Incremental Method Engineering Approach for Process Improvement

1. Incremental Method Engineering Approach for Process Improvement by Dominique MirandolleInge van de Weerd Sjaak Brinkkemper

2. Content of this presentation Introduction & related research Research Candidate methods selection Case company Mapping candidate methods to case company Implementation Lessons learned Conclusion

3. Introduction Product software companies are constantly changing Company growth Environmental change Software development Product management Design new methods or adapt existing ones

4. Related research Situated method engineering Incremental method engineering Related work Software Product Management Competence Model & Maturity Matrix(Van de Weerd et al., 2008) Situational Factors(Bekkers, 2008) Process Deliverable Diagrams(Van de Weerd & Brinkkemper, 2008)

5. Related research Software Product Management Competence Model & Maturity Matrix (Van de Weerd et al., 2008)

6. Related research Situational Factors (Bekkers, 2008)

7. Related research Process Deliverable Diagrams (Van de Weerd & Brinkkemper, 2008)

8. Research How can incremental method engineering support process improvement in the sofware industry? 1. Select and analyze 8 candidate methods 2. Interview and analyze case company 3. Map methods fragments to case company 4. Implement method fragment

9. Candidate method selection Requirements prioritization capabilities A. Internal stakeholder involvement B. Prioritization method C. Customer involvement D. Cost revenue consideration E. Partner involvement

10. Candidate method selection Eight selected candidate methods: Binary Priority List Win Win requirements negotiation model Integer linear programming approach Requirements Triage MOSCOW Cost Value Approach Quality Function Development Features Prioritization Matrix Maturity Level Situational Factors

11. Candidate method selection Situational Factors Process Deliverable Diagram Maturity Level

12. Case company Product software company in the ‘search solutions’ domain (data mining, automatic sentiment analysis) Method for Requirement prioritization: MOSCOW Maturity Level on Req. Prior.: D Situational Factors

13. Mapping candidate methods to the case company Maturity level of candidate method > Maturity level case company method Situational Factors need to match

15. Key hole cylinder represents Situational Factors

17. Implementation Features Prioritization Matrix Multiple stakeholder sheet Process Deliverable Diagram before and after implementation

18. Lessons learned Situational Factors can be ‘matched’ by analyzing them for the case company, as well as for the candidate methods. Testing the adapted method in case company is necessary to prove practical application. None of the methods matched 31 SFs, a larger method base provides even more accurate match.

19. Conclusion Theoretical proof of concept of the success of incremental method engineering. Incremental method engineering can support the maturing of a software development method in a product software company. Changing a small part of the method, by adding a capability, can increase the overall maturity level.

20. Thank you for your attention

21. References Weerd, I. van de, Versendaal, J., Brinkkemper, S.: A Product Software Knowledge Infrastructure for Situational Capability Maturation: Vision and Case Studies in Product Management. In: Proceedings of the 12th working conference on requirements engineering: Foundation for software quality. (2006) Weerd, I. van de, Brinkkemper, S., Nieuwenhuis, R., Versendaal, J., & Bijlsma, L. (2006). Towards a reference framework for software product management. Proceedings of the 14th International Requirements Engineering Conference, Minneapolis/St. Paul, Minnesota, USA, 319-322. Bekkers, W.: Situational Process Improvement in Software Product Management. Utrecht, The Netherlands: Universiteit Utrecht. (2008) Bekkers, W., Weerd, I. v.: SPM Maturity Matrix, Technical report: UU-CS-2010-013. The Netherlands: University Utrecht. (2010) Weerd, I. van de, Brinkkemper, S.: Meta-modeling for situational analysis and design methods. In: M.R. Syed and S.N. Syed (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Modern Systems Analysis and Design Technologies and Applications (pp. 38-58). Hershey: Idea Group Publishing. (2008) Bebensee, Th., Weerd, I. van de, Brinkkemper, S.: Binary Priority List for Prioritizing Software Requirements. Submitted for publication. (2010) Boehm, B.: A Spiral Model of Software Development and Enhancement. In: Computer, May 1988, 61-72. (1988) Dantzig, B.G.: Linear Programming and Extensions. New Jersey: Princeton University Press. (1963) Davis, A. M.: The art of Requirements Triage. In: Computer, vol. 36, no. 3, 42-49. (2003) Stapleton, J.: DSDM Business Focused Development. Addison-Wesley Professional, Reading (2002) Karlsson, J., Ryan, K.: Prioritizing Requirements Using a Cost-Value Approach. In: 1EEE Software: 67-74. (1997) Mizuno, S., Akao, Y. (Eds.): Quality function deployment: integrating customer requirements into product design. Portland: Productivity Press Inc. (1990) Wiegers, Karl E.: First Things First: Prioritizing Requirements. In: Software Development Magazine Sept. 1999: 24-30. (1999) Bekkers, W. , Van de Weerd, I. , Brinkkemper, S. , Mahieu, A., The Influence of Situational Factors in Software Product Management: An Empirical Study, In: Proceedings of the 2008 Second International Workshop on Software Product Management, p.41-48, September 09-09, (2008) Stapleton, J., Dynamic Systems Development Method, In: Proceedings of the Technology of Object-Oriented Languages and Systems, p. 406, June 07-10. (1999)