Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Software or Service? That’s the question!

553 views

Published on

In Information and Communication Technology (ICT) a ‘deliverable’ may be either software (perceived as an ‘output’) or a service (perceived as an ‘outcome’). On the one hand, the differences between software and service have led to the design of parallel models and lifecycles with more commonalities than differences, thereby not supporting the adoption of different frameworks. For instance, a software project could be managed applying best practices for services (e.g. ITIL), while some processes (e.g. Verification & Validation) are better defined in models of the Software Management domain. Thus, this paper aims at reconciling these differences and provides suggestions for a better joint usage of models/frameworks. To unify existing models we use the LEGO approach, which aims at keeping the element of interest from any potential model/framework for being inserted in the process architecture of the target Business Process Model (BPM) of an organization, strengthening the organizational way of working. An example of a LEGO application is presented to show the benefit from the joint view of the ‘software + service’ sides as a whole across the project lifecycle, increasing the opportunity to have many more sources for this type of improvement task.

Published in: Software
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Software or Service? That’s the question!

  1. 1. www.eng.it 25°International Workshop on Software Measurement (IWSM) and 10th International Conference on Software Process and Product Measurement (MENSURA) Krakow (Poland) - October 5-7, 2015 Luigi Buglione Alain Abran Christiane Gresse von Wangenheim Fergal McCaffery Jean C.R. Hauck That’s the question!Software or Service?
  2. 2. www.eng.it2 IWSM-MENSURA 2015 – October 5, 2015 © 2015 Buglione; Abran, Gresse von Wangenheim, McCaffery, Hauck Goals of the presentation 1. Discuss the differences between Software (product) and Service 2. Look at the ‘big picture’ for achieving a lower Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) when dealing with both ‘sides of the story’ at the same time 3. Present a LEGO (Living EnGineering prOcess) example with the KM process Software or Service?
  3. 3. www.eng.it3 IWSM-MENSURA 2015 – October 5, 2015 © 2015 Buglione; Abran, Gresse von Wangenheim, McCaffery, Hauck ETS - GELOG At a glance gelog.etsmtl.ca
  4. 4. www.eng.it4 IWSM-MENSURA 2015 – October 5, 2015 © 2015 Buglione; Abran, Gresse von Wangenheim, McCaffery, Hauck DKIT At a glance Dundalk Institute of Technology is a 90 acre campus situated between Dublin and Belfast (each approximately 50 miles away). The Institute consists of 4 Schools: 1. Business & Humanities 2. Informatics & Creative Arts 3. Engineering 4. Health & ScienceThe Regulated Software Research Group is part of LERO (the Irish Software Engineering Research Centre) at the School of Informatics & Creative Media
  5. 5. www.eng.it5 IWSM-MENSURA 2015 – October 5, 2015 © 2015 Buglione; Abran, Gresse von Wangenheim, McCaffery, Hauck UFSC At a glance Federal University of Santa Catarina Florianópolis/Brazil [http://www.ufsc.br] • 25,737 Undergraduate students • 8,543 Graduate students • 34,280 Students INCoD an institute for excellence in research, validation and dissemination to support digital convergence. [http://www.incod.ufsc.br] The Software Quality Group focuses on scientific research, development and transfer of SE models, methods & tools. [http://www.gqs.ufsc.br] [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V6E1Z5DEuvk]
  6. 6. www.eng.it6 IWSM-MENSURA 2015 – October 5, 2015 © 2015 Buglione; Abran, Gresse von Wangenheim, McCaffery, Hauck Engineering At a glance www.eng.it
  7. 7. www.eng.it7 IWSM-MENSURA 2015 – October 5, 2015 © 2015 Buglione; Abran, Gresse von Wangenheim, McCaffery, Hauck Software or Service? Let’s Social...ize! If you want to share comments/notes/pics…  @IWSMMensura  @lbu_measure  #LEGO  #MCM  #SvcMgmt …
  8. 8. www.eng.it8 IWSM-MENSURA 2015 – October 5, 2015 © 2015 Buglione; Abran, Gresse von Wangenheim, McCaffery, Hauck Agenda • Introduction – Software (product) or Service? – Is it a glossary issue? – Some examples… • MCMs (Maturity & Capability Models) – Representations & Dimensions – Why do we need choosing a MCM? – Coverage & classification of MCMs – Why KM could be valuable when joining Sw+Svc? • MCMs & KM in Horizontal MCMs (H-MCMs) – CMMI-DEV/SVC and ISO 15504-2 – Other Sources • LEGO and KM – The LEGO approach – Applying LEGO to KM- Elements of Interest (EoI) – Suggested Improvements • Conclusions & Prospects • Q & A Software or Service?
  9. 9. www.eng.it9 IWSM-MENSURA 2015 – October 5, 2015 © 2015 Buglione; Abran, Gresse von Wangenheim, McCaffery, Hauck Are they the same or not?Introduction • Can we manage them all in the same way or not? • What are the commonalities & differences? • What are you buying: a product or a service?
  10. 10. www.eng.it10 IWSM-MENSURA 2015 – October 5, 2015 © 2015 Buglione; Abran, Gresse von Wangenheim, McCaffery, Hauck Some (important) questions...Introduction What is a software project and what is a service? E.g...which differences between CMMI-DEV and CMMI-SVC? Are ITIL or eTOM models valid only for the IT Service Management domain or not? How much value are we creating for our projects?
  11. 11. www.eng.it11 IWSM-MENSURA 2015 – October 5, 2015 © 2015 Buglione; Abran, Gresse von Wangenheim, McCaffery, Hauck Introduction Product vs Service? ISO Glossary • Service is the result of at least 1 activity necessarily performed at the interface between the supplier and customer and is generally intangible” (ISO 9000:2005,§3.4.2, note 2). • Product is the result of a process, and that “there are 4 generic product categories: services, software, hardware, processed materials”. • ..“many products comprise elements belonging to different product categories[…] Ex: the offered product ‘automobile’ consists of hardware (e.g. tyres), processed materials (e.g. fuel, cooling liquid), software (e.g. engine control software..) and service (e.g. operating explanations given by the salesman)”. (ISO 9000:2005,§3.4.2, note 1).
  12. 12. www.eng.it12 IWSM-MENSURA 2015 – October 5, 2015 © 2015 Buglione; Abran, Gresse von Wangenheim, McCaffery, Hauck Introduction (IT) Service Management – Value • Value  Utility + Warranty • Service is a means of delivering value to customers by facilitating outcomes customers want to achieve without the ownership of specific costs and risks. (ITIL v3 Glossary, 2011)
  13. 13. www.eng.it13 IWSM-MENSURA 2015 – October 5, 2015 © 2015 Buglione; Abran, Gresse von Wangenheim, McCaffery, Hauck Introduction The Entity question • Is the ‘project scope’ a software or a service project? • If a service has a wider scope than a strictly software project, why not use such a representation where a service can include 2+ sub-projects (Sw+Svc)? • BTW, maintenance…is a service! • Thus…isn’t only a wording (more than a content) issue? • Looking at MCMs, CMMI-DEV and CMMI-SVC: share 16 out of 22 processes • …but what about the other potential MCMs to be explored?
  14. 14. www.eng.it14 IWSM-MENSURA 2015 – October 5, 2015 © 2015 Buglione; Abran, Gresse von Wangenheim, McCaffery, Hauck Introduction Quality Models: only for Software? • Substituting “System/Software Product” with “Service”, couldn’t ISO 25010 be applied to a service or not? Only to ICT services or to a generic service? • Direct consequences  right now different ISO WG for software and services, with the risk to duplicate models and efforts (e.g. maturity models for services from WG10 and WG25-40) with possible confusions for adopters  the adoption of the same standards for Software and Service communities could lower the TCO (Total Cost of Ownership) for ICT projects
  15. 15. www.eng.it15 IWSM-MENSURA 2015 – October 5, 2015 © 2015 Buglione; Abran, Gresse von Wangenheim, McCaffery, Hauck Introduction Sw/Svc: friends or foes? Model Software Service Differences • (Meant as a) ‘Product’ • ‘More’ tangible • QMS: ISO 9001 (EA 33 code) • ‘Service’ • ‘Less’ tangible • QMS: ISO 9001 (EA 35 code) • SMS: ISO 20000-x specifies better some req’s Commonalities • Same requirements in many cases among respective standards in each domain • ISO 9000 glossary mentions ‘product’ for ‘product/service’ • SaaS  «Software» as a Service or «Service as a Software»? Possible benefits • Reduce the overall TCO for a project (including both) by:  Unique, continuous lifecycle and process flow (lifetime for a system)  Same glossary (e.g. SEVOCAB)  e.g. CR or RfC?  Knowledge Management (KM)  see later  Product/service (ROI + VOI)  ...
  16. 16. www.eng.it16 IWSM-MENSURA 2015 – October 5, 2015 © 2015 Buglione; Abran, Gresse von Wangenheim, McCaffery, Hauck Introduction Sw+Svc – Example: US2 + INVEST Grid
  17. 17. www.eng.it17 IWSM-MENSURA 2015 – October 5, 2015 © 2015 Buglione; Abran, Gresse von Wangenheim, McCaffery, Hauck Agenda • Introduction – Software (product) or Service? – Is it a glossary issue? – Some examples… • MCMs (Maturity & Capability Models) – Representations & Dimensions – Why do we need choosing a MCM? – Coverage and classification of MCMs – Why KM could be valuable when joining Sw+Svc? • MCMs & KM in Horizontal MCMs (H-MCMs) – CMMI-DEV/SVC and ISO/IEC 15504-2 – Other Sources • LEGO and KM – The LEGO approach – Applying LEGO to KM- Elements of Interest (EoI) – Suggested Improvements • Conclusions & Prospects • Q & A Software or Service?
  18. 18. www.eng.it18 IWSM-MENSURA 2015 – October 5, 2015 © 2015 Buglione; Abran, Gresse von Wangenheim, McCaffery, Hauck Why do we need choosing a MCMs?MCMs
  19. 19. www.eng.it19 IWSM-MENSURA 2015 – October 5, 2015 © 2015 Buglione; Abran, Gresse von Wangenheim, McCaffery, Hauck Representations - StagedMCMs • ML: 5 • PA: 24 • N.min PA : ML1 (0) • N.max PA : ML3 (13) ML Focus Id. PA Title 5 Optimizing OPM Organizational Performance Management CAR Causal Analysis & Resolution 4 Predictable OPP Organizational Process Performance QPM Quantitative Project Management 3 Defined RD Requirement Development TS Technical Solution PI Product Integration VAL Validation VER Verification OPD Organizational Process Definition OPF Organizational Process Focus OT Organizational Training IPM Integrated Project Management RSKM Risk Management DAR Decision Analysis & Resolution 2 Managed REQM Requirement Management PP Project Planning PMC Project Monitoring & Control SAM Supplier Agreement Management MA Measurement & Analysis PPQA Process & Product Quality Assurance
  20. 20. www.eng.it20 IWSM-MENSURA 2015 – October 5, 2015 © 2015 Buglione; Abran, Gresse von Wangenheim, McCaffery, Hauck Representations - ContinuousMCMs • PA categories: 4 • PA: 24  22 • N.min PA per Category : Process Management (5) • N.max PA per Category: Project Management (7) Process Categories Maturity Levels Process Management Project Management Engineering Support Optimizing OPM CAR Predictable OPP QPM Defined OPF OPD OT IPM RKSM RD TS PI VER VAL DAR Managed PP PMC SAM REQM CM MA PPQA Initial Ad-hoc processes
  21. 21. www.eng.it21 IWSM-MENSURA 2015 – October 5, 2015 © 2015 Buglione; Abran, Gresse von Wangenheim, McCaffery, Hauck Representations – Continuous (example)MCMs Special cause (GP.2.2 @ OT) Common cause (GP.2.9 @ +PA) • Source: http://goo.gl/i6IvI
  22. 22. www.eng.it22 IWSM-MENSURA 2015 – October 5, 2015 © 2015 Buglione; Abran, Gresse von Wangenheim, McCaffery, Hauck MCMs Classifying MCMs by Dimension • Horizontal: MMs going through the whole supply chain  SwEng: ISO 15504, CMMI, FAA i-CMM, … • Vertical: MMs focusing on a single perspective/group of processes  Test Mgmt: TMM, TPI, …  Project Mgmt: PM-MM, OPM3, …  Requirement Mgmt: .... • Diagonal: MMs focused on Organizational/Support processes  People CMM, TSP, PSP, … Source:BuglioneL.,AnEcologicalViewonProcessImprovement:SomeThoughtsfor ImprovingProcessAppraisals,4WCSQ,4thWorldCongressonSoftwareQuality, WashingtonD.C.(USA),15-18September2008
  23. 23. www.eng.it23 IWSM-MENSURA 2015 – October 5, 2015 © 2015 Buglione; Abran, Gresse von Wangenheim, McCaffery, Hauck Agenda • Introduction – Software (product) or Service? – Is it a glossary issue? – Some examples… • MCMs (Maturity & Capability Models) – Representations & Dimensions – Why do we need choosing a MCM? – Coverage and classification of MCMs – Why KM could be valuable when joining Sw+Svc? • MCMs & KM in Horizontal MCMs (H-MCMs) – CMMI-DEV/SVC and ISO/IEC 15504-2 – Other Sources • LEGO and KM – The LEGO approach – Applying LEGO to KM- Elements of Interest (EoI) – Suggested Improvements • Conclusions & Prospects • Q & A Software or Service?
  24. 24. www.eng.it24 IWSM-MENSURA 2015 – October 5, 2015 © 2015 Buglione; Abran, Gresse von Wangenheim, McCaffery, Hauck CMMI-DEV and ISO 15504 – KM ref’sMCMs and KM Model CMMI-DEV/SVC ISO 15504-12207 Domain Sw/Svc Sw-SE--Svc PRM (source) CMMI-SVC v1.3 ISO 12207 PRM (# Processes) 22 47 Process Categories 4 (Engineering, Process, Project, Support) 9 (Primary: Acquisition, Supply, Operation, Engineering; Organizational: Management, Reuse, Resource & Infrastructure, Process Improvement Management; Support: Supporting) KM-related process(es) None (KM practices are dealt in P-CMM) 3 (RIN.3 – Knowledge Mangaement) PAM ext. Appraisals SCAMPI v1.3 ISO 15504-2 ISO 15504-5 PAM reuse-related issues GP 2.5 (Train People) 6 RIN.3 BPs
  25. 25. www.eng.it25 IWSM-MENSURA 2015 – October 5, 2015 © 2015 Buglione; Abran, Gresse von Wangenheim, McCaffery, Hauck MCMs and KM Model/ Framework Repr. Type ML (#) Architect- Type Comments/Notes APQC KMMM Staged 5 [1-5] Level-based  --- Siemens KMMM Staged 5 [1-5] Level-based  8 Key Areas ONTOKNOM Staged 5 [1-5] Level-based  Ontology included G-KMMM Staged 5 [1-5] Matrix -based  Assessment with questionnaire by ML InfoSys KMMM Staged 5 [1-5] Level-based  --- KPMG Knowledge Journey Staged 5 [1-5] Level-based  4 KPAs K3M Staged 8 [1-8] Level-based  --- KMCA Staged 6 [0-5] Level-based  Added a ‘zero’ ML ITIL v3 Refresh 2011 --- --- ---  Svc Mgmt Framework, 5 SLC phases  KM in the Svc Transition (ST) phase; 7-Step Improvement Process in CSI (Continual Svc Improvement) phase Microsoft MOF v4 --- --- ---  Svc Mgmt Framework, 4 SLC phases  KM in the ‘Manage’ phase COBIT --- --- ---  IT Governance Framework  4 main phases (PO, AI, DS, ME) Choosing KM MCMs - Results
  26. 26. www.eng.it26 IWSM-MENSURA 2015 – October 5, 2015 © 2015 Buglione; Abran, Gresse von Wangenheim, McCaffery, Hauck Agenda • Introduction – Software (product) or Service? – Is it a glossary issue? – Some examples… • MCMs (Maturity & Capability Models) – Representations & Dimensions – Why do we need choosing a MCM? – Coverage and classification of MCMs – Why KM could be valuable when joining Sw+Svc? • MCMs & KM in Horizontal MCMs (H-MCMs) – CMMI-DEV/SVC and ISO/IEC 15504-2 – Other Sources • LEGO and KM – The LEGO approach – Applying LEGO to KM- Elements of Interest (EoI) – Suggested Improvements • Conclusions & Prospects • Q & A Software or Service?
  27. 27. www.eng.it27 IWSM-MENSURA 2015 – October 5, 2015 © 2015 Buglione; Abran, Gresse von Wangenheim, McCaffery, Hauck LEGO and SvcMgmt The LEGO Approach 1. MCM Repository 2. Process Architecture 4. Appraisal Method3. Mappings & Comparisons 1. Identify goals 2. Query the MCM repository 3. Include new elements 4. Adapt & Adopt Source: Buglione L., Gresse von Wangenheim C., Hauck J.C.R., Mc Caffery F., The LEGO Maturity & Capability Model Approach, Proceedings of 5WCSQ, 5th World Congress on Software Quality, Shanghai (China), Oct 31- Nov 4 2011
  28. 28. www.eng.it28 IWSM-MENSURA 2015 – October 5, 2015 © 2015 Buglione; Abran, Gresse von Wangenheim, McCaffery, Hauck Applying LEGO to KMExperiencing LEGO... The LEGO steps & related activities & outcomes: 1. Identify Goals  Improve the internal Knowledge Management (KM) capability in order to generate more value to our organization along time (product+service)  Assumed the target BPM (Business Process Model) to improve is generically the ISO 15504 RIN.3 process 2. Query the MCM repository  Filtere the list of available KM-based MCMs from the MCM repository  Next table (EoI – Element of Interest) is a filter of the elements by each of the KM MCMs considered 3. Include new elements into the target BPM  Next table (Suggested Improvements) lists the possible EoI matched with the requested MCMs (both SPs and GPs) 4. Adapt & Adopt  Map each practice of the improved process to the related internal QMS process(es)  Validate the mapping results before using it in the daily activities
  29. 29. www.eng.it29 IWSM-MENSURA 2015 – October 5, 2015 © 2015 Buglione; Abran, Gresse von Wangenheim, McCaffery, Hauck Applying LEGO to KM – Why?Experiencing LEGO... • ITIL v3 DIKW • Data/Information/Knowledge/Wisdom  Four KM waves  Verifying (DIKW): Data  Information  Knowledge  Wisdom  Building (WKID): Wisdom  Knowledge  Information  Data  ‘5W’s+H’ rule (who, what, when, where, how, why)  Two dimensions: Context; Understanding • SECI Model – (Nonaka/Tageuchi, 1995)  Socialization, Externalization, Combination, Internalization  From Tacit to Explicit Knowledge
  30. 30. www.eng.it30 IWSM-MENSURA 2015 – October 5, 2015 © 2015 Buglione; Abran, Gresse von Wangenheim, McCaffery, Hauck Step 2 - EoI: Elements of Interest (1/2) Model/ Framework Elements of Interest (EoI) APQC KMMM  --- Siemens KMMM  8 Key Areas (Planning, Ext Knowledge, People, Informal Rules, Operation, Int. Knowledge, Technology, Formal Rules) ONTOKNOM  KM Maturity Model Ontology based on three components (Admin, Author, User) KPMG KJourney  4 KPAs (People, Process, Content, Technology) G-KMMM  3 KPAs (People/Org, Process, Technology) K3M  More refined levels for a gradual implementation  Top-down retention measurement at ML3 and a formal Org Knowledge Base (ML4) KMCA  Separating ‘behavior’ and ‘infrastructure’ into the analysis LEGO and KM
  31. 31. www.eng.it31 IWSM-MENSURA 2015 – October 5, 2015 © 2015 Buglione; Abran, Gresse von Wangenheim, McCaffery, Hauck Step 2 - EoI: Elements of Interest (2/2) Model/ Framework Elements of Interest (EoI) ITIL v3 KM  Overall, global concept of SKMS (Service Knowledge Management System)  The four waves for KM: DIKW (Data, Information, Knowledge, Wisdom)  Goal-oriented KM, well linked with the Measurement perspective and the CSI (Continual Service Improvement) process Microsoft MOF v4  ‘Plan’ phase, POL (Policy) area, Process 2 (Create Policy), activity #5 (Create KM policies)  ‘Operate’ phase, CUS (Customer Service) area, Process 3 (Resolve the Request), activities asking to search, locate, verify knowledge base articles  ‘Manage’ phase, GRC (Governance, Risk, Compliance) area, Process 2 (Assess, Monitor & Risk), Activity #9 (Learn from prior effects and update the Knowledge Base)  Stressed the ‘learning’ activity as a ‘risky’ element whether not properly managed COBIT v4.1  PO2.1 (Enterprise Architecture Model)  PO2.4 (Integrity Management)  AI4.2 (Knowledge Transfer to Business Management)  AI4.3 (Knowledge Transfer to End Users)  AI4.4 (Knowledge Transfer to Operation and Support Staff) LEGO and KM
  32. 32. www.eng.it32 IWSM-MENSURA 2015 – October 5, 2015 © 2015 Buglione; Abran, Gresse von Wangenheim, McCaffery, Hauck Step 3 - Suggestions for Improvement ISO 15504 RIN.3 process Suggested Improvements BP 01 – Establish a KM system  Distinguish the ‘behavior’ from the ‘infrastructure’ [KMCA]  Define/Refine which Information Systems are part of the overall SKMS in Architectural terms [ITIL][COBIT PO2.1]  Define – according to the ‘four waves of KM’ – the layers and related IS for gathering and distributing data, information, knowledge and wisdom [ITIL] BP 02 - Create the Network of Knowledge contributors  Create and update a list of (primary, secondary) stakeholders to consider as the main input for formulating requirements and for checking their validity [COBIT PO2.4] BP 03 – Develop a KM strategy  The strategy should have clear KM axes of interest well defined from the beginning, to be periodically updated [ITIL SS, Siemens KMMM; KPMG KJourney; G-KMMM]  The specification of which KM areas could be the most relevant to the organization for a proper generation of value is welcome [Siemens KMMM, G-KMMM, KPMG]  Consider KM process and its implication also from a Risk perspective [MOF]  A KM Ontology could help during the creation/periodical update of the organizational overall strategy [ONTOKNOM]  The KM Strategy must be goal-oriented, receiving feedbacks from previous improvements put in action [ITIL CSI; MOF Plan] BP 04 - Capture Knowledge  Revise periodically the potential sources of data/information gathering, also considering new technologies (e.g. Social media and the possibility to interface organization’s website and intranet) [MOF Operate CUS; SECI model [14]) BP 05 – Disseminate Knowledge Assets (KAs)  Keep in mind several stakeholders, not only customers but mostly Users and their perceptions in the creation of value [COBIT AI4.x][ITIL CSI] BP 06 - Improve KAs  KAs must be managed as one of the several organization’s Configuration Items (CI) to be updated on a regular basis [ITIL ST]  KAs must be updated as part of a regular CSI (Continual Service Improvement) program [ITIL CSI] LEGO and KM
  33. 33. www.eng.it33 IWSM-MENSURA 2015 – October 5, 2015 © 2015 Buglione; Abran, Gresse von Wangenheim, McCaffery, Hauck Agenda • Introduction – Software (product) or Service? – Is it a glossary issue? – Some examples… • MCMs (Maturity & Capability Models) – Representations & Dimensions – Why do we need choosing a MCM? – Coverage and classification of MCMs – Why KM could be valuable when joining Sw+Svc? • MCMs & KM in Horizontal MCMs (H-MCMs) – CMMI-DEV/SVC and ISO/IEC 15504-2 – Other Sources • LEGO and KM – The LEGO approach – Applying LEGO to KM- Elements of Interest (EoI) – Suggested Improvements • Conclusions & Prospects • Q & A Software or Service?
  34. 34. www.eng.it34 IWSM-MENSURA 2015 – October 5, 2015 © 2015 Buglione; Abran, Gresse von Wangenheim, McCaffery, Hauck Conclusions & Future Works • Software and Service: friends or foes?  Often there is a ‘wording’ barrier more than a real difference between the 2 worlds  E.g. ‘product’ in the ISO glossary can refer to both to products and services  E.g. ISO 20000-1 is a service-oriented specification of ISO 9001  A service can manage a software, a software can be used by a service  Value should be the sum of Utility+Warranty, both for a product and a service  Thus, Value is the final goal to achieve in order to really improve our activities • Models and Methods  Many models, taxonomies and frameworks can be valid for both domains  The value in better defined points of contacts with a lower TCO for projects  E.g. ITIL is not only for IT services and can be a good framework for strategy and design suggestions not valid, as well as for reinforcing the design of a software project • LEGO’ (Living EnGineering prOcess) approach • http://slideshare.re/nssLR8 [5WCSQ, Shangai, Nov 2011] • Choose and integrate the ‘pieces of the puzzle’ you need for your goals the target is your QMS, not the model(s) you are using  Next Steps  Identify further ‘silver bullets’ for leveraging the joint view of products and services, also from a business viewpoint  Hybridize more models and techniques between the two communities for benchmarking purposes All models are wrong. Some models are useful. (George Box, Mathematician, 1919-2013) Software or Service?
  35. 35. www.eng.it35 IWSM-MENSURA 2015 – October 5, 2015 © 2015 Buglione; Abran, Gresse von Wangenheim, McCaffery, Hauck Lessons Learned... URL:www.dilbert.com Software or Service?
  36. 36. www.eng.it36 IWSM-MENSURA 2015 – October 5, 2015 © 2015 Buglione; Abran, Gresse von Wangenheim, McCaffery, Hauck Q & A Dziękuję za uwagę! Thanks for your attention! Software or Service?
  37. 37. www.eng.it37 IWSM-MENSURA 2015 – October 5, 2015 © 2015 Buglione; Abran, Gresse von Wangenheim, McCaffery, Hauck Our Contact DataSoftware or Service? Luigi Buglione Engineering Ing. Inf. /ETS luigi.buglione@eng.it Fergal McCaffery DKIT fergal.mccaffery@dkit.ie C. Gresse von Wangenheim UFSC gresse@gmail.com Alain Abran ETS alain.abran@etsmtl.ca Jean Carlo R. Hauck UFSC jeanhauck@gmail.com

×