Advertisement

Software Process Modelling

Socio-Technical Perspectives
  • Patrick Waterson
  • Stephan Weibelzahl
  • Dietmar Pfahl
Part of the International Series in Software Engineering book series (SOFT, volume 10)

Abstract

In this chapter we describe how the socio-technical systems (STS) approach has been applied to the software process, as well as attempts that have been made to simulate and model the process as a whole. We also outline previous attempts to use socio-technical criteria and guidelines in order to make improvements to the process of constructing software. We first provide a broad outline of the STS approach followed by a number of examples drawn from the areas of COTS-based selection, the People Capability Maturity Model (P-CMM), competency programmes and process simulation. We conclude the chapter with a set of future research issues that are most likely to occupy researchers in the coming years. These issues are drawn partly from the theoretical literature within software engineering, as well as recent developments within industrial practice.

Key words

Process modelling simulation software engineering education sociotechnical systems 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [AbM91]
    Abdel-Hamid TK, Madnick SE, Software Projects Dynamics — an Integrated Approach, Prentice-Hall, 1991.Google Scholar
  2. [ASR93]
    Abdel-Hamid TK, Sengupta K, Ronan D, “Software Project Control: An Experimental Investigation of Judgement with Fallible Information”, IEEE Trans. on Software Engineering, pp. 603–612, Vol. 19, No. 6, June 1993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. [Acu+01]
    Acuña ST, de Antonio A, Ferré X, López M, Maté L, “The Software Process: Modelling, Evaluation and Improvement”. In: Handbook of Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering, World Scientific Publishing, 2001.Google Scholar
  4. [AcJ03]
    Acuña ST, Juristo N, “Modelling Human Competencies in the Software Process”, Proceedings of the International Workshop on Software Process Simulation Modelling (ProSim), Portland, 2003.Google Scholar
  5. [BAB+00]
    Boehm BW, Abts C, Brown WA, Chulani S, Clark BK, Horowitz E, Madachy R, Reifer DJ, Steece B, Software Cost Estimation with COCOMO II, Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall PTR, 2000.Google Scholar
  6. [BDR96]
    Briand LC, Differding CM, Rombach HD, “Practical Guidelines for Measurement-Based Process Improvement”, Software Process Improvement and Practice 2(4), pp. 253–280, 1996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. [Bec99]
    Beck K, Extreme Programming Explained, Addison-Wesley, 1999.Google Scholar
  8. [Chr99]
    Christie AM, “Simulation: An Enabling Technology in Software Engineering”, CROSSTALK — The Journal of Defence Software Engineering, pp. 2–7, April 1999.Google Scholar
  9. [Cle00]
    Clegg CW, “Sociotechnical Principles for System Design”, Applied Ergonomics, 31, pp. 463–477, 2000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. [CKI88]
    Curtis B, Krasner H, Iscoe I, “A Field Study of the Software Process for Large Systems”, Communications of the ACM, 31(11), pp. 1268–87, 1988.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. [CHM02]
    Curtis B, Hefley WE, Miller, SA, The People Capability Maturity Model: Guidelines for Improving the Workforce, Boston: Addison-Wesley, 2002.Google Scholar
  12. [DeH+03]
    de Haan D, Waterson PE, Trapp S, Pfahl D, “Integrating Needs Assessment within Next Generation E-Learning Systems: Lessons Learnt from a Case Study”. In: M. Branda, H. Heiho & J. Multisilta (Hrsg.) Abstract Book e Train 2003. E-Training Practices for Professional Organisations, IFIP Open Working Conference (S. 42). Tampere University of Technology, 2003.Google Scholar
  13. [DiR0l]
    Dingsøyr T, Røyrvik E, “Skills Management as Knowledge Technology in a Software Consulting Company”. In: K-D. Althoff, RL. Feldmann & W. Müller (Eds.), Advances in Learning Software Organisations (LSO 2001). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  14. [DrL99]
    Drappa A, Ludewig J, “Quantitative Modelling for the Interactive Simulation of Software Projects”, Journal of Systems and Software 46, pp. 113–122, 1999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. [EDM97]
    E1 Eman K, Drouin J, Melo W, SPICE-The Theory and Practice of Software Process Improvement and Capability Determination, IEEE Computer Society, 1997.Google Scholar
  16. [For61]
    Forrester J W, Industrial Dynamics, Productivity Press, Cambridge, 1961.Google Scholar
  17. [FoL02]
    Forward A, Lethbridge TC, “The Relevance of Software Documentation, Tools and Technologies: A Survey”, Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Documentation Engineering (DocEng 2002), ACM Press, pp. 26–33, 2002.Google Scholar
  18. [FrK94]
    Friedman B, Kahn PH “Educating Computer Scientists: Linking the Social and the Technical”, Communications of the ACM, 37,1, pp. 65–70. 1994.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. [Gla97]
    Glass RL, Software Runaways: Monumental Software Disasters, New York: Pearson Education, 1997.Google Scholar
  20. [Gra+92]
    Graham AK et al., “Model-supported Case Studies for Management Education”, European Journal of Operational Research 59, pp. 151–166, 1992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. [GrM97]
    Gremba J, Myers C, “The IDEAL model: A Practical Guide for Improvement”. Bridge, 3, 19–23, 1997.Google Scholar
  22. [GWW04]
    Grüiitzner I, Weibelzahl S, Waterson PE, “Improving Courseware Quality through Lifecycle Encompassing Quality Assurance”, Fraunhofer IESE Report, Kaiserslautern, 2004.Google Scholar
  23. [HCI99]
    Special Issue on Representations in Interactive Systems Development, Edited by P. Johnson, E. O’Neill, H. Johnson, Human-Computer Interaction, 14, 1/2.Google Scholar
  24. [Hof0l]
    Hofstede G, Culture’s Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviours, Institutions and Organizations Across Nations, 2nd Edition, Thousand Oaks CA: Sage Publications, 2001.Google Scholar
  25. [Hum89]
    Humphrey WS, Managing the Software Process, Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  26. [JirG94]
    Jirotka M, Goguen J, Requirements Engineering — Social and Technical Issues, London: Academic Press, 1994.Google Scholar
  27. [KMR99]
    Kellner MI, Madachy RJ, Raffo DM, “Software Process Simulation Modelling: Why? What? How?”, Journal of Systems and Software 46, pp. 91–105, 1999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. [Kon96]
    Kontio J, “A Case Study in Applying a Systematic Method for COTS Selection”, Proceeding of the 18th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE’ 96), IEEE Computer Society, 1996.Google Scholar
  29. [KrS95]
    Kraut RE, Streeter L, “Coordination in Software Development”, Communications of the ACM, 38,3, pp. 69–81, 1995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. [KuB99]
    Kunda D, Brooks L, “Applying the Socio-Technical Approach for COTS Selection”, Proceedings of the 4th UKAIS Conference, University of York, McGraw Hill, 1999.Google Scholar
  31. [Kyn91]
    Kyng M, “Designing for Cooperation: Cooperating in Design”, Communications of the ACM, 34,12, pp. 65–73, 1991.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. [Lan95]
    Landauer TK, The Trouble With Computers, Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1995.Google Scholar
  33. [Lane95]
    Lane DC, “On a Resurgence of Management Simulation Games”, Journal of the Operational Research Society 46, pp. 604–625, 1995.Google Scholar
  34. [LSF03]
    Lethbridge TC, Singer J, Forward A, “How Software Engineers User Documentation: The State of the Practice”, IEEE Software, November/December, pp. 35–39, 2003.Google Scholar
  35. [Lon93]
    Lonchamp J, “A Structured Conceptual and Terminological Framework for Software Process Engineering”, Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Software Process, pp. 41–53, February 1993.Google Scholar
  36. [MaN98]
    Maiden N, Ncube C, “Acquiring COTS Software Selection Requirements”, IEEE Software, March/April, pp. 46–56, 1998.Google Scholar
  37. [Mad04]
    Madachy RJ, Software Process Dynamics, to appear, 2004.Google Scholar
  38. [Mor88]
    Morecroft JDW, “System Dynamics and Microworlds for Policymakers”, European Journal of Operational Research 35, pp. 301–320, 1988.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. [NaS0l]
    Nakayama N, Sutcliffe NG, “IT Skills Portfolio Research in SIGCPR Proceedings: Analysis, Synthesis and Proposals”, Proceedings of the 2001 ACM SIGCPR Conference on Computer Personnel Research, San Diego, California, United States, pp. 100–113, 2001.Google Scholar
  40. [Och+00]
    Ochs M, Pfahl D, Chrobok-Diening G, Nothelder-Kolb B, “CAP — Definition of a COTS Acquisition Process and Experience of its Application”, Fraunhofer IESE Report, 2000.Google Scholar
  41. [O’NJJ99]
    O’ Neill E, Johnson P, Johnson H, “Representations and User-Developer Interaction in Cooperative Analysis and Design” Human-Computer Interaction, 14,1/2 pp.43–91, 1999.Google Scholar
  42. [Pau+93]
    Paulk MC, Curtis B, Chrissis MB, Weber CV, “The Capability Maturity Model for Software, Version 1.1”, IEEE Software, 10,4, pp. 18–27, 1993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. [PDC02]
    Biennial Participatory Design Conference (most recent — 2003-Participation and design: Inquiring into the politics, contexts and practices of collaborative design work, PDC 2002 — the Participatory Design Conference, June 23–25, 2002, Malmö, Sweden, http://www.cpsr.org/publications/publications.html), 2003.Google Scholar
  44. [PfR0l]
    Pfahl D, Ruhe G, “System Dynamics as an Enabling Technology for Learning in Software Organizations”, Proceedings of 13th International Conference on Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering (SEKE), Skokie: Knowledge Systems Institute, pp. 355–362, 2001.Google Scholar
  45. [PfR02]
    Pfahl D, Ruhe G, “IMMoS-A Methodology for Integrated Measurement, Modelling, and Simulation”, Software Process Improvement and Practice 7, pp. 189–210, 2002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. [PKR01]
    Pfahl D, Klemm M, Ruhe G, “A CBT Module with Integrated Simulation Component for Software Project Management Education and Training”, Journal of Systems and Software 59(3), pp. 283–298, 2001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. [Pfa+03]
    Pfahl D, Laitenberger O, Dorsch J, Ruhe G, “An Externally Replicated Experiment for Evaluating the Learning Effectiveness of Using Simulations in Software Project Management Education”, Empirical Software Engineering 8,4, pp. 367–395, 2003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. [Pow+97]
    Powell A, Vickers A, Lam W, Edwards E. “Evaluating Tools to Support Component based Software Engineering”, Proceedings of the 5th International Symposium on Assessment of Software Tools, IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos, 1997.Google Scholar
  49. [RuM95]
    Rugg G, McGeorge P, “Laddering”, Expert Systems, 12,4, pp. 183–192, 1995.Google Scholar
  50. [Saw+98]
    Sawyer S, Eschenfelder K, Diekema A, McClur C, “IT Skills in the Context of BigCo”, Proceedings of the 1998 ACM SIGCPR Conference on Computer Personnel Research, Boston, Massachusetts, United States, pp. 9–18, 1998.Google Scholar
  51. [Sen90]
    Senge PM, The Fifth Discipline — the Art & Practice of the Learning Organization, New York: Doubleday, 1990.Google Scholar
  52. [Sha00]
    Shaw M, “Software Engineering Education: A Roadmap”. In: The Future of Software Engineering (ed. A. Finkelstein), New York: ACM, pp. 371–380, 2000.Google Scholar
  53. [SoB00]
    van Solingen R, Berghout E, “From Process Improvement to People Improvement — Enabling Learning in Software Development”. In: Project Control: The Software Factor (eds. K. Maxwell, R. Kusters, E. Van Veenendaal and A. Cowderoy), Maastricht: Shaker Publications, 2000.Google Scholar
  54. [Som00]
    Sommerville I, Software Engineering (5th Edition), London: Addison-Wesley, 2000.Google Scholar
  55. [SoR97]
    Sommerville I, Rodden T, “Human, Social and Organisational Influences on the Software Process”, Technical Report: CSEG/2/1995, University of Lancaster, Computing Department, 1995.Google Scholar
  56. [SWE01]
    Software Engineering Body of Knowledge — (website: http://www.swebok.org/home.html), 2001.Google Scholar
  57. [Ste94]
    Sterman JD, “Learning in and about Complex Systems”, System Dynamics Review, 10(2–3), pp. 291–330, 1994.Google Scholar
  58. [Ven90]
    Vennix JAM, Mental Models and Computer Models — design and evaluation of a computer-based learning environment for policy-making, PhD Thesis, University of Nijmegen, 1990.Google Scholar
  59. [Ven96]
    Vennix JAM, Group Model Building, John Wiley & Sons, 1996.Google Scholar
  60. [Wal02]
    Walsham G, “Cross-Cultural Software Production and Use: A Structurational Analysis”, MIS Quarterly, 26,4, pp. 359–380, 2002.Google Scholar
  61. [WOC02]
    Waterson PE, Older Gray MT, Clegg CW, “A Sociotechnical Method for Designing Work Systems”, Human Factors, 44,3, pp. 376–391, 2002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. [Wat04]
    Waterson PE, “Sociotechnical Design of Work Systems”, To appear in: J. Wilson, E. Megaw (Eds.), Evaluation of Human Work (3rd Edition), London: Taylor and Francis, 2004.Google Scholar
  63. [Win+96]
    Winograd T, Bennett J, De Young L, Hartfield B (Eds.), Bringing Design to Software New York: Addison Wesley, 1996.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Patrick Waterson
    • 1
  • Stephan Weibelzahl
    • 1
  • Dietmar Pfahl
    • 1
  1. 1.Fraunhofer Institute Experimental Software Engineering (IESE)KaiserslauternGermany

Personalised recommendations