Using practice outcome areas to understand perceived value of CMMI specific practices for SMEs

Authors:
Xi Chen;Mark Staples
Affiliations:
NICTA, Australia Technology Park, Sydney, NSW, Australia and School of Computer Science and Engineering, University of New South Wales, Australia;NICTA, Australia Technology Park, Sydney, NSW, Australia and School of Computer Science and Engineering, University of New South Wales, Australia
Venue:
EuroSPI'07 Proceedings of the 14th European conference on Software Process Improvement
Year:
2007

Citing 9
Cited 0

Managing the development of large software systems: concepts and techniques

ICSE '87 Proceedings of the 9th international conference on Software Engineering
The CMMI: it's formidable

Journal of Systems and Software
Lessons learned from 25 years of process improvement: the rise and fall of the NASA software engineering laboratory

Proceedings of the 24th International Conference on Software Engineering
Software Process Improvement at Hughes Aircraft

IEEE Software
Software Process Improvement At Raytheon

IEEE Software
How Software Process Improvement Helped Motorola

IEEE Software
Improving Software Process Improvement

IEEE Software
CMMI Guidlines for Process Integration and Product Improvement

CMMI Guidlines for Process Integration and Product Improvement
An exploratory study of why organizations do not adopt CMMI

Journal of Systems and Software

Quantified Score

Hi-index	0.00

Visualization

Abstract

In this article, we present a categorization of CMMI Specific Practices, and use this to reanalyze prior work describing the perceived value of those practices for Small-to-Medium-sized Enterprises (SMEs), in order to better understand the software engineering practice needs of SMEs. Our categorization is based not on process areas, but on outcome areas (covering organizational, process, project, and product outcomes) and on the nature of activities leading to outcomes in those areas (covering planning, doing, checking, and improvement activities). Our reanalysis of the perceived value of Specific Practices for the CMMI Level 2 Process Areas shows that SMEs most value practices for working on project-related outcomes, and for planning and doing work on product-related outcomes. Our categorization of practices will serve as a framework for further study about CMMI and other SPI approaches.