Goal-Oriented Setup and Usage of Custom-Tailored Software Cockpits

  • Jens Heidrich
  • Jürgen Münch
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5089)


Software Cockpits, also known as Software Project Control Centers, support the management and controlling of software and system development projects and provide means for quantitative measurement-based project control. Currently, many companies are developing simple control dashboards that are mainly based on Spreadsheet applications. Alternatively, they use solutions providing a fixed set of project control functionality that cannot be sufficiently customized to their specific needs and goals. Specula is a systematic approach for defining reusable, customizable control components and instantiate them according to different organizational goals and characteristics based on the Quality Improvement Paradigm (QIP) and GQM. This article gives an overview of the Specula approach, including the basic conceptual model, goal-oriented measurement, and the composition of control components based on explicitly stated measurement goals. Related approaches are discussed and the use of Specula as part of industrial case studies is described.


Software Project Control Center QIP GQM 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Agresti, W., Card, D., Church, V.: Manager’s Handbook for Software Development. SEL 84-101, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center. Greenbelt, Maryland (November 1990)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Basili, V.R., Caldiera, G., Rombach, D.: The Experience Factory. Encyclopaedia of Software Engineering 1, 469–476 (1994)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Basili, V.R., Heidrich, J., Lindvall, M., Münch, J., Regardie, M., Rombach, D., Seaman, C., Trendowicz, A.: GQM+Strategies®: A Comprehensive Methodology for Aligning Business Strategies with Software Measurement. In: Büren, G., Bundschuh, M., Dumke, R. (eds.) MetriKon 2007, DASMA-Software-Metrik-Kongress, Kaiserslautern, Germany, November 15-16, 2007, pp. 253–266 (2007)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ciolkowski, M., Heidrich, J., Münch, J., Simon, F., Radicke, M.: Evaluating Software Project Control Centers in Industrial Environments. In: International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement, ESEM, Madrid, pp. 314–323 (2007)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Differding, C.: Adaptive measurement plans for software development. Fraunhofer IRB Verlag, PhD Theses in Experimental Software Engineering, 6 (2001) ISBN: 3-8167-5908-4Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Heidrich, J.: Custom-made Visualization for Software Project Control. Technical Report 06/2003, Sonderforschungsbereich 501, University of Kaiserslautern (2003)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Heidrich, J., Münch, J.: Goal-oriented Data Visualization with Software Project Control Centers. In: Büren, G., Bundschuh, M., Dumke, R. (eds.) MetriKon 2005, DASMA-Software-Metrik-Kongress, Kaiserslautern, Germany, November 15-16, 2005, pp. 65–75 (2005)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Heidrich, J., Münch, J., Wickenkamp, A.: Usage Scenarios for Measurement-based Project Control. In: Dekkers, T. (ed.) Proceedings of the 3rd Software Measurement European Forum. Smef 2006, Rome, Italy, May 10-12, 2006, pp. 47–60 (2006)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Heidrich, J., Münch, J.: Cost-Efficient Customisation of Software Cockpits by Reusing Configurable Control Components. In: Dekkers, T. (ed.) Proceedings of the 4th Software Measurement European Forum. Smef 2007, Rome, Italy, May 9-11, 2007, pp. 19–32 (2007)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hendrick, R., Kistler, D., Valett, J.: Software Management Environment (SME)— Concepts and Architecture (Revision 1). NASA Goddard Space Flight Center Code 551, Software Engineering Laboratory Series Report SEL-89-103, Greenbelt, MD, USA (1992)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    ISO 9126: Software Engineering – Product Quality. Technical Report. ISO/IEC TR 9126. Geneva (2003)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kitchenham, B.A.: Software Metrics. Blackwell, Oxford (1995)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Krishnamurthy, B., Barghouti, N.S.: Provence: A Process Visualization and Enactment Environment. In: Sommerville, I., Paul, M. (eds.) ESEC 1993. LNCS, vol. 717, pp. 451–465. Springer, Heidelberg (1993)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    McGarry, J., Card, D., Jones, C., Layman, B., Clark, E., Dean, J., Hall, F.: Practical Software Measurement – Objective Information for Decision Makers, 1st edn. Addison-Wesley Professional, Reading (2001)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Münch, J., Heidrich, J.: Software Project Control Centers: Concepts and Approaches. Journal of Systems and Software 70(1), 3–19 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Project Management Institute: A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK Guide) 2000 Edition. Project Management Institute, Four Campus Boulevard, Newtown Square, PA 19073-3299 USA (2000)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Selby, R.W., Porter, A.A., Schmidt, D.C., Berney, J.: Metric-Driven Analysis and Feedback Systems for Enabling Empirically Guided Software Development. In: Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Software Engineering, pp. 288–298 (1991)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Simmons, D.B., Ellis, N.C., Fujihara, H., Kuo, W.: Software Measurement – A Visualization Toolkit for Project Control and Process Improvement. Prentice Hall Inc., New Jersey (1998)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Tesoriero, R., Zelkowitz, M.V.: The Web Measurement Environment (WebME): A Tool for Combining and Modeling Distributed Data. In: Proceedings of the 22nd Annual Software Engineering Workshop (SEW) (1997)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Torii, K., Matsumoto, K., Nakakoji, K., Takada, Y., Takada, S., Shima, K.: Ginger2: An Environment for Computer-Aided Empirical Software Engineering. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 25(4), 474–492 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jens Heidrich
    • 1
  • Jürgen Münch
    • 1
  1. 1.Fraunhofer IESEKaiserslauternGermany

Personalised recommendations