Meta Model Based Architecture for Software Process Instantiation

  • Peter Killisperger
  • Markus Stumptner
  • Georg Peters
  • Georg Grossmann
  • Thomas Stückl
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5543)

Abstract

In order to re-use software processes for a spectrum of projects they are described in a generic way. Due to the uniqueness of software development, processes have to be adapted to project specific needs to be effectively applicable in projects. This instantiation still lacks standardization and tool support making it error prone, time consuming and thus expensive. Siemens AG has started research projects aiming to improve software process related activities. Part of these efforts has been the development of a New Software Engineering Framework (NSEF) enabling a more effective and efficient instantiation and application of processes. A system supporting project managers in instantiation of software processes is being developed. It aims to execute instantiation decision made by humans and to automatically restore correctness of the resulting process.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    ISO/IEC 15504-9 Tech. Software Process Assessment Part 9: Vocabulary (1998)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Aalst, W.v.d., Hee, K.v.: Workflow Management-Models, Methods, and Systems. The MIT Press, Cambridge (2004)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Alexander, L.C., Davis, A.M.: Criteria for Selecting Software Process Mod- els. In: Proceedings of the Fifteenth Annual International Computer Software and Applications Conference, pp. 521–528 (1991)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Allerbach, A., Bauer, T., Reichert, M.: Managing Process Variants in the Process Life Cycle. In: Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems. ISAS, vol. 2, pp. 154–161 (2008)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Armbrust, O., Katahira, M., Miyamoto, Y., Münch, J., Nakao, H., Ocampo, A.: Scoping Software Process Models - Initial Concepts and Experience from Defining Space Standards. In: Wang, Q., Pfahl, D., Raffo, D.M. (eds.) ICSP 2008. LNCS, vol. 5007, pp. 160–172. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bandinelli, S., Fuggetta, A.: Computational Reflection in Software Process Modeling: The SLANG Approach. In: ICSE, pp. 144–154 (1993)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Basili, V.R., Rombach, H.D.: Support for comprehensive reuse. Software Engineering Journal 6(5), 303–316 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Becker, U., Hamann, D., Verlage, M.: Descriptive Modeling of Software Processes. In: Proceedings of the Third Conference on Software Process Improvement, SPI 1997 (1997)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    BMI. The new V-Modell XT - Development Standard for IT Systems of the Federal Republic of Germany (2004), http://www.v-modell-xt.de (accessed 01.12.2008)
  10. 10.
    Boehm, B., Belz, F.: Experiences With The Spiral Model As A Process Model Generator. In: Proceedings of the 5th International Software Process Workshop Experience with Software Process Models, pp. 43–45 (1990)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bowers, J., May, J., Melander, E., Baarman, M.: Tailoring XP for Large System Mission Critical Software Development. In: Wells, D., Williams, L. (eds.) XP 2002. LNCS, vol. 2418, pp. 100–111. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Brinkkemper, S.: Method engineering: engineering of information systems development methods and tools. Information & Software Tech. 38(4), 275–280 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Feiler, P.H., Humphrey, W.S.: Software Process Development and Enactment: Concepts and Definitions. In: ICSP, pp. 28–40 (1993)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Fitzgerald, B., Russo, N., O’Kane, T.: An empirical study of system development method tailoring in practice. In: Proceedings of the Eighth European Conference on Information Systems, pp. 187–194 (2000)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ginsberg, M., Quinn, L.: Process tailoring and the software Capability Maturity Model. Technical report, Software Engineering Institute, SEI (1995)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    IBM. Rational Method Composer (2008), http://www-01.ibm.com/software/awdtools/rmc/ (accessed 26.11.2008)
  17. 17.
    Kabbaj, M., Lbath, R., Coulette, B.: A Deviation Man- agement System for Handling Software Process Enactment Evolution. In: ICSP, pp. 186–197 (2008)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Killisperger, P., Peters, G., Stumptner, M., Stückl, T.: Instantiation of Software Processes, An Industry Approach. In: Information Systems Development: Towards a Service Provision Society. Springer, Heidelberg (2008) (forthcoming)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Killisperger, P., Stumptner, M., Peters, G., Stückl, T.: Challenges in Software Design in Large Corporations A Case Study at Siemens AG. In: Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems. ISAS, vol. 2, pp. 123–128 (2008)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Osterweil, L.J.: Software Processes Are Software Too. In: ICSE, pp. 2–13 (1987)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Rosemann, M., van der Aalst, W.: A Configurable Reference Modelling Language. Information Systems 32(1), 1–23 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Scheer, A.-W.: ARIS- business process modelling. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Schmelzer, H.J., Sesselmann, W.: Geschäftsprozessmanagement in der Praxis: Produktivität steigern - Wert erhöhen - Kunden zufrieden stellen, 4th edn. Hanser Verlag, Muenchen (2004)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    WFMC. WFMC-TC-1025-03-10-05 Specification for XPDL v2.0 (2005), http://www.wfmc.org (accessed: 28.11.2008)
  25. 25.
    Yoon, I.-C., Min, S.-Y., Bae, D.-H.: Tailoring and Verifying Soft- ware Process. In: APSEC, pp. 202–209 (2001)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Peter Killisperger
    • 1
    • 2
  • Markus Stumptner
    • 1
  • Georg Peters
    • 3
  • Georg Grossmann
    • 1
  • Thomas Stückl
    • 4
  1. 1.Advanced Computing Research CentreUniversity of South AustraliaAdelaideAustralia
  2. 2.Competence Center Information SystemsUniversity of Applied SciencesMünchenGermany
  3. 3.Department of Computer Science and MathematicsUniversity of Applied SciencesMünchenGermany
  4. 4.System and Software ProcessesSiemens Corporate TechnologyMünchenGermany

Personalised recommendations