. Galin . (2004) Software quality assurance, from theory to implementation.
    32. 32)
      • D.B. Bisant , J.R. Lyle . A two-person inspection method to improve programming productivity. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. , 10 , 1294 - 1304
    33. 33)
      • Laitenberger, O., Dreyer, H.M.: `Evaluating the usefulness and the ease of use of a Web-based inspection data collection tool', Proc. 5th Int. Software Metrics Symp., 1998, p. 122–132.
    34. 34)
      • M. Fagan . Design and code inspections to reduce errors in program development. IBM Syst. J. , 3 , 182 - 211
    35. 35)
      • D.L. Parnas , M. Lawford . Inspection's’ role in software quality assurance. IEEE Softw. , 4 , 16 - 20
http://iet.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1049/iet-sen_20070011
Loading

Related content

content/journals/10.1049/iet-sen_20070011
pub_keyword,iet_inspecKeyword,pub_concept
6
6
Loading
Print this page
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address