The IRMA Community
Newsletters
Research IRM
Click a keyword to search titles using our InfoSci-OnDemand powered search:
|
Software Process Improvement for Small and Very Small Enterprises
|
|
Author(s): Mohammad Zarour (King Abdulaziz City for Science and Technology, Saudi Arabia), Alain Abran (École de Technologie Supérieure, Canada)and Jean-Marc Desharnais (Bogaziçi University, Turkey)
Copyright: 2012
Pages: 22
Source title:
Software Process Improvement and Management: Approaches and Tools for Practical Development
Source Author(s)/Editor(s): Shukor Sanim Mohd Fauzi (University Teknologi Mara, Malaysia), Mohd Hairul Nizam Md Nasir (University of Malaya, Malaysia), Nuraminah Ramli (Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris, Malaysia)and Shamsul Sahibuddin (Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Malaysia)
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61350-141-2.ch009
Purchase
|
Abstract
Software organizations have been struggling for decades to improve the quality of their products by improving their software development processes. Designing an improvement program for a software development process is a demanding and complex task. This task consists of two main processes: the assessment process and the improvement process. A successful improvement process requires first a successful assessment; failing to assess the organization’s software development process could create unsatisfactory results. Although very small enterprises (VSEs) have several interesting characteristics such as flexibility and ease of communications, initiating an assessment and improvement process based on well-known Software Process Improvement (SPI) models such as Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) and ISO 15504 is more challenging in such VSEs. Accordingly, researchers and practitioners have designed a few assessment methods to meet the needs of VSEs organizations to initiate an SPI process. This chapter discusses the assessment and improvement process in VSEs; we first examine VSEs characteristics and problems. Next, we discuss the different assessment methods and standards designed to fit the needs of such organizations and how to compare them. Finally, we present future research work perceived in this context.
Related Content
|
Subrata Tikadar, Kaushik Paul, Abhishek Mukhopadhyay.
© 2026.
26 pages.
|
|
Devanshi Shrivastava, Debanshi Chakraborty, Manjusha Pandey, Siddharth Swarup Rautray.
© 2026.
32 pages.
|
|
Harshita Gupta, Suman Suman Majumder.
© 2026.
12 pages.
|
|
Subhajit Ghosh.
© 2026.
38 pages.
|
|
Sanjib Kundu, Sourav Kayal.
© 2026.
40 pages.
|
|
Sudip Chatterjee, Pronaya Bhattacharya, Subrata Tikadar.
© 2026.
14 pages.
|
|
Chandan Kumar Singh.
© 2026.
40 pages.
|
|
|