Fandi Gunawan
ABSTRACT
A good software process improves software products. In the case of a small software company, software development is a matter of survivability due to its limited resources to develop software. XYZ Company is a very small software company that adopted Kanban and DevOps and faced software delivery delays. It is necessary to recommend the software process improvements to solve this problem. Software process improvements are the outcomes of measurement and analysis of maturity levels using the ISO 29110 framework in a qualitative study. They are then analyzed using the Lean Six Sigma tools, namely gap analysis, root cause analysis, and Pareto analysis. Delphi method validated them and resulted in 18 improvement recommendations within four domains, namely (a) product, (b) people, (c) technology, and (d) process. The improvements span across two main processes within software development, namely (a) Project Management (PM) and (b) Software Implementation (SI). The XYZ Company or any agile-based software company could adopt the 18 improvement recommendations to enhance the software process and quality.
- Muhammad Ovais Ahmad, Jouni Markkula, and Markku Oivo. 2013. Kanban in software development: A systematic literature review. Proc. - 39th Euromicro Conf. Ser. Softw. Eng. Adv. Appl. SEAA 2013 (2013), 9–16. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1109/SEAA.2013.28Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Margarita André, María G. Baldoquín, and Silvia T. Acuña. 2011. Formal model for assigning human resources to teams in software projects. Inf. Softw. Technol.53, 3 (2011), 259–275. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2010.11.011Google ScholarDigital Library
- Jiju Antony, S Vinodh, and E.V Gijo. 2016. Lean Six Sigma for small and medium sized enterprises: A practical guide. CRC Press, Bota Rotan, FL.Google Scholar
- Jacob Diebold, Philipp Diebold, and Arthur Vetter. 2018. Agile meets assessments: Case study on how to do agile process improvement in a very small enterprise. Lect. Notes Comput. Sci. (including Subser. Lect. Notes Artif. Intell. Lect. Notes Bioinformatics)11271 LNCS, (2018), 31–47. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-03673-7_3Google Scholar
- Christof Ebert, Gorka Gallardo, Josune Hernantes, and Nicolas Serrano. 2016. DevOps. IEEE Softw.33, 3 (May 2016), 94–100. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1109/MS.2016.68Google ScholarDigital Library
- Asmaa H. Elsaid, Rashed K. Salem, and Hatem M. Abdelkader. 2019. Proposed framework for planning software releases using fuzzy rule-based system. IET Softw.13, 6 (2019), 543–554. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1049/iet-sen.2018.5047Google ScholarDigital Library
- S Galvan, M Mora, R V O'Connor, F Acosta, and F Alvarez. 2015. A Compliance Analysis of Agile Methodologies with the ISO/IEC 29110 Project Management Process. In Procedia Computer Science, Elsevier BV, 188–195. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2015.08.480Google Scholar
- Christian Printzell Halvorsen and Reidar Conradi. 2001. A taxonomy to compare SPI frameworks. Lect. Notes Comput. Sci. (including Subser. Lect. Notes Artif. Intell. Lect. Notes Bioinformatics)2077, (2001), 217–235. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45752-6_17Google Scholar
- Hana Rizky Herdika and Eko K Budiardjo. 2020. Variability and Commonality Requirement Specification on Agile Software Development: In2020 3rd International Conference on Computer and Informatics Engineering (IC2IE), 323–329.Google Scholar
- Romana Vajde Horvat, Ivan Rozman, and Jozsef Gyorkos. 2000. Managing the complexity of SPI in small companies. Softw. Process Improv. Pract.5, 1 (2000), 45–54. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1002/(sici)1099-1670(200003)5:1<45::aid-spip110>3.0.co;2-2Google ScholarCross Ref
- Q Hu, R Mason, S J Williams, and P Found. 2015. Lean implementation within SMEs: A literature review. J. Manuf. Technol. Manag.26, 7 (2015), 980–1012. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1108/JMTM-02-2014-0013Google ScholarCross Ref
- Muzaffar Iqbal and Muhammad Rizwan. 2009. Application of 80/20 rule in software engineering Waterfall Model. 2009 Int. Conf. Inf. Commun. Technol. ICICT 2009Author 1 (2009), 223–228. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1109/ICICT.2009.5267186Google ScholarCross Ref
- ISO. 2015. ISO/IEC 29110-3:2015 Systems and Software Engineering - Lifecycle Profiles for Very Small Entities (VSEs) - Part 3-1: Assessment Guide. Geneva, Switzerland.Google Scholar
- ISO. 2015. ISO/IEC 33002:2015 Information technology - Process assessment - Requirements for performing process assessment. Geneva, Switzerland.Google Scholar
- ISO. 2019. ISO 9000 Family - Quality Management. ISO 9000 Family - Quality Management.Google Scholar
- Marco Kuhrmann and Juergen Muench. 2019. SPI is dead, isn't it? Clear the stage for continuous learning! Proc. - 2019 IEEE/ACM Int. Conf. Softw. Syst. Process. ICSSP 2019 (2019), 9–13. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSSP.2019.00012Google ScholarDigital Library
- P Lohier and P Rodríguez Dapena. 2018. Yes, very small organizations in the IT sector can benefit from being recognized internationally. In2018 11th International Conference on the Quality of Information and Communications Technology (QUATIC), 8–14. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1109/QUATIC.2018.00012Google Scholar
- Irfan Ridwan Maksum, Amy Yayuk Sri Rahayu, and Dhian Kusumawardhani. 2020. A social enterprise approach to empowering micro, small and medium enterprises (SMEs) in Indonesia. J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex.6, 3 (2020). DOI:https://doi.org/10.3390/JOITMC6030050Google Scholar
- Jack T. Marchewka. 2015. Information technology project management: Providing measurable organizational value (5th ed.). Wiley, Hoboken, NJ.Google Scholar
- Gurpreet Singh Matharu, Anju Mishra, Harmeet Singh, and Priyanka Upadhyay. 2015. Empirical Study of Agile Software Development Methodologies. ACM SIGSOFT Softw. Eng. Notes 40, 1 (2015), 1–6. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/2693208.2693233Google ScholarDigital Library
- Juliana Medeiros, Alexandre Vasconcelos, Carla Silva, and Miguel Goulão. 2020. Requirements specification for developers in agile projects: Evaluation by two industrial case studies. Inf. Softw. Technol.117, (2020), 106194. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2019.106194Google ScholarDigital Library
- Apinporn Methawachananont, Marut Buranarach, Pakaimart Amsuriya, Sompol Chaimongkhon, Kamthorn Krairaksa, and Thepchai Supnithi. 2020. Software process capability self-assessment support system based on task and work product characteristics: A case study of ISO/IEC 29110 standard. IEICE Trans. Inf. Syst.E103D, 2 (2020), 339–347. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1587/transinf.2018EDP7303Google ScholarCross Ref
- Mirna Muñoz, Jezreel Mejia, and Claude Y. Laporte. 2020. Implementing ISO/IEC 29110 to reinforce four very small entities of Mexico under an agile approach. IET Softw.14, 2 (2020), 75–81. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1049/iet-sen.2019.0040Google ScholarDigital Library
- Chitu Okoli and Suanne D. Pawlowski. 2004. The Delphi method as a research tool: An example, design considerations and applications. Inf. Manag.42, 1 (2004), 15–29. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2003.11.002Google ScholarDigital Library
- Christophe Ponsard and Jean-Christophe Deprez. 2018. Helping SMEs to Better Develop Software: Experience Report and Challenges Ahead. In Proceedings of the 40th International Conference on Software Engineering: Software Engineering in Practice (ICSE-SEIP '18), ACM, New York, NY, USA, 213–214. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/3183519.3183553Google ScholarDigital Library
- Roger S. Pressman and Bruce R Maxim. 2019. Software engineering: A practitioner's approach (9th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education, New York, NY.Google Scholar
- Mikko Raatikainen, Juha Tiihonen, and Tomi Männistö. 2019. Software product lines and variability modeling: A tertiary study. J. Syst. Softw.149, (2019), 485–510. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2018.12.027Google Scholar
- Muhammad Rizwan and Muzaffar Iqbal. 2011. Application of 80/20 rule in software engineering Rapid Application Development (RAD) model. Commun. Comput. Inf. Sci.181 CCIS, PART 3 (2011), 518–532. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-22203-0_45Google Scholar
- Johnny Saldaña. 2014. The coding manual for qualitative researchers (2nd ed.). SAGE, London. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/s13398-014-0173-7.2Google Scholar
- Mary-Luz Sánchez-Gordón and Rory V O'Connor. 2016. Understanding the gap between software process practices and actual practice in very small companies. Softw. Qual. J.24, 3 (2016), 549–570. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/s11219-015-9282-6Google ScholarDigital Library
- Ken Schwaber and Jeff Sutherland. 2020. The Definitive Guide to Scrum: The Rules of the Game. Retrieved from https://www.scrumguides.org/docs/scrumguide/v2020/2020-Scrum-Guide-US.pdfGoogle Scholar
- D. Shoemaker, C. Woody, and N. R. Mead. 2016. Advances in software engineering and software assurance. In Advances in Computers. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.adcom.2016.05.001Google Scholar
- Ian Sommerville. 2016. Software engineering (10th ed.). Pearson Education, Essex.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Srijith Sreenivasan and Krishnamurthy Kothandaraman. 2019. Improving processes by aligning Capability Maturity Model Integration and the Scaled Agile Framework®. Glob. Bus. Organ. Excell.38, 6 (2019), 42–51. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1002/joe.21966Google ScholarCross Ref
- Timo Varkoi. 2010. Process assessment in very small entities - An ISO/IEC 29110 based method. In2010 Seventh International Conference on the Quality of Information and Communications Technology, IEEE, 436–440. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1109/QUATIC.2010.80Google ScholarDigital Library
Index Terms
- A Quest of Software Process Improvements in DevOps and Kanban:: A Case Study in Small Software Company
Index terms have been assigned to the content through auto-classification.
Recommendations
CMMI guided process improvement for DevOps projects: an exploratory case study
ICSSP '16: Proceedings of the International Conference on Software and Systems ProcessVery recently, an increasing number of software companies adopted DevOps to adapt themselves to the ever-changing business environment. While it is important to mature adoption of the DevOps for these companies, no dedicated maturity models for DevOps ...
The kanban approach, between agility and leanness: a systematic review
The interest in lean product development in general and the Kanban approach in particular has increased over the years. However, practitioners, in the software development field, have significant challenges in implementing the Kanban approach as it ...
Agile and Kanban in Coordination
AGILE '11: Proceedings of the 2011 Agile ConferenceIterative development and Kanban are not mutually exclusive competing methodologies, in essence they are complementary processes that when used together can facilitate higher performance in large development teams. This paper is a walkthrough of the ...
Comments