Towards Managing Understandability of Quality-Related Information in Software Development Processes

  • Vladimir A. Shekhovtsov
  • Heinrich C. Mayr
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8583)


Establishing common understanding between the parties in the software process is important for dealing with quality of the prospective software. This process is difficult to organize because the parties (especially, developers and business stakeholders) perceive quality based on different world views. To address this problem, we aim at a solution for managing understandability of quality-related information in the software process. This solution provides the set of understandability assessment activities (aimed at diagnosing problems with communicated terms not belonging to the view of the target party) and understandability improvement activities (aimed at resolving these problems by translating problematic terms between world views and providing necessary explanations). These activities are supported by a modular ontology incorporating available quality-related knowledge; particular configuration of the ontology modules describes the quality view of the involved party. The proposed solution is expected to reduce the time and effort for establishing a communication basis while discussing software quality, thus cutting costs and strengthening the mutual trust of the parties.


understandability software process software quality qualityrelated communicated information 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Adolph, S., Kruchten, P., Hall, W.: Reconciling perspectives: A grounded theory of how people manage the process of software development. The Journal of Systems and Software 85, 1269–1286 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Anda, B., Jørgensen, M.: Quality and understandability of use case models. In: Lindskov Knudsen, J. (ed.) ECOOP 2001. LNCS, vol. 2072, pp. 402–428. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Genero, M., Poels, G., Piattini, M.: Defining and validating metrics for assessing the understandability of entity–relationship diagrams. Data & Knowledge Engineering 64, 534–557 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Guizzardi, G.: Ontological foundations for structural conceptual models. University of Twente (2005)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Guizzardi, G., Falbo, R., Guizzardi, R.S.: Grounding software domain ontologies in the unified foundational ontology (UFO): The case of the ODE software process ontology. In: Proceedings of the XI Iberoamerican Workshop on Requirements Engineering and Software Environments, pp. 244–251 (2008)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    ISO/IEC 9126-1:2001: Software Engineering – Product Quality – Part 1: Quality Model. International Organization for Standardization, Geneva (2001)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jin-Cherng, L., Kuo-Chiang, W.: A Model for Measuring Software Understandability. In: CIT 2006. IEEE (2006)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    JIRA Issue Tracking System, (accessed May 08, 2014)
  9. 9.
    Kamsties, E., von Knethen, A., Reussner, R.: A controlled experiment to evaluate how styles affect the understandability of requirements specifications. Information and Software Technology 45, 955–965 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lin, J.-C., Wu, K.-C.: Evaluation of software understandability based on fuzzy matrix. Fuzzy Systems, 2008. In: FUZZ-IEEE 2008, pp. 887–892. IEEE (2008)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mehmood, K., Cherfi, S.S.: Data quality through model quality: a quality model for measuring and improving the understandability of conceptual models. In: MDSEDQS 2009, pp. 29–32. ACM (2009)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Reijers, H.A., Mendling, J.: A study into the factors that influence the understandability of business process models. IEEE Transactions onSystems, Man and Cybernetics, Part A: Systems and Humans 41, 449–462 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Shekhovtsov, V.A., Mayr, H.C., Kop, C.: Harmonizing the Quality View of Stakeholders. In: Mistrik, I., Bahsoon, R., Eeles, R., Roshandel, R., Stal, M. (eds.) Relating System Quality and Software Architecture. Elsevier (in print, 2014)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Shekhovtsov, V.A., Mayr, H.C.: Managing Quality Related Information in Software Development Processes. In: CAiSE 2014 Forum. (in print, 2014)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Shekhovtsov, V.A., Mayr, H.C., Kop, C.: Towards Conceptualizing Quality-Related Stakeholder Interactions in Software Development. In: Kop, C. (ed.) UNISON 2012. LNBIP, vol. 137, pp. 73–86. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Vladimir A. Shekhovtsov
    • 1
  • Heinrich C. Mayr
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute for Applied InformaticsAlpen-Adria-Universität KlagenfurtAustria

Personalised recommendations