Quantitative Quality Evaluation and Improvement in Incremental Financial Software Development

  • Bin Xu
  • Meng Chen
  • Cun Liu
  • Juefeng Li
  • Qiwei Zhu
  • Aleksander J. Kavs
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering book series (LNEE, volume 107)


Software quality is extremely important in financial software development. Though incremental software development enables high quality releases, efficient quality management is essential to make the best tradeoff between schedule, effort, cost and quality in order to reduce the potential risks in financial systems. In this chapter the authors suggest quantitative quality framework with a set of evaluation, analysis and improvement approaches. Related practice in a global IT corporation shows that the approaches have significant business value in avoiding decision issues.


Quantitative quality management Incremental financial software development Quality evaluation and improvement 



This work is part of “Global Collaborative Software Development” research project, which is an attempt to improve the dual-shore software development with integrated best practice, software engineering technology and project management methodology. The research project is funded by State Street Corporation, USA. The project is collaboration between Zhejiang University, China, and State Street Corporation, USA. All the company and product names are trademarks or registered trademarks of their respective owners. The contents of this chapter are the opinions and conclusions of the authors only and do not necessarily represent the position of State Street Corporation or its subsidiaries, affiliates, officers, directors or employees.


  1. 1.
    Original Software, Application Quality Management Survey Result (2010) Accessed 25 April 2011
  2. 2.
    Mills HD, Dyer M, Linger RC (1987) Cleanroom software engineering. IEEE Softw 4(5):19–24Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sommerville I (2001) Software engineering, 6th edn. Addison-Wesley, BostonGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ruhe G (2005) Software release planning. Handbook software engineering and knowledge engineering, vol. 3. World Scientific, Singapore, pp 365–394Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Xu B (2005) Extreme programming for distributed legacy system reengineering. COMPSAC 2:160–165Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Xu B (2010) Cost efficient software review in an E-Business software development project. ICEE :2680–2683Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Xu B, Pan XP (2006) Optimizing dual-shore SQA resource and activities in offshore outsourced software projects. CCECE  :2405–2409Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Xu B, Yang X, He Z, Srinivasa RM (2004) Achieving high quality in outsourcing reengineering projects throughout extreme programming. SMC 3:2131–2136Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Rose KH (2005) Project quality management: why, what and how. J.Ross Publishing, Fort LauderdaleGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ahire SL (1997) Management science—total quality management interfaces: an integrative framework. Interfaces 27(6):91–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wohlin C (1994) Managing software quality through incremental development and certification. Building quality into software. Computational Mechanics Publications, Southampton, pp 187–202Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Booch G, Jacobson I, Rumbaugh J (1999) The unified software development process. Addison-Wesley, ReadingGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Nørbjerg J (2002) Managing incremental development: combining flexibility and control. ECIS, Gdansk, pp 229–239Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kroll P, Kruchten P (2003) The rational unified process made easy: a practitioner’s guide to the RUP. Addison-Wesley, BostonGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Shuja Ahmad, Krebs Jochen (2007) IBM rational unified process reference and certification guide: solution designer. IBM Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    ISO/IEC 9126-1:2001 (2001) Software engineering—product quality—part 1: quality modelGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    ISO/IEC 14598-5:1998 (1998) International standard, information technology—software product evaluation—part 5: process for evaluatorsGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bin Xu
    • 1
  • Meng Chen
    • 2
  • Cun Liu
    • 2
  • Juefeng Li
    • 2
  • Qiwei Zhu
    • 2
  • Aleksander J. Kavs
    • 3
  1. 1.College of Computer Science & TechnologyZhejiang UniversityHangzhouChina
  2. 2.State Street TechnologyHangzhouPeople’s Republic of China
  3. 3.State Street CorporationBostonUSA

Personalised recommendations