Advertisement

Developing a Maturity Matrix for Software Product Management

  • Inge van de Weerd
  • Willem Bekkers
  • Sjaak Brinkkemper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 51)

Abstract

The quality of processes in Software Product Management (SPM) has a high impact on the success of a software product, as it improves product quality and prevents release delays. To improve the SPM practice, we propose the maturity matrix for SPM, a focus area oriented maturity model concentrating on the SPM functions Requirements Management, Release Planning, Product Roadmapping, and Portfolio Management. In this paper, we describe the development of the SPM maturity matrix, consisting of (a) identification and description of capabilities, (b) positioning the capabilities at the right levels in the maturity matrix and (c) validating the maturity matrix with expert validation and a survey among 45 product managers and product management experts. The result is a validated maturity matrix that will guide further development of methodical support in SPM.

Keywords

software product management maturity requirements management 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Ebert, C.: The Impacts of Software Product Management. Journal of Systems and Software 80(6), 850–861 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    van de Weerd, I., Brinkkemper, S., Nieuwenhuis, R., Versendaal, J., Bijlsma, L.: Towards a Reference Framework for Software Product Management. In: Proceedings of the 14th Int. Requirements Engineering Conference, Minneapolis/St. Paul, USA, pp. 312–315 (2006)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bekkers, W., van de Weerd, I., Brinkkemper, S., Mahieu, A.: The Relevance of Situational Factors in Software Product Management. Technical report, UU-CS-2008-016, Utrecht University (2008)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    van de Weerd, I., Brinkkemper, S., Versendaal, J.: Concepts for Incremental Method Evolution: Empirical Exploration and Validation in Requirements Management. In: Krogstie, J., Opdahl, A.L., Sindre, G. (eds.) CAiSE 2007 and WES 2007. LNCS, vol. 4495, pp. 469–484. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hevner, A.R., March, S.T., Park, J., Ram, S.: Design Science in Information Systems Research. MIS Quarterly 28, 75–105 (2004)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Vaishnavi, V., Kuechler, B.: Design Research in Information Systems, AISWorld Net: http://www.isworld.org/Researchdesign/drisISworld.htm (retrieved December 7, 2007)
  7. 7.
    van Steenbergen, M., Bos, R., Brinkkemper, S., van de Weerd, I., Bekkers, W.: The Design of Focus Area Maturity Models. In: Proceedings of DESRIST 2010: Global Perspectives on Design Science Research, St.Gallen, Switzerland, June 4-5 (2010)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Abramovici, M., Soeg, O.C.: Status and Development Trends of Product Lifecycle Management Systems. Ruhr-University Bochum, Chair of ITM, Germany (2002)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Clements, P., Northrop, L.: Software Product Lines: Patterns and Practice. Addison Wesley, Reading (2001)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Van Steenbergen, M., Brinkkemper, S., van den Berg, M.: An Instrument for the Development of the Enterprise Architecture Practice. In: Proceedings of the 9th Int. Conference on Enterprise Information Systems, pp. 14–22 (2007)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Paulk, M.C., Curtis, B., Chrissis, M.B., Weber, C.V.: Capability Maturity Model, Version 1.1. IEEE Software 10(4), 18–27 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    CMMI Product Team: Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) Version 1.1 Staged Representation, Tech. Report CMU/SEI-2002-TR-029, Carnegie Mellon University (2002)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Cusumano, M.A.: The Business of Software. Free Press, New York (2004)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    ISO/IEC 15504, Information Technology – Software Process Assessment ISO/IEC (1996)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kuilboer, J.P., Ashrafi, N.: Software Process and Product Improvement: An Empirical Assessment. Information and Software Technology 42(1), 27–34 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Reifer, D.J.: The CMMi: It’s Formidable. Journal of Systems and Software 50(2), 97–98 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Zahran, S.: Software Process Improvement: Practical Guidelines for Business Success. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1997)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Brodman, J.G., Johnson, D.L.: What Small Businesses and Small Organization Say About the CMM. In: Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Software Engineering, pp. 247–262. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (1994)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Koomen, T., Baarda, R.: TMap Test Topics, Tutein Nolthenius, Den Bosch, The Netherlands (2005)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    van de Weerd, I.: IT and Software Product Management, http://www.softwareproductmanagement.org/ (retrieved Februari 1, 2009)
  21. 21.
    Wohlin, C., Runeson, P., Höst, M., Ohlsson, M.C., Regnell, B., Wesslén, A.: Experimentation in Software Engineering: An Introduction. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Norwell (1999)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    van de Weerd, I., Versendaal, J., Brinkkemper, S.: A Product Software Knowledge Infrastructure for Situational Capability Maturation: Vision and Case Studies in Product Management. In: Proceedings of the 12th Working Conference on Requirements Engineering: Foundation for Software Quality (REFSQ 2006), Luxembourg, pp. 97–112 (2006)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Bekkers, W., van de Weerd, I., Brinkkemper, S., Mahieu, A.: The Influence of Situational Factors in Software Product Management: An Empirical Study. In: Proceedings of the 21st International Workshop on Product Management, Barcelona (2008)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Inge van de Weerd
    • 1
  • Willem Bekkers
    • 1
  • Sjaak Brinkkemper
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Information and Computing SciencesUtrecht UniversityUtrechtThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations