DOI:10.32604/iasc.2022.015955
| Intelligent Automation & Soft Computing DOI:10.32604/iasc.2022.015955 | |
| Article |
CMMI Compliant Workflow Models to Track and Control Changes
1Department of Computer Science, COMSATS University Islamabad, Wah Campus, Pakistan
2Department of IT and Computer Science, PAF-Institute of Applied Sciences and Technology, Mang, Haripur, Pakistan
3College of Computer Science and Information Technology, Al Baha University, Al Baha, Saudi Arabia
4Department of Information and Computer Science, King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals, Dhahran, 31261, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
5Department of Information and Communication Engineering, Yeungnam University, Gyeongsan, 38541, Korea
*Corresponding Author: Jin-Ghoo Choi. Email: jchoi@yu.ac.kr
Received: 15 December 2020; Accepted: 24 May 2021
Abstract: The Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) is a renowned Software Process Improvement (SPI) framework. Research studies have revealed that CMMI adoption needs a lot of resources in terms of training, funds, and professional workers. However, the software SMEs (SSMEs) have few resources and cannot adopt CMMI. One of the challenges of adopting CMMI is that CMMI tells “What to do?” as requirements to be met, and leaves “How to do?” to the implementers. The software industry especially SSMEs faces difficulties in successfully implementing various process areas (PAs) particularly Configuration Management Process Area (CM-PA). SG-2 (Track and control changes) is one of the important Specific Goals (SGs) required by CMMI to successfully implement CM-PA. As a starting point, we have achieved this SG by implementing its two contributing Specific Practices (SPs). The proposed WFMs were validated through an Expert Panel Review (EPR) process. In addition, a case study approach was used for the evaluation. The results showed that the models are useful, easy to use, supportive in the achievement of SG-2, and applicable to SSMEs. It is worth mentioning that this research work has not only contributed to the implementation studies but also added to the empirical software engineering body of knowledge.
Keywords: SPI; CMMI; CM-PA; SSMEs
The success or failure of an organization depends on the quality of its products or services. Customers appreciate a reliable software product that operates un-erroneously and never crashes. One way to improve software quality is to improve software development processes. That’s why many software development companies take interest in Software Process Improvement (SPI) programs. Continually improving the software process and regularly appraising its effectiveness will pave the way for the development of high-quality software and help meet customer expectations.
CMMI model facilitates the software development industry to take the quality of software processes to higher levels. However, no significant numbers of small and medium software enterprises (SSMEs) are adopting it. Xu et al. [1] have the opinion that CMMI offers software enterprises only guidelines and does not provide clear workflow models resulting into heavy cost of adoption. Few among the many definitions of SMEs are given in Tab. 1.
CMMI Level II [6] contains seven PAs, including CM-PA. Various studies have been carried out to implement PAs. However, no workflow model for implementing CM-PA to help SSME was found as shown in Tab. 2. Therefore, there is an urgent need to design workflow models for SPs of the CM-PA.
The focus of this research study is to achieve the second specific goal (SG-2) of CM-PA by designing workflow models (WFMs) for the implementation of two SPs (SP-2.1 & SP-2.2). To achieve research goals, the research questions are formulated and listed in Tab. 3.
The organization of this paper is to introduce related work in Part 2. The research methodology is explained in Part 3. Proposed WFMs are illustrated in part 4. Validation of the proposed models is provided in Part 5. Novelties and limitations of the proposed WFMs are presented in part 6. Conclusion and future work are highlighted in Part 7.
A variety of related research was studied. However, keeping the concision in mind, only very close research i.e., WFMs devised for implementation of PAs at CMMI level-II is presented. To support SSMEs in implementing the best practices, Keshta et al. [7] designed WFMs for the two SPs of REQM-PA. The WFM for SP 1.1 includes five stages: “Request”, “Understand”, “Evaluate”, “Accept”, and “Finalize” whereas WFM for SP 1.2 includes five stages “Assess”, “Report”, “Negotiate”, “Record”, and “Commit”. Keshta et al. [8] further designed WFMs for the other two SPs of REQM-PA. WFM for SP 1.3 has six stages “Initiate”, “Validate”, “Implement”, “Verify”, “Update”, and “Release”. Another six stages named “Request”, “Maintain”, “Validate”, “Allocate”, “Verify”, and “Release” constitute the WFM for SP 1.4. The EPR process was used to validate the models against the specified criteria. The applicability of the models to SSMEs was evaluated in Saudi Arabian software industry. Bhatti et al. [9] proposed a six-phase methodology to deal with changing requirements: “Initiate”, “Receipt”, “Approve/Disapprove”, “Evaluate”, “Implement”, and “Configure” with CCB to act as process owner and play a central role. Tariq et al. [10] have recommended to include an additional SP in REQM-PA for Software as a Service and carried out validation through a case study. In the same way, Niazi et al. [11] designed the CMMI-Compliant Requirements Change Management (RCM) Model. The model is divided into five stages: “Request”, “Validate”, “Implement”, “Verify” & “Update” and was evaluated through the EPR process. Similarly, Keshta [12] also designed a WFM for the implementation of SP 1.3 of PP-PA and defined phases for a project life cycle keeping in view the SSMEs. The model includes four stages: “Plan”, “Design”, “Review”, and “Update/Rework”. Keshta et al. [13] further developed WFMs for all SPs of PPQA from the perspective of small and medium software development organizations. Vivatanavorasin et al. [14] presented a three-layered WFM for SAM-PA which contains “Contextual”, “Elaboration”, and “Definition” layers. As a proof-of-concept prototype, a Supplier Agreement Management Tool was also developed. Iskandar et al. [15] suggested practices to improve tracking changes in software development including “Initiation”, “Approval”, “Scheduling”, and “Deployment”. The deployment, in turn, is achieved through sub-practices such as “Preparation”, “Execution”, “Validation”, and “Completion/Reversion”.
After a thorough literature review, it was concluded that there are currently no WFMs available for the implementation of the said goal. Therefore, to support SSMEs, there is an urgent need to design the same.
It has always been believed that research methodology profoundly impacts the validity of research results, so it was very meticulously designed. The phases involved in designing WFMs are shown in Fig. 1.
Figure 1: Methodology adopted
The success of the research largely depends on the establishment of robust validation criteria. The criterion for validation of the WFMs in this study having similar nature has been derived from the work of Keshta et al. [7,8], Niazi et al. [11], Keshta et al. [12,13], and Vivatanavorasin et al. [14] as given in Tab. 4.
The WFMs proposed for the aforementioned SPs are composed of core stages that logically group the activities involved in a particular SP. The proposed WFMs are constructed by employing the well-known Entry-Task-Verification-eXit (ETVX) model. For each WFM, the associated inputs-outputs, the potential artifacts, and actors are identified. Note that the actors are from a sample SSME.
4.1 Workflow Model for Overall CM-PA
To design an abstract WFM for CM-PA, in addition to other research materials, PMBOK 6th Edition, SWEBOK V3.0, CMMI 1.3, and ITIL were studied. The proposed WFM for the entire CM-PA is shown in Fig. 2. The scope of this work (SG-2) is shown in light green.
Figure 2: Overall WFM for CM-PA
4.2 Proposed WFMs to Track and Control Changes (SG-2)
The second specific goal of CM-PA is to “track and control changes”. Its purpose is to maintain the baseline established through SG-1. This is achieved by implementing two SPs, namely “Track Change Requests” and “Control Configuration Items”.
4.2.1 Workflow Model to Track Change Requests
“Track change requests” is the first of two SPs contributing to SG-2. WFM for this SP has five stages, namely “Initiation”, “Evaluation”, “Implementation”, “Updation” and “Closure” as illustrated in Fig. 3. In Tab. 5 accompanying process guide is shown. Tab. 6 lists the literature findings at each stage. For the sake of brevity, only three of the many references are provided.
Figure 3: Proposed workflow model to track change requests (SP-2.1)
4.2.2 Workflow Model to Control Configuration Items
The proposed WFM for this SP is divided into five stages: “Initiation”, “Authorization”, “Maintenance”, “Review” and “Record” as illustrated in Fig. 4 followed by the pertinent process guide in Tab. 7 followed by supportive findings from literature in Tab. 8.
Figure 4: Workflow model for SP-2.2
5 Validation of the Proposed Models
An expert panel review was conducted to verify the proposed WFMs, in which opinions on the model were obtained from 10 experts according to the specified criteria. The experts having expertise in the fields of SPI, Project Management, Configuration Management, and Software Development were consulted as shown in Tab. 9.
According to [22], researchers are free to develop their criteria for the classification of experts. The experts in this study are divided into 3 groups. Experts with less than 15 years of experience are classified as juniors, experts with more than 17 years of experience as senior, and the remaining experts as intermediates. According to this criterion, the panel consists of 4 seniors, 4 intermediates, and 2 juniors.
The questionnaire was specially designed to obtain the opinions of the experts on the proposed WFMs. This questionnaire is based on similar work by Niazi et al. [11] and Keshta et al. [7,8,12,13]. The questionnaire consists of three parts, including a cover letter stating purpose, demographics, and expert opinions. The questionnaire has seven questions and was reviewed by academicians to make it clearer and easier to read. The summary of the expert’s responses based on the five-point Likert scale is shown in Tabs. 10 and 11. The Q-8 was open-ended that was used to collect feedback to improve the models.
According to the results of the EPR process, experts believe that the proposed models are easy to learn, cover sub-practices, can effectively implement SP, help achieve SG-2, help improve the quality of the software produced, and are suitable for SSME as well as for the software industry. However, like other things, there is room for improvement in the proposed model.
5.2 Validation through Case Studies
To test the worth of the model in the real world, a case study was conducted in two Pakistani SSMEs willing to implement WFMs. In order to maintain confidentiality, the cover names are used. The participating SSMEs are briefly defined in Tab. 12.
The participating SSMEs were appraised by CMMI experts for readiness against the underlined SPs at level-II and were found unready. A brief presentation covering the objectives of the study was delivered in an opening session for both the SSMEs. In order to evaluate the effectiveness of the proposed WFMs after implementation, SCAMPI Type-“C” and Type-“B” appraisals were conducted by the lead auditor in both SSMEs against the said SPs. The result of appraisals was encouraging. Both the SPs were declared “Fully Implemented” and its contribution towards the satisfactory achievement of the SG-2 in both the SSMEs was appreciated. According to the lead auditor’s statement, both SSMEs will undoubtedly be rated as “fully implemented” in the SCAMPI Type “A” assessment. Feedback was also collected from participating professionals at the closing meeting.
5.3 Mitigation Actions Taken Against Threats to Result’s Validity
First, the closed-ended questions in the questionnaire may not have captured the true views of respondents. In order to reduce the impact, an open-ended question was included to get free opinions thereby improving the accuracy of the response. Second, the panel members may have a different interpretation of the questions/WFMs and may have responded accordingly. Due to the close correlation, the questionnaire was taken from the work of Keshta. This was further refined by adding coverage of the framework at the sub-practices level and reviewed by another proficient academician. Third, the responses may have been limited to the knowledge and experiences of the respondents. Fortunately, experts with extensive industry experience participated in this study. The presence of world-renowned experts in the panel added to the effectiveness of the review process. Fourth, the responses of senior, intermediate, and junior experts might be different. The P of Chi-Square (X2) test was calculated and found > 0.05 for ∞ = 0.05 and the degree of freedom = 2 against the responses. This means that the difference between the answers provided by the experts is negligible. Finally, the general literature review process may not have seen the relevant research work. However, according to Hossain et al. [23], this cannot be regarded as a systemic omission.
6 Novelties and Limitations of the Proposed Models
Novelties of the models are tabulated as under in Tab. 13.
Although the models have all the novelties, these have some limitations as well. First, these models are compatible with the current version of CMMI. Second, its applicability was tested in Pakistani SSMEs. However, these need to be revised for future versions and validated for other countries.
The main purpose of this research is to design a workflow model to realize the SG-2 “Track and control changes” of CM-PA at CMMI level-II and validate it. To this end, five research questions (RQ-A~RQ-E) were formulated. Further WFMs were designed for its two associated SPs. Responses received from the experts as per the five-point Likert scale satisfy the validation criteria. The results were further confirmed by conducting case studies. The results showed that Pakistani SSMEs are capable of adopting the proposed models with minor adjustments. Satisfactory comments from experts and participating organizations speak well of the WFMs and add to the confidence in the evaluation results. The WFMs were refined after several rounds of improvements by incorporating suggestions from academicians, professionals, and finally feedback from case study participants. This work should continue to design WFMs for other SPs of this PA, other PAs of Level-II, and higher levels for which workflow models have not yet been developed.
Funding Statement: This work was supported by the Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation (NRF) of Korea funded by the Ministry of Education under Grant 2018R1D1A1B07048948.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest to report regarding the present study.
1. G. Xu, H. Hu, P. Yu, J. Lv, P. Qu et al., “Supporting flexibility of the CMMI process framework with a multi-layered process model,” in Proc. Web Information System and Application Conf., Yangzhou, China, pp. 409–414, 2013. [Google Scholar]
2. A. Tripathi, “SMEs in Saudi Arabia—An innovative tool for country’s economic growth,” Science International (Lahore), vol. 31, no. 2, pp. 261–267, 2019. [Google Scholar]
3. H. Karadag, “The role and challenges of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in emerging economies: An analysis from Turkey,” Business and Management Studies, vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 179–188, 2015. [Google Scholar]
4. S. Divakara and H. N. S. K. Surangi, “A literature review on small & medium-size enterprises,” Journal of Business and Technology, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 17–33, 2018. [Google Scholar]
5. Dasanayaka, “SMEs in globalized world: A brief note on basic profiles of Pakistan’s small and medium scale enterprises and possible research directions,” Research Journal of the Institute of Business Administration Karachi— Pakistan, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 69–90, 2008. [Google Scholar]
6. CMMI Product Team, “CMMI for Development, Version 1.3,” Software Engineering Institute, pp. 433–454, 2010. [Google Scholar]
7. I. Keshta, M. Niazi and M. Alshayeb, “Towards the implementation of requirements management specific practices (SP 1.1 and SP 1.2) for small- and medium-sized software development organisations,” IET Software, vol. 5, pp. 308–317, 2020. [Google Scholar]
8. I. Keshta, M. Niazi and M. Alshayeb, “Towards implementation of requirements management specific practices (SP 1.3 and SP 1.4) for Saudi Arabian small and medium-sized software development organizations,” IEEE Access, vol. 14, pp. 24162–24183, 2017. [Google Scholar]
9. M. W. Bhatti, F. Hayat, N. Ehsan, A. Ishaque, S. Ahmed et al., “A methodology to manage the changing requirements of a software project,” in Proc. Int. Conf. on Computer Information Systems and Industrial Management Applications, Krakow, Poland, pp. 319–322, 2010. [Google Scholar]
10. A. Tariq, S. A. Khan and S. Iftikhar, “Remapping of CMMI level-2 KPA’s for development process improvement of software-as-a-service (SaaS) cloud environment,” in Proc. Int. Conf. on Open Source Systems and Technologies, Lahore, Pakistan, pp. 43–51, 2014. [Google Scholar]
11. M. Niazi, C. Hickman, R. Ahmad and M. Ali Babar, “A model for requirements change management: Implementation of CMMI level 2 specific practice,” in Proc. Lecture Notes Computer Science, vol. 5089, LNCS, pp. 143–157, 2008. [Google Scholar]
12. I. Keshta, “A model for defining project lifecycle phases: Implementation of CMMI level 2 specific practice,” Journal of King Saud University—Computer and Information Sciences, 2019. [Google Scholar]
13. I. Keshta, M. Niazi and M. Alshayeb, “Towards implementation of process and product quality assurance process area for Saudi Arabian small and medium-sized software development organizations,” IEEE Access, vol. 6, pp. 41643–41675, 2018. [Google Scholar]
14. C. Vivatanavorasin, N. Prompoon and A. Surarerks, “A process model design and tool development for supplier agreement management of CMMI: Capability level 2,” in Proc. XIII ASIA PACIFIC Software Engineering Conf., Bangalore, India, pp. 385–392, 2006. [Google Scholar]
15. M. Iskandar, B. David and A. Bin Shamsudin, “Improving track changes in software development,” Journal of Software Maintenance and Evolution, pp. 1–17, 2016. [Google Scholar]
16. A. Abran, J. W. Moore, R. Dupuis, R. Dupuis and L. L. Tripp, “Software configuration management,” in Guide to the Software Engineering Body of KnowledGe (SWEBOKVer 3.0. A Project of the IEEE Computer Society, vol. 6, pp. 1–15, 2014. [Google Scholar]
17. M. Chaudhary and A. Chopra, “CMMI Design,” In: CMMI for Development – Implementation Guide, India: Apress, vol. 2, pp. 9–69,2017. [Google Scholar]
18. G. O’Regan, “Configuration Management,” in Introduction to Software Quality Assurance, Ireland, Cham Heidelberg, New York, Dordrecht, London: Springer, vol. 5, pp. 89–99,2014. [Google Scholar]
19. M. B. Chrissis, M. Konrad and S. Shrum, “Configuration Management,” in CMMI for Development, 3rd edition, Addison-Wesley, pp. 243–255,2017. [Google Scholar]
20. G. O’Regan, “Configuration management,” in Introduction to Software Process Improvement, London, Dordrecht, Heidelberg, New York: Springer, vol. 5, pp. 116–125,2011. [Google Scholar]
21. M. Chemuturi and T. M. J. Cagley, “Change management in software development projects,” Mastering Software Project Management, vol. 8, pp. 157–169, 2010. [Google Scholar]
22. S. U. Khan, M. Niazi and R. Ahmad, “Empirical investigation of success factors for offshore software development outsourcing vendors,” Institute of Engineering and Technology Software, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 1–15, 2012. [Google Scholar]
23. E. Hossain, M. Ali Babar and H. Y. Paik, “Using scrum in global software development: A systematic literature review,” in Proc. Fourth IEEE Int. Conf. on Global Software Engineering, Limerick, Ireland, pp. 175–184, 2009. [Google Scholar]
 | This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |