Abstract
The development of software for modern products with lots of interfaces, layers and stakeholders has become very complex, increasing the risk of inefficiency. Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) can be used to identify bottlenecks and problems, but the challenge is how to create KPI models, processes and dashboards that help improving the development processes and can be adopted by all the stakeholders. We introduce the RelAA Framework - a bottom-up approach for monitoring product-focused software development. The RelAA (Relevant, Accessible and Adoptable) Framework is created in an industrial setup that currently includes around 350 persons in different phases of the software life cycle. The RelAA Framework is formed by analyzing existing KPIs and tools, gathering feedback from development teams, management, business representatives, and other stakeholders, and creating intuitive ways to share information related to KPIs. The RelAA Framework itself does not define exact KPIs for the organization to adopt, but it provides a process and model how to create, document and utilize KPIs. The RelAA Framework ensures relevance, accessibility, and adoption of KPIs across stakeholders and organization.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Sinclair, D., Zairi, M.: Effective process management through performance measurement: part III-an integrated model of total quality-based performance measurement. Bus. Process Re-eng. Manag. J. 1(3), 50–65 (1995)
Staron, M.: Critical role of measures in decision processes: managerial and technical measures in the context of large software development organizations. IST 54, 887–889 (2012)
Neely, A., Gregory, M., Platts, K.: Performance measurement system design: a literature review and research agenda. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Man. 15(4), 80–116 (1995)
Gosselin, M.: An empirical study of performance measurement in manufacturing firms. Int. J. Product. Perform. Man. 54(5/6), 419–437 (2005)
Sanchez, H., Robert, B.: Measuring portfolio strategic performance using key performance indicators. Proj. Manag. J. 41(5), 64–73 (2010)
Ishaq Bhatti, M., Awan, H.M., Razaq, Z.: The key performance indicators (KPIs) and their impact on overall organizational performance. Qual. Quant. 48(6), 3127–3143 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-013-9945-y
Garcia, F., et al.: Towards a consistent terminology for software measurement. IST 48, 631–644 (2006)
Briand, L.C., Morasca, S., Basili, V.R.: An operational process for goal-driven definition of measures. TSE 28(12), 1106–1125 (2002)
Tsunoda, M., Matsumura, T., Matsumoto, K.: Modeling software project monitoring with stakeholders. In: Proceedings of the ICCIS 2010, pp. 723–728 (2010)
Staron, M., Meding, W., Niesel, K., Abran, A.: A key performance indicator quality model and its industrial evaluation. In: Proceedings of the IWSM-Mensura, 2016, pp. 170–179 (2016)
Staron, M., Meding, W.: MeSRAM – a method for assessing robustness of measurement programs in large software development organizations and its industrial evaluation. JSS 113, 76–100 (2016)
Antolic, Z.: An example of Using Key Performance Indicators for Software Development Process Efficiency Evaluation, Ericsson Nikola Tesla R&D Center, p. 6 (2008)
Kazi, L., Radulovic, B., Kazi, Z.: Performance indicators in software project monitoring: balanced scorecard approach. In: Proceedings of the SISY, 2012, pp. 19–24 (2012)
Mattila, A.-L., Ihantola, P., Kilamo, T., Luoto, A., Nurminen, M., Väätäjä, H.: Software visualization today – systematic literature review. In: Proceedings of the 20th International Academic Mindtrek Conference. 2016, ACM, pp. 262–271 (2016)
Dickens, L., Watkins, K.: Action research: rethinking lewin. Manag. Learn. 30(2), 127–140 (1999)
Oinonen, T.: Key Performance Indicators for Automated Testing and Continuous Software Integration. Master’s thesis, Aalto University, p. 70 (2018)
Wohlin, C., Runeson, P., Höst, M., Ohlsson, M.C., Regnell, B., Wesslén, A.: Experimentation in Software Engineering, p. 236 (2012)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2021 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Leppäkoski, A., Sievi-Korte, O., Hämäläinen, T.D. (2021). Framework for Creating Relevant, Accessible, and Adoptable KPI Models in an Industrial Setting. In: Wang, X., Martini, A., Nguyen-Duc, A., Stray, V. (eds) Software Business. ICSOB 2021. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol 434. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-91983-2_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-91983-2_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-91982-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-91983-2
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)