Abstract
Whereas BPR (Business Process Re-engineering or Business Process Re-design) is being offered as a means by which organizations may be able to respond to the challenge of increased competition, Process Improvement, on the other hand aims to improve productivity, product quality and competitive advantage. Fundamentally, both activities offer a means by which organizations may be able to deal with a rapidly changing business environment, through internal change. BPR extends the concept of process change (albeit rapid change through innovation) to include changes to the basic assumptions and principles of management. The results, however are not positive: estimates of between 50 and 70% of firms fail to achieve the expected dramatic gains from BPR. An alternative to BPR for software development organizations is Process Assessment and Process Improvement. This paper presents a Process/Product Quality Model which incorporates three separate evaluations: process conformance, process effectiveness and product quality as a means of evaluating ‘what is’, i.e. the current status of activities, within a software development organization. The model aims to identify possible areas for process improvement and to uncover all relevant issues which may affect attempts to implement improvement initiatives. Preliminary findings from a set of case studies conducted within software development organizations in Australia are presented in support of the usefulness of the model.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
M. Hammer and J. Champy.Reengineering the Corporation: a Manifesto for Business Revolution (Harper Business Press, New York, 1993).
T.H. Davenport,Process Innovation: Reengineering Work through Information Technology (Harvard Business Press, Boston, 1993).
J.F. Craig and P.W. Yetton, [1] The dual strategic and change role of IT: A critique of business process reengineering, AGSM Working Paper 94-002 University of New South Wales, 1994.
J.L. Gasston. Linking the evaluation of software process quality to product quality, inProceedings of PRIISM '96 International Conference, 1–3 January 1996 Maui, USA.
ISO/IEC JTC1/SC7,Process Management Study: The Need and Requirements for a Software Process Assessment Standard, Report N944R, Issue 2.0, London, 11 June 1992.
B. Glasson. Business process re-engineering: information systems opportunities or challenge? inProceedings of the TC8AUS IFIP Information Systems International Working Conference, Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia, May 8–11, 1994, pp. 1–6.
R.T. Vidgen, J.R.G. Wood and A.T. Wood-Harper, Business process reengineering: the need for a methodology to re-vision the organisation, inProceedings of the TC8AUS IFIP Information Systems International Working Conference, Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia, May 8–11, 1994, pp. 637–646.
J. King. A revisionist view of re-engineering, inProceedings of the TC8AUS IFIP Information Systems International Working Conference, Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia, May 8–11, 1994, pp. 47–56.
C. Butler. The role of I/T in facilitating BPR: observations from the literature, inProceedings of the TC8AUS IFIP Information Systems International Working Conference, Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia, May 8–11, 1994, pp. 153–166.
N. Bjorn-Anderson. Reengineering the role of IS professionals, inProceedings of the TC8AUS IFIP Information Systems International Working Conference, Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia, May 8–11, 1994, pp. 17–26.
R. Baskerville, J. Travis and D. Truex. Systems without method: the impact of new technologies on information systems development projects, inThe Impact of Computer Supported Technologies on Information Systems Development, K.E. Kendallet al. (eds) (Elsevier Science Publishers, North-Holland, IFIP 1992).
M. Jarke and K. Pohl, Information systems quality and quality information systems, inThe Impact of Computer Supported Technologies on Information SystemsDevelopment, K.E. Kendall,et al. (eds) (Elsevier Science Publishers, North-Holland, IFIP, 1992).
M.C. Paulk, B. Curtis, M.B. Chrissis and C.V. Weber, CMU/SEI-93-TR-24 Capability Maturity Model for Software, Version 1.1, SEI, Pittsburgh, PA., February 1993.
L. Smircich, Concepts of culture and organizational analysis,Administrative Science Quarterly,28 (1983) 339–358.
P.B. Crosby.Quality is Free (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1979).
W.E. Deming,Out of the Crisis (Cambridge University Press, 1982).
A.C. Gillies,Software Quality Theory and Management (Chapman and Hall, London).
ISO-SPICE (Software process Improvement and Capability dEtermination), Special initiative for Software Process Assessment Standardization, ISO/IEC JTC1/SC7/WG10, 1993–96.
J.L. Gasston and T.P. Rout, Can the effectiveness of software process be assessed?Software Quality Journal,3 (1994) 153–166.
J.L. Gasston and T.P. Rout. An instrument for the assessment of software process effectiveness, inProceedings of the First Australian Conference on Software Metrics, Sydney, NSW, November, 1993.
J.L. Gasston, A Framework for evaluating the quality of software processes and products, inProceedings of 2nd International SPICE Symposium, T.P. Rout (ed.) 1995, pp. 103–108.
B.W. Boehm, J.R. Brown, M. Lopow, G.J. Macleod and M.J. Merritt.Characteristics of Software Quality (North-Holland, New York, 1978).
B. Kitchenham. Towards a constructive quality model,Software Engineering Journal, July (1987) 105–112.
M. Duetsch and R. Willis.Software Quality Engineering (Prentice-Hall, 1988).
R.G. Dromey, A model for software product quality,IEEE Software Engineering,21, (1995) 1–18.
R.G. Dromey. Cornering the Chimera,IEEE Software,13 (1996).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Gasston, J.L. Process improvement: an alternative to BPR for software development organizations. Software Qual J 5, 171–183 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00678582
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00678582