Assessing Software Replacement Success: An Industrial Case Study Applying Four Approaches

  • Jussi Koskinen
  • Henna Sivula
  • Tero Tilus
  • Irja Kankaanpää
  • Jarmo J. Ahonen
  • Päivi Juutilainen
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4257)


This paper describes an industrial case study assessing software replacement success and other effects. The target of assessments has been a large commercial legacy system for customer register management. The success of its replacement by its performed rewrite has been assessed via four approaches concerning: user satisfaction, strengths and problems of the system, problem surveillance and expert judgments. The approaches and metrics have been selected in cooperation with industrial experts in order that they would meet the needs of their organization. The assessments have been conducted by comparing the situations before and after the rewrite. They have included quality aspects. The applied approaches have supplemented each other well and results provided by them have been mainly consistent. The study has offered a wide view of the system replacement effects and lessons for the replacement assessment process improvement in industrial settings.


User Satisfaction Expert Judgment Final Assessment System Replacement Software Maintenance 
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.
    Aversano, R., Esposito, R., Mallardo, T., Tortorella, M.: Supporting Decisions on the Adoption of Re-engineering Technologies. In: The Eight European Conference on Software Maintenance and Reengineering (CSMR 2004), pp. 95–104. IEEE Computer Soc., Los Alamitos (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bennett, K., Ramage, M., Munro, M.: Decision Model for Legacy Systems. IEE Proceedings - Software 146(3), 153–159 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Dehning, B., Richardson, V.: Returns on Investment in Information Technology: A Research Synthesis. Journal of Information Systems 16(1), 7–30 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Doll, W., Torkzadeh, G.: The Measurement of End-User Computing Satisfaction. MIS Quarterly 12(2), 259–274 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kankaanpää, I., Sivula, H., Ahonen, J.J., Tilus, T., Koskinen, J., Juutilainen, P.: ISEBA - A Framework for IS Evolution Benefit Assessment. In: Proc. of the 12th European Conf. Inform. Technology Evaluation (ECITE 2005) Academic Conferences, pp. 255–264 (2005)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Koskinen, J., Ahonen, J.J., Sivula, H., Tilus, T., Lintinen, H., Kankaanpää, I.: Software Modernization Decision Criteria: An Empirical Study. In: The Ninth European Conf. Software Maintenance and Reengin (CSMR 2005), pp. 324–331. IEEE Computer Soc., Los Alamitos (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Koskinen, J., Lintinen, H., Sivula, H., Tilus, T.: Evaluation of Software Modernization Estimation Methods Using NIMSAD Meta Framework. Publ. of the Information Technology Research Institute 15, ITRI, Univ. of Jyväskylä, Jyväskylä, Finland (2004)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lehman, M., Perry, D., Ramil, J.: Implications of Evolution Metrics on Software Maintenance. In: Proc. of the International Conference on Software Maintenance – 1998 (ICSM 1998), pp. 208–217. IEEE Computer Soc., Los Alamitos (1998)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lientz, B., Swanson, E.: Problems in Application Software Maintenance. Communications of the ACM 24(11), 763–769 (1981)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Saastamoinen, H.: On the Handling of Exceptions on Information Systems. Jyväskylä Studies in Computer Science, Economics and Statistics, vol. 28. University of Jyväskylä, Jyväskylä, Finland (1995)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sahin, I., Zahedi, M.: Policy Analysis for Warranty, Maintenance, and Upgrade of Software Systems. Journal of Software Maintenance: Res. and Pract. 13(6), 469–493 (2001)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Seacord, R.C., Plakosh, D., Lewis, G.A.: Modernizing Legacy Systems - Software Technologies, Engineering Processes, and Business Practices. Addison-Wesley, Reading (2003)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Seaman, C.B.: Qualitative Methods in Empirical Studies of Software Engineering. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 25(4), 557–572 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sneed, H.: Estimating the Costs of Software Maintenance Tasks. In: International Conference on Software Maintenance (ICSM 1995), pp. 168–181. IEEE Computer Soc., Los Alamitos (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sneed, H., Brössler, P.: Critical Success Factors in Software Maintenance – A Case Study. In: International Conference on Software Maintenance (ICSM 2003), pp. 190–198 (2003)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Tilus, T., Koskinen, J., Ahonen, J.J., Sivula, H., Lintinen, H., Kankaanpää, I.: MODEST: A Method for Early System Modernization Pressure Estimation, Univ. of Jyväskylä, Jyväskylä, Finland (submitted, 2005) Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Verhoef, C.: Quantitative IT Portfolio Management. Science of Computer Programming 45, 1–96 (2002)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Visaggio, G.: Value-Based Decision Model for Renewal Processes in Software Maintenance. Annals of Software Engineering 9, 215–233 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Warren, I., Ransom, J.: Renaissance: A Method to Support Software System Evolution. In: Proc. of the 26th Annual International Computer Software and Applications Conference (COMPSAC 2002), pp. 415–420. IEEE Computer Soc., Los Alamitos (2002)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jussi Koskinen
    • 1
  • Henna Sivula
    • 1
  • Tero Tilus
    • 1
  • Irja Kankaanpää
    • 1
  • Jarmo J. Ahonen
    • 2
  • Päivi Juutilainen
    • 1
  1. 1.Information Technology Research InstituteUniversity of JyväskyläJyväskyläFinland
  2. 2.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of KuopioKuopioFinland

Personalised recommendations