The document summarizes a research paper that customizes the ISO 9126 quality model for evaluating B2B applications. It does the following: 1) Extracts quality factors specific to web applications and B2B electronic commerce from literature and weights them from developer and user perspectives. 2) Adds these weighted quality factors to the ISO 9126 model to create a customized model for evaluating B2B applications. 3) Applies the proposed customized model to a case study of a B2B portal to demonstrate how it can be used to evaluate a system and calculate an overall quality score.

1. Customizing ISO 9126 Quality Model for
Evaluation of B2B Applications
Behshid Behkamal, Mohsen Kahani, Mohammad Kazem Akbari
Information and Software Technology
vol.51 pp.599–609, 2009.
報告者: 葉承宇 (Dean Yeh)
1/29

2. Abstract
• A software quality model acts as a framework for the evaluation of
attributes of an application that contribute to the software quality.
• The most well-known quality models are studied, and reasons for using
ISO 9126 quality model as the basis are discussed.
• The customization is done by extracting the quality factors from web
applications and B2B EC applications, weighting these factors from the
viewpoints of both developers and end users, and adding them to the
model.
2/29

3. Overview
Quality Model
(ISO 9126)
B2B
Characteristics
Web
Characteristics
Customizing Quality Model
B2B Application
3/29

4. Introduction
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
4/29
Review of Quality Models
B2B Electronic Commerce
Need to customize ISO Model for B2B applications
Our approach for customizing ISO Quality Model
Applying the proposed model to a case study
Evaluation & Discussion
Conclusion & Future works

5. What is software quality?
5/29
http://www.cse.dcu.ie/essiscope/sm2/charact.html

6. McCall Model
6/29
http://www.cse.dcu.ie/essiscope/sm2/charact.html

7. Boehm Model
7/30
7/29
http://slashnode.wikidot.com/seng4420-lect11

8. FURPS Model
• FURPS
•
•
•
•
•
Functionality
Usability
Reliability
Performance
Supportability
• +
•
•
•
•
8/29
Design requirements
Functional requirements
Non-functional requirements
Implementation requirements
Interface requirements
Physical requirements
IBM Software Group - Non-Functional Requirements

9. Dromey Model
Software product
Product properties
Correctness
Internal
Implementation
Contextual
Descriptive
9/29
Quality attributes
Functionality
Reliability
Maintainability
Efficiency
Reusability
Portability
Usability
https://export.writer.zoho.com/public/pakitosh/untitled1/fullpage

10. ISO Model
10/29
http://carballosa.blogspot.tw/2010/05/quint2-extended-iso-9126.html

11. Star Model
11/29
A Quality Model for Design Patterns

12. BBN Model
Data collection of Observation
12/29
Bayesian belief network Diagram
http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/貝式網路

13. Comparison of software quality models
Quality
model
Number
of levels
Relationship
Disadvantages
Advantages
McCall
Hierarchical
Two
Many to many
Overlapping of
components
Having evaluation criteria
Boehm
Hierarchical
Three
Many to many
Lack of criteria
Including factors related to hardware
FURPS
Hierarchical
Tow
One to many
Not considering
portability
Separating functional and non-functional
requirements
Dromey
Hierarchical
Tow
One to many
Incomprehensiveness
Applicable to different systems
ISO
Hierarchical
Three
One to many
Generality
– Having evaluation criteria
– Separating internal and external quality
Star
13/29
Structure
Nonhierarchical
–
Many to many
Lack of criteria
Considering different viewpoints
BBN
Nonhierarchical
–
Many to many
Lack of criteria
Having weighted quality factors

14. B2B Electronic Commerce
14/29
Benchmarking: An International Journal - Benchmarking business-to-business electronic commerce

15. Customize ISO model for B2B applications
Expert
Review
Review of
software
quality
assessment
methods
Software
Metrics
Quality
Model
15/29

16. Customizing ISO quality model
Step 1: Choosing ISO quality model as a basis.
Step 2: Identifying quality characteristics of a particular application.
Step 3: Choosing a group of software expert familiar with B2B ecommerce systems.
Step 4: Assigning weights to the quality factors and sub factors by experts.
Step 5: Developing the quality criteria.
16/29

17. Identifying quality characteristics of B2B
applications
Web Application Quality
The Quality of B2B Applications
Quality factor
Rank
Quality factor
Total points Quality factor
Total points
Efficiency
1
Security
5
Intractability
2
Security
2
Scalability
5
Functionality
2
Usability
3
Efficiency
5
Customizability
2
Traceability
4
Availability
5
Accessibility
5
Supportability
1
Scalability
6
Traceability
3
1
Functionality
7
Open source
platform
Customizability
8
Reliability
3
Portability
1
Recoverability
9
Integrity
3
Generality
1
Usability
2
Changeability
1
17
Manageability
2
Compatibility
1
Consistency (Data) 10
17/29

18. Applying the proposed model to a case study
First and second levels of proposed model with their weights
18
18/29

19. Analytical hierarchy process (AHP)
19/29
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analytic_hierarchy_process#Uses_and_applications

20. Development of quality criteria
Relationships between quality factors and quality criteria
20
20/29

21. Development of quality criteria
Relationships between quality factors and quality criteria
21
21/29

22. Applying the proposed model to a case study
Design and completion of the evaluation checklist
Evaluation of
ISACO portal
Calculating the values of the quality factors
Calculating the values of the model’s components
Calculating the final quality of system
22/29

23. Calculating the values of the quality factors
Numerical values of model’s components for ISACO portal
23
23/29

24. Calculating the values of
the model’s components & final quality of system
Final quality of system from both viewpoints
24/29

25. Evaluation and Discussion
• Comprehensiveness
• Web document architecture
• Considering different viewpoints
• Understandability
• It has all of these factors, so it has higher level of clarity and understandability in
comparison with other models.
• Accuracy
• Considering the difference between the weights of values of the quality factors from the
users’ and developers’ viewpoint.
25/29

26. Relation between quality factors and web
document architecture
26/29

27. Quality evaluation of ISACO by ISO model
27/29

28. Conclusion and Future works
• In general, the contributions of this paper can be summarized into three areas:
• Presenting a method for customizing a general quality model for evaluation of a
particular domain;
• Considering two main viewpoints(Developer & Viewer) in quality assessment of
software products and presenting a method for weighting the quality factors.
• Due to the novelty of e-commerce systems, there are many research directions
in which this work can be expanded.
• Therefore, focusing on environmental infrastructures as another dimension of
the model may be an appropriate research direction.
28/29

29. Thanks for Your Listening
29
29/29