Applying Testing Techniques to Software Process Assessment: A Model-Based Perspective

  • L. García-Borgoñón
  • R. Blanco
  • J. A. García-García
  • M. A. Barcelona
Conference paper


Software processes constitute a major asset for an organization. However, in many occasions there are differences between defined processes and executed processes. For this reason, organizations spend time and effort of their resources to find these non-conformances. The use of software testing techniques could be a useful way to reduce these costs. This paper proposes a model-based approach and shows how software testing techniques can be applied to evaluate the execution conformity in a software processes context, and also to evaluate the model designed. A real execution of a NDT methodology process by means of the process model included in NDTQ-Framework (a solution based on this approach that is currently being used in software development organizations) illustrates the final results. Finally, conclusions and future work are stated.


Model-Driven Testing Software Processes 



This work has been supported by the projects TEMPROS (TIN2010-20057-C03-02) and Test4DBS (TIN2010-20057-C03-01) of Ministerio de Educación y Ciencia, Spain, and the NDTQ-Framework project (TIC-5789) of the Junta de Anda-lucía, Spain.


  1. 1.
    Bendraou R, Gervais MP (2007) A framework for classifying and comparing process technology domains. In: International conference on software engineering advances, ICSEA 2007. Cap Esterel, French Riviera, France. IEEE, pp 5–5Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Chrissis MB, Konrad M, Shrum S (2003) CMMi. Addison-Wesley, BostonGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Humphrey WS (1989) Managing the software process (Hardcover). Addison-Wesley Professional, ReadingGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Henderson-Sellers B, Gonzalez-Perez C (2005) A comparison of four process metamodels and the creation of a new generic standard. Inf Softw Technol 47(1):49–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Makinen T, Varkoi T, Soini J (2007) Integration of software process assessment and modeling. In: Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology, Portland, PICMET 2007. IEEE, pp 2476–2481Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Coletta A (1997) Process assessment using spice: the assessment activities. SPICE: The theory and practice of software process improvement and capability determination, Computer Society Press. IEEE, pp 99–122Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    ISO/IEC (2005) ISO 15504-1 information technology - process assessment - part 1 concepts and vocabularyGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ardagna D, Ghezzi C, Mirandola R (2008) Rethinking the use of models in software architecture. In: Quality of software architectures. Models and architectures. Springer, Berlin, pp 1–27Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Schmidt DC (2006) Model-driven engineering. Computer (IEEE Computer Society) 39(2):25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Osterweil L (1987) Software processes are software too. In: Proceedings of the 9th international conference on software engineering. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos, pp 2–13Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Henderson-Sellers B, Stallinger F, Lefever B (2002) Bridging the gap from process modelling to process assessment: the oospice process specification for component-based software engineering. In: Euromicro conference, Dortmund, Germany, 2002. Proceedings. 28th. IEEE, pp 324–331Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    ISO/IEC (1995) ISO 12207 Information technology - software lifecycle processesGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hamann D (2006) Towards an integrated approach for software process improvement: combining software process assessment and software process modeling. Fraunhofer-IRB-VerlagGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lepasaar M, Makinen T (2002) Integrating software process assessment models using a process meta model. In: IEEE international engineering management conference, 2002. IEMC’02, Cambridge, UK, vol 1. IEEE, pp 224–229Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Makinen T, Varkoi T (2008) Assessment driven process modeling for software process improvement. In: Portland International conference on management of engineering & technology, Portland, PICMET 2008. IEEE, pp 1570–1575Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    IEEE Standards Software Engineering (2004) Vol. 2. Process Standards. IEEE Std. 1012 2004. Standard for Software Verification and Validation PlansGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    ISO/IEC (2006) ISO/IEC 24765 software and systems eng. vocabularyGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Zhu H, Hall PA, May JH (1997) Software unit test coverage and adequacy. ACM Comput Surv 29(4):366–427CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    OMG (2012). UML (unified modeling language). Last accessed 01-2013.
  20. 20.
    OMG. BPMN, Business process modeling notation, version 2.0. Last accessed 01-2013.
  21. 21.
    García-Borgoñon L, García-García JA, Ortega MA, Escalona MJ (2012) Software process management: a model-based approach. In: Proceedings of the 21st international conference on information systems development (ISD)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Escalona MJ, Aragon G (2008) Ndt. A model-driven approach for web requirements. IEEE Trans Softw Eng 34(3):377–390.
  23. 23.
    ITIL (Information Technology Infrastructure Library). Last Accessed 01-2013.
  24. 24.
    ISO/IEC (2013) ISO/IEC 29119 software engineering – software testing standard. International Organization for StandardizationGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    ISO/IEC (2008) ISO 9001:2008 quality management systems - requirements. International Organization for StandardizationGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Project Management Institute (2008) A guide to the project management body of knowledge (PMBOK guide)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    ISO/IEC (2005) ISO 27001 information technology - security techniques - information security management systems - requirementsGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • L. García-Borgoñón
    • 1
  • R. Blanco
    • 2
  • J. A. García-García
    • 3
  • M. A. Barcelona
    • 1
  1. 1.Aragón Institute of TechnologyZaragozaSpain
  2. 2.University of OviedoGijónSpain
  3. 3.University of SevilleSevillaSpain

Personalised recommendations