Difficulties in Establishing a Defect Management Process: A Case Study

  • Marko Jäntti
  • Tanja Toroi
  • Anne Eerola
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4034)


A well-organized defect management process is one of the success factors for implementing software projects in time and in budget. The defect management process includes defect prevention, defect discovery and resolution, defect causal analysis, and the process improvement. However, establishing an organization-wide defect management process is a complicated task. The main research question in this paper is what kind of difficulties organizations have regarding the defect management process. Our findings show that problems are related to defect resolution reports, limited project resources for fixing defects, and challenges in creating a test environment. Results are based on our observations from four case organizations. The main contribution of this study is to help organizations to identify and avoid typical problems with defect management.


Service Level Agreement Defect Data Software Vendor Defect Management Case Organization 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Florac, W.: Software quality measurement a framework for counting problems and defects. Technical Report CMU/SEI-92-TR-22 (1992)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hirmanpour, I., Schofield, J.: Defect management through the personal software process. Crosstalk, The Journal of Defense Software Engineering (2003)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Mays, R.G., Jones, C.L., Holloway, G.J., Studinski, D.P.: Experiences with defect prevention. IBM Syst. J. 29(1), 4–32 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Office of Government Commerce: ITIL Service Support. The Stationary Office, UK (2002)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Leszak, M., Perry, D.E., Stoll, D.: A case study in root cause defect analysis. In: ICSE 2000: Proceedings of the 22nd international conference on Software engineering, pp. 428–437. ACM Press, New York (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    El-Emam, K., Wieczorek, I.: The repeatability of code defect classifications. Technical Report. International Software Engineering Research Network, ISERN-98-09 (1998)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Humphrey, W.S.: A personal commitment to software quality. In: ESEC, pp. 5–7 (1995)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Jalote, P.: CMM in Practise, Processes for Executing Software Projects at Infosys. Addison-Wesley, Reading (2000)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Jäntti, M., Toroi, T.: Uml-based testing: A case study. In: Proceedings of NWUML 2004, 2nd Nordic Workshop on the Unified Modeling Language, Turku Centre for Computer Science, Turku, pp. 33–44 (2004)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kruchten, P.: The Rational Unified Process: An Introduction. Addison-Wesley, Reading (2001)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Yin, R.: Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Sage Publishing, Beverly Hills (1994)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Binder, R.: Testing Object-Oriented Systems: Models, Patterns, and Tools. Addison-Wesley, Reading (2000)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Quality Assurance Institute: A software defect management process. Research Report number 8 (1995)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Eisenhardt, K.: Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review 14, 532–550 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ahonen, J.J., Junttila, T., Sakkinen, M.: Impacts of the organizational model on testing: Three industrial cases. Empirical Softw. Engg. 9(4), 275–296 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Henninger, S.: Using software process to support learning software organizations. In: 1st International Workshop on Learning Software Organizations, Kaiserlautern (1999)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hartmann, J., Imoberdorf, C., Meisinger, M.: Uml-based integration testing. In: ISSTA 2000: Proceedings of the 2000 ACM SIGSOFT international symposium on Software testing and analysis, pp. 60–70. ACM Press, New York (2000)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Gilb, T., Graham, D.: Software Inspection. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1993)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Card, D.N.: Learning from our mistakes with defect causal analysis. IEEE Software 15(1), 56–63 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Office of Government Commerce: ITIL Service Delivery. The Stationary Office, UK (2002)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marko Jäntti
    • 1
  • Tanja Toroi
    • 1
  • Anne Eerola
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of KuopioKuopioFinland

Personalised recommendations