A Model for Selecting an Optimum Set of Measures in Software Organizations | SpringerLink
Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

A Model for Selecting an Optimum Set of Measures in Software Organizations

  • Conference paper
Software Process Improvement (EuroSPI 2009)

Part of the book series: Communications in Computer and Information Science ((CCIS,volume 42))

Included in the following conference series:

  • 1008 Accesses

Abstract

Most of the software organizations face difficulties in choosing the measures to collect since there is no universal set of measures for all types of organizations and projects. Experience shows that measurement can be more successful if the measures are collected based on the goals of the organization or the project which it will serve. However, one of the major constraints for the organizations is the associated cost for the resources needed when collecting the measures. Therefore, based on their goals, the software organizations require collecting not only as few measures from a large number of possible measures as possible but an optimum set of measures as well. In this paper, we propose a model, called ‘Optimum Measures Set Decision (OMSD) Model’, which is an extension of the well-known Goal Question Metric (GQM) paradigm using a heuristics approach. We performed a survey by distributing a structured questionnaire to a number of people from the industry in order evaluate and get feedback on these factors. We evaluated the rules of the model by means of some sample cases we created. In this paper, we discuss OMSD as well as the empirical studies we conducted in order to develop it.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
¥17,985 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
JPY 3498
Price includes VAT (Japan)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
JPY 5719
Price includes VAT (Japan)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
JPY 7149
Price includes VAT (Japan)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Wang, Q., Li, M.: Measuring and improving software process in China. In: International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering, p. 10 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bundschuh, M., Dekkers, C.: The Measurement Compendium: Estimating and Benchmarking Success with Functional Size Measurement. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  3. Goethert, W., Hayes, W.: Experiences in Implementing Measurement Programs. Technical Note, Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, CMU/SEI-2001-TN-026 (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Gopal, A., Krishnan, M.S., Mukhopadhyay, T., Goldenson, D.R.: Measurement Programs in Software Development: Determinants of Success. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 28(9), 863–875 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Hall, T., Fenton, N.: Implementing Effective Software Metrics Programs. IEEE Software 14(2), 55–65 (1997)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Basili, V.R., Weiss, D.M.: A Methodology for Collecting Valid Software Engineering Data. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering SE-10(6), 728–738 (1984)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Basili, V.R., Rombach, H.D.: The TAME Project: Towards Improvement-Oriented Software Environments. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering SE-14(6), 758–773 (1988)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Park, R.E., Goethert, W.B., Florac, W.A.: Goal-Driven Software Measurement - A Guidebook. Handbook. Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, CMU/SEI-96-HB-002 (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  9. ISO/IEC 15939 International Standard 1st Edition 2002: Software engineering — Software measurement process. Reference Number ISO/IEC 15939:2002(E) (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Berander, P., Jönsson, P.: A goal question metric based approach for efficient measurement framework definition. In: Proceedings of the 2006 ACM/IEEE international Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering. ISESE 2006, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, September 21 - 22, pp. 316–325. ACM, New York (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  11. DeMarco, T.: Why does software cost so much? Essay 2: Mad about Measurement, pp. 11–25. Dorset House Publishing, Co., Inc., New York (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Rubin, H.A.: The Top 10 Mistakes in IT Measurement. IT Metrics Strategies II(11) (1996), http://www.cutter.com/benchmark/1996toc.html

  13. Lavazza, L., Barresi, G.: Automated support for process-aware definition and execution of measurement plans. In: 27th international Conference on Software Engineering. ICSE 2005, St. Louis, MO, USA, May 15 - 21, pp. 234–243. ACM, New York (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Abdullah, H.M., Bhatti, A.M.: Deciding on Optimum set of Measures in Software Organizations. Master’s Thesis MSE-200901, Blekinge Institute of Technology, Ronneby, Sweden. pp. 1–66 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Principles of heuristics optimization, http://www.mm.helsinki.fi/kurssi/Marv/MSUU14/Heuristic.pdf

  16. Rina, D.: Constraint Processing. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Fenton, N.E., Pfleeger, S.L.: Software Metrics: A Rigorous and Practical Approach, 2nd edn. Course Technology (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  18. ISO/IEC 9126-1 International Standard 1st Edition 2001: Software engineering — Product quality — Part 1: Quality model. Reference Number ISO/IEC 9126-1:2001(E) (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  19. ISO/IEC 9126-2 International Standard 1st Edition 2003: Software engineering — Product quality — Part 1: Quality model. Referenc Number ISO/IEC 9126-2:2003(E) (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  20. ISO/IEC 9126-3 International Standard 1st Edition 2003: Software engineering — Product quality — Part 1: Quality model. Reference Number ISO/IEC 9126-3:2003(E) (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  21. ISO/IEC 9126-4 International Standard 1st Edition 2004: Software engineering — Product quality — Part 1: Quality model. Reference Number ISO/IEC 9126-4:2004 (E) (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  22. ISO/IEC 25000 International Standard 1st Edition 2005: Software engineering — Software product Quality Requirements and Evaluation (SQuaRE) — Guide to SQuaRE. Reference Number ISO/IEC 25000:2005(E) (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  23. CMMI Product Team: CMMI for Development Version 1.2 (CMMI-Dev, V1.2): Improving processes for better products. CMU/SEI-2006-TR-008, ESC-TR-2006-008, Software Engineering Institute, SEI (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Lamouchi, O., Cherif, A.R., Lévy, N.: A framework based measurements for evaluating an IS quality. In: Hinze, A., Kirchberg, M. (eds.) Proceedings of the Fifth on Asia-Pacific Conference on Conceptual Modelling - Volume 79. Wollongong, NSW, Australia, January 01. Conferences in Research and Practice in Information Technology Series, vol. 325, pp. 39–47. Australian Computer Society, Darlinghurst (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Thakkar, D., Hassan, A.E., Hamann, G., Flora, P.: A framework for measurement based performance modeling. In: Proceedings of the 7th international Workshop on Software and Performance. WOSP 2008, Princeton, NJ, USA, June 23 - 26, pp. 55–66. ACM, New York (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  26. Kaner, C., Bond, W.P.: Software Engineering Metrics: What Do They Measure and How Do We Know? In: 10th International Software Metrics Symposium, Metrics (2004), http://www.kaner.com/pdfs/metrics2004.pdf

  27. Murty, K.G.: Optimization Models For Decision Making, Dept. of Industrial & Operations Engineering, vol. 1. University of Michigan, Ann Arbor (2003), http://www.ioe.engin.umich.edu/people/fac/books/murty/opti_model/junior-0.pdf

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Engineering, Blekinge Institute of Technology, 372 25, Ronneby, Sweden

    Ansar Malook Bhatti, Hafiz Muhammad Abdullah & Cigdem Gencel

Authors
  1. Ansar Malook Bhatti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hafiz Muhammad Abdullah
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Cigdem Gencel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Lero, The Irish Software Engineering Research Centre and School of Computing, Dublin City University, Dublin, Ireland

    Rory V. O’Connor

  2. University of Hertfordshire, Hatfield, AL10 9AB, Hertfordshire, UK

    Nathan Baddoo

  3. University of Alcala, Madrid, Spain

    Juan Cuadrago Gallego  & Ricardo Rejas Muslera  & 

  4. Lappeenranta University of Technology, Lappeenranta, Finland

    Kari Smolander

  5. ISCN, Graz, Austria and ISCN, Bray, Co. Wicklow, Ireland

    Richard Messnarz

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2009 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Bhatti, A.M., Abdullah, H.M., Gencel, C. (2009). A Model for Selecting an Optimum Set of Measures in Software Organizations. In: O’Connor, R.V., Baddoo, N., Cuadrago Gallego, J., Rejas Muslera, R., Smolander, K., Messnarz, R. (eds) Software Process Improvement. EuroSPI 2009. Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol 42. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-04133-4_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-04133-4_4

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-04132-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-04133-4

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics