Skip to main content
Log in

An integrated strategy to systematically understand and manage quality in use for web applications

  • Quality RE for Sys. & Architecting
  • Published:
Requirements Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The main goal in evaluating software quality is to ultimately improve its quality. In this work, we discuss SIQinU (Strategy for Improving Quality in Use), a six-phased evaluation-driven strategy for understanding and improving software quality requirements in a systematic way. Starting with quality in use (QinU), we design specific user tasks and context of use, and through identifying problems in QinU, we determine external quality (EQ) attributes that could be related to these QinU weakly performing indicators. Then, after deriving EQ attributes related to the QinU problems, we evaluate EQ and derive a benchmark to be used as a basis to make improvements. Once improvement recommendations are made based on poorly performing EQ indicators, a new version of the software application is completed and evaluated again for its EQ to establish a delta from the initial benchmark. Then, we re-evaluate QinU to determine the improvements resulting in QinU from the improvements made at the EQ level, thus leading to a cyclic strategy for improvement and development of relationships. SIQinU is a repeatable and consistent strategy which relies on: a conceptual framework (with ontological base), a process, and specific methods. In order to illustrate SIQinU, a real case study is conducted.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

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
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Abran A, Surya W, Khelifi A, Rilling J, Seffah A, Robert F (2003) Consolidating the ISO usability models. In: Proceedings of the 11th annual international software quality management conference

  2. Bachmann F, Bass L, Klein M, Shelton C (2005) Designing software architectures to achieve quality attribute requirements. IEE Proc Softw 152(4):153–165

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Basili V, Lindvall M, Regardie M, Seaman C, Heidrich J, Munch J, Rombach D, Trendowicz A (2010) Linking software development and business strategy through measurement. IEEE Comput 43(4):57–65

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Becker P, Molina H, Olsina L (2010) Measurement and evaluation as quality driver. In: Journal ISI (Ingénierie des Systèmes d’Information), special issue “quality of information systems”, Lavoisier, Paris, 15(6), pp 33–62

  5. Becker P, Lew P, Olsina L (2011) Strategy to improve quality for software applications: a process view. In: ACM proceedings of the international conference of software and system process (ICSSP), Honolulu, Hawaii, USA, pp 129–138

  6. Bevan N (2009) Extending quality in use to provide a framework for usability measurement. In: Proceedings of HCI international 2009. San Diego, CA, USA

  7. Bevan N, Bohomolni I (2000) Incorporating user quality requirements in the software development process. In: Proceedings of 4th international software quality week Europe, Brussels, pp 1192–1204

  8. Brambilla M, Comai S, Fraternali P, Matera M (2008) Designing web applications with webml and webratio. In: Rossi G, Pastor O, Schwabe D, Olsina L (eds) Web engineering: modeling and implementing web applications, HCIS, Chap. 9. Springer, London, pp 221–262

  9. Burton M, Walther J (2001) The value of web log data in use-based design and testing. J Comput Mediat Commun 6(3):1563–1578

    Google Scholar 

  10. Cappiello C, Daniel F, Matera M (2009) A quality model for mashup components. In: Proceedings of the international congress on web engineering ICWE ‘09, San Sebastian, Spain, pp 236–250

  11. Chung L, Nixon BA, Yu E (1995) Using non-functional requirements to systematically support change. In: Proceedings of the 2nd IEEE international symposium on requirements engineering (RE), York, England, pp 132–139

  12. Chung L, Nixon BA, Yu E, Mylopoulos J (2000) Non-functional requirements in software engineering. Kluwer, Dodrecht

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Chung L, Supakkul S (2004) Representing NFRs and FRs: a goal-oriented and use case driven approach. In: Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on software engineering research, management and applications (SERA04), pp 29–41

  14. Chung L, Supakkul S (2006) Capturing and reusing functional and non-functional requirements knowledge: a goal-object pattern approach. In: Proceedings of IEEE international conference on information reuse and integration (IRI), pp 539–544

  15. Covella G, Olsina L (2006) Assessing quality in use in a consistent way. In: ACM proceedings of the international congress on web engineering, (ICWE ‘06), SF, USA, pp 1–8

  16. Ginige A, Murugesan S (2001) Web engineering: an introduction. IEEE Multimed 8(1):14–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Hassenzahl M (2008) User experience: towards an experiential perspective on product quality, IHM; V.339. In: Proceedings of the 20th international conference of the assoc. francophone d’interaction homme-machine, pp 11–15

  18. ISO 13407 (1998) User centred design process for interactive systems

  19. ISO/IEC FDIS 25010 (2010) Systems and software engineering. Systems and software quality requirements and evaluation (SQuaRE). System and software quality models

  20. ISO/IEC 25012 (2008) Software engineering: software product quality requirements and evaluation (SQuaRE): data quality model

  21. Lew P, Olsina L, Zhang L (2010) Quality, quality in use, actual usability and user experience as key drivers for web application evaluation. In: Proceedings of the LNCS 6189, Springer, 10th international congress on web engineering (ICWE2010), Vienne, Austria, pp 218–232

  22. Lew P (2010) An integrated strategy to understand and improve quality in use (SIQinU) for web applications, BUAA, school of computer science, Beijing, China, 2010, Doctoral thesis accessed by 05 Apr 2011 at: https://www.docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=explorer&chrome=true&srcid=0BxPtYtkeyfgMZDNmZGYzMmUtYzg2ZS00NDUwLTk5YWEtM2UyYjFjNjMxNmQw&hl=en&authkey=CJGzuYIP

  23. Molina H, Papa F, Martín M, Olsina L (2004) Semantic capabilities for the metrics and indicators cataloging web system; engineering advanced web applications. Rinton Press, NJ, pp 97–109

    Google Scholar 

  24. Moraga MA, Bertoa MF, Morcillo MC, Calero C, Vallecillo A (2008) Evaluating quality-in-use using bayesian networks. In Proceedings of QAOOSE 2008, Paphos, Cyprus

  25. Mylopoulos J, Chung L, Nixon BA (1992) Representing and using nonfunctional requirements: a process-oriented approach. IEEE Transact Softw Eng (TSE) 18(6):483–497

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Nielsen J, Levy J (1994) Measuring usability: preference versus performance. Commun ACM 37(4):66–75

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Olsina L, Papa F, Molina H (2008) How to measure and evaluate web applications in a consistent way. In: Rossi G, Pastor O, Schwabe D, Olsina L (eds) Web engineering: modeling and implementing web applications, HCIS, Chap. 13. Springer, London, pp 385–420

  28. Olsina L, Rossi G, Garrido A, Distante D, Canfora G (2008) Web applications refactoring and evaluation: a quality-oriented improvement approach. J Web Eng. Rinton Press, US, 4(7), pp 258–280

    Google Scholar 

  29. Santos PJ, Badre AN (1995) Discount learnability evaluation. Graphics, visualization and usability center. Georgia Institute of Technology. Accessed by 19 Oct 2010 at smartech.gatech.edu/bitstream/1853/3574/1/95-30.pdf

  30. Supakkul S, Chung L (2010) Visualizing non-functional requirements patterns. In: Proceedings of the 5th international workshop on requirements engineering visualization (REV ‘10) in conjunction with RE ‘10, Sydney, Austria, pp 25–34

  31. Supakkul S, Hill T, Chung L, Tun TT, Leite JC (2010) An NFR pattern approach to dealing with NFRs. In: Proceedings of the 18th IEEE international requirements engineering conference (RE), Sydney, Australia, pp 179–188

  32. Tang A, Avgeriou P, Jansen A, Capilla R, Ali Babar M (2010) A comparative study of architecture knowledge management tools. J Syst Softw 83(3):352–370

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Zimmermann P, Gomez P, Danuser B, Schär S (2006) Extending usability: putting affect into the user-experience. In: Proceedings of NordiCHI ‘06, ACM Press, NY, pp 27–32

Download references

Acknowledgments

Thanks to the support by National Basic Research Program of China (973 project) (No. 2007CB310803) and PAE-PICT 2188 project at UNLPam, from the Science and Technology Agency, Argentina.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Philip Lew.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lew, P., Olsina, L., Becker, P. et al. An integrated strategy to systematically understand and manage quality in use for web applications. Requirements Eng 17, 299–330 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00766-011-0128-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00766-011-0128-x

Keywords

Navigation