Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
Published byAlexandra Shelton Modified over 9 years ago
1
Where We are and What’s Next in Hungarian Software Process Improvement ? Katalin Balla NJSZT Szoftvertechnológiai Fórum 09. October 2007. Budapest
2
09.10.2007. Where We are and What's Next in Hungarian SPI? 2 / 29 Contents ~ Introduction ~ Pioneering in SPI ~ About current projects connected to SPI ~ TST GVOP-3.3.1-2004-04-0079/3 ~ "Pázmány Péter Program" (RET-06/2005.) / NKTH ~ IKKK-GVOP-2004-3.2.2 ~ Goals ~ The survey ~ Findings, results of the survey ~ Conclusion, further possibilities
3
09.10.2007. Where We are and What's Next in Hungarian SPI? 3 / 29 Introduction ~ Hungarian software companies experience more and more the requirement of producing provably good - quality software, “certified software”, as a condition for staying in the market.
4
09.10.2007. Where We are and What's Next in Hungarian SPI? 4 / 29 Introduction ~ What to certify ~ Product, process, resources… ~ According to what standard / model? ~ ISO 9001, AQAP, CMMI, SPICE, ISO 9126… ~ How to get extra results from certification? ~ Improve software quality ~ Develop processes that increase software development efficiency ~ Do SPI ISO 9126 (Boehm, McCall )... Process Product Resource Def QA Metric Objects Attributes PM methodologies People CMM Weinberg... GQM ISO 9001:2000 CMM SPICE CMMI ISO 15504 TSP, PSP
5
09.10.2007. Where We are and What's Next in Hungarian SPI? 5 / 29 Contents
6
09.10.2007. Where We are and What's Next in Hungarian SPI? 6 / 29 Pioneering in SPI 1993 Hungarian membeship in the Bootstrap Institute, Bootstrap audits in Hungary Miklós Bíró, Éva Feuer, Tibor Remzső 1996 NJSZT Software Quality Management Division 1997 European Systems and Software Initiative in Hungary 1999 Pioneering Process Improvement Experiment in Hungary 2000 First official Introduction to the CMM® training in Central&Eastern Europe 2001 CMMI Briefing in Budapest 2004 Article: 10 years od SPI in Hungary (Bíró, Iványos, Balla, Messnarz) 2005 EuroSPI International Confer in Budapest 2005, 2006 CMMI-related events / presentation (free) 2007 HTE – product quality 2007 Hungarian Society for Quality
7
09.10.2007. Where We are and What's Next in Hungarian SPI? 7 / 29 Contents
8
09.10.2007. Where We are and What's Next in Hungarian SPI? 8 / 29 TST GVOP-3.3.1-2004-04-0079/3 ~ Development in Hungary of world-class services connected to software quality improvement and auditing ~ Dec 2004-Dec 2006 ~ SQI, TUE, TUB
9
09.10.2007. Where We are and What's Next in Hungarian SPI? 9 / 29 TST GVOP-3.3.1-2004-04-0079/3
10
09.10.2007. Where We are and What's Next in Hungarian SPI? 10 / 29 TST GVOP-3.3.1-2004-04-0079/3 ~ Developing ~ QMIM – methodology supporting synergic usage of more quality models ~ Quality Organizer – a support tool fro using multiple quality approaches ~ Contains 27 software quality-related standards / approaches
11
09.10.2007. Where We are and What's Next in Hungarian SPI? 11 / 29 RET-06/2005 ~T~T~T~TUB - In cooperation with 9 big software companies, sponsored by National Office for Research and Technology (NKTH) ~2~2~2~2005-2008 ~B~B~B~BME Innovation and Knowledge Centre of Information Technology – BME(IT)2 ~B~B~B~BME Információtechnológiai Innovációs és Tudásközpont ~h~h~h~http://it2.ik.bme.hu ~R~R~R~R & D ~D~D~D~Development methodology and framework ~H~H~H~Head of programe: Dr. Charaf Hassan ~D~D~D~Distributed and embedded systems ~H~H~H~Head of Programe: Dr. Béla Fehér ~I~I~I~IT security and quality ~H~H~H~Head of programe: Dr. Károly Kondorosi ~H~H~H~Human-machine relation ~H~H~H~Head of programe: Dr. László Szirmay-Kalos ~ Security (COBIT, BS7799) ~ Quality (processes, ISO 9126) ~ Technology
12
09.10.2007. Where We are and What's Next in Hungarian SPI? 12 / 29 Contents
13
09.10.2007. Where We are and What's Next in Hungarian SPI? 13 / 29 IKKK-GVOP-2004-3.2.2 ~ Sponsored by Hungarian Ministry of Trade and EU ( http://ikkk.inf.elte.hu/) ~ A cooperation of 7 software companies, coordinated by the Eötvös Lóránd University of Science, Budapest. ~ 5 main areas: simulation, adaptive software, telecommunication, imageing ~ Duration: 3 years (Nov. 2004- Nov. 2007) ~ Main target: ~ To establish and maintain the activity of a research and development center, in order to ensure an ongoing cooperation between software industry and academic sphere. quality, ELTE Informatikai Kooperációs Kutatási és Oktatási Központ (ELTE IKKK)
14
09.10.2007. Where We are and What's Next in Hungarian SPI? 14 / 29 IKKK-GVOP-2004-3.2.2 ~ Quality - related R&D ~ Goals: ~ Clarifying theoretical basis of component-based technologies, direct attention towards new areas of their application, introducing them to university curriculum - Head of programe: Prof. Dr. László Kozma ~ To establish and maintain a center for software estimations and quality auditing ~ Modeling software development risks by Bayesian Belief Networks, Safety start-up of distributed systems, testing, modeling programs by graphs, Curses related to : software metrics, PSP- Dr. Attila Kovács ~ Defining theoretical basis and implementation of multiparadigm-based software metrics – Zoltán Porkoláb ~ To execute surveys about ~ Company characteristics related to quality - Dr. Attila Kovács ~ Quality approaches and SPI done in Hungary - Dr. Katalin Balla
15
09.10.2007. Where We are and What's Next in Hungarian SPI? 15 / 29 IKKK-GVOP-2004-3.2.2– the survey ~ Scope: to investigate in Hungary the „where we are in SPI”, i.e.: ~ Basic software quality models used in SPI ~ SPI ~ Drivers ~ Barriers ~ Get an idea about actual maturity / capability level of software companies / software development processes ~ Recognize ~ actually most mature processes in software development ~ actually most immature processes in software development ~ most common ~ difficulties companies face while doing SPI ~ most common ~ benefits companies encounter while doing SPI
16
09.10.2007. Where We are and What's Next in Hungarian SPI? 16 / 29 IKKK-GVOP-2004-3.2.2– the survey ~ Participants: ~ 8 software development companies / companies having large software development departments ~ 5 Hungarian-owned ~ 3 Hungarian members of (big) multinational companies ~ Software developed: ~ Automotive, safety-critical, telecom, medical devices, software used in customs, „general purpose” software ~ Surveying technique: ~ Interviews / CMMI-related, mini - internal appraisals
17
09.10.2007. Where We are and What's Next in Hungarian SPI? 17 / 29 IKKK-GVOP-2004-3.2.2– findings of the survey ~ Basic software quality models used in SPI ~ ISO 9001:2000 is still the most used quality approach- „ informatics” companies, total: 439 IT-related companies are ISO-certified ~ + standards connected to the business domain of the company (health-care, automotive…) + AQAP ~ Software product quality models are rarely used (some elements of ISO 9126) ~ CMMI® is becoming a popular, “trusted” SPI model in Hungary 152
18
09.10.2007. Where We are and What's Next in Hungarian SPI? 18 / 29 IKKK-GVOP-2004-3.2.2– findings of the survey ~ Drivers of the SPI ~ Internal needs, eg.: ~ To have reliable project progress data (how much… by when…?) ~ To have better estimates ~ Personal knowledge should be transformed into organizational knowledge ~ To have a „better” testing ~ To have configurations under control ~ To understand the nature and cost of the change requests ~ Marketing ~ Wish to stabilize the organization (But: successful SPI can be done ina stable organizational environment – contradiction) ~ Cases when SPI has been started to satisfy a specific customer requirement (eg. for certification) are extremely rare
19
09.10.2007. Where We are and What's Next in Hungarian SPI? 19 / 29 IKKK-GVOP-2004-3.2.2– findings of the survey ~ Barriers of the SPI ~ There are never enough resources. People must work on „real” projects. So, SPI is done „overtime”. ~ „Let the consultant do it for us.” ~ „Just let us finish the SPI…” – processes might not be „real”, therefore useless – fact recognized while doing the SPI, therefore stopping it ~ „CMMI ML3 or nothing…” – unrealistic goals and schedules, causing terrible stress to the employees ~ Good practices are „kept” inside the company – no / few possibilities to learn from others’ experience ~ Marketing value of doing SPI is still rather low in Hungary
20
09.10.2007. Where We are and What's Next in Hungarian SPI? 20 / 29 IKKK-GVOP-2004-3.2.2– findings of the survey ~ Get an idea about actual maturity / capability level of software companies / software development processes ~ According to CMMI ~ ML not reaching 2 … ~ MA, risk management in projects rarely exists ~ PPQA is not phased to projects ~ DAR process almost never in place ~ Usually technical processes have a higher capability level than managerial ones („these are the real work…”) ~ …but: technical processes are not divided (eg: one „testing” process, where it is difficult to identify VER, VAL, PI) ~ Wish to identify as few „cases” as possible ~ … but the unique, „standard” process seems to be too complicated for everyone
21
09.10.2007. Where We are and What's Next in Hungarian SPI? 21 / 29 IKKK-GVOP-2004-3.2.2– findings of the survey ~ Recognize actually most mature processes in software development ~ CM, TS, testing (as a VER+VAL+ PI procedure) - (most times satisfy CMMI requirements for ML2 and ML3 almost entirely) ~ PP, PMC (most times partially satisfy CMMI requirements for ML3) ~ Missing (eg.): „record basis of estimates”
22
09.10.2007. Where We are and What's Next in Hungarian SPI? 22 / 29 IKKK-GVOP-2004-3.2.2– findings of the survey ~ Recognize actually most immature processes in software development ~ MA, DAR, PPQA (most times do not satisfy CMMI requirements for ML3) ~ Results in: not satisfying GP 2.8, GP 2.9 for the other processes ~ REQM SP1.4 (maintain bidirectional traceability…) – never found satisfied
23
09.10.2007. Where We are and What's Next in Hungarian SPI? 23 / 29 IKKK-GVOP-2004-3.2.2– findings of the survey Process profile according to CMM Process profile according to CMMI
24
09.10.2007. Where We are and What's Next in Hungarian SPI? 24 / 29 IKKK-GVOP-2004-3.2.2– findings of the survey ~ Recognize most common difficulties companies face while doing SPI ~ What model to choose? ~ We never execute 2 projects which are alike…how to standardize them? (mistake: standardization is approached from technical aspects…) ~ Fear from spending (and reporting!!!) time for non-technical activities ~ Difficulties in understanding GG2 (if CMMI is used) ~ Describing GG2 in one short document, generically, for all processes ~ Vehement protest against planning, monitoring, measuring etc. something else than the technical activities („illogic”) ~ Protest against doing CM for something else than the product ~ How to measure product quality attributes? ~ How to measure something else than effort, time and the nr. of change request? ~ What are my product types?
25
09.10.2007. Where We are and What's Next in Hungarian SPI? 25 / 29 IKKK-GVOP-2004-3.2.2– findings of the survey ~ Recognize most common benefits companies encounter while doing SPI ~ A „really good” PM system is put in place ~ Reliable data starts to show up ~ Easily usable templates and models are developed (no more arguing about what type of data should be sent to a manager…) ~ Better estimations can be made, based on historical data that has been started to be collected ~ „Proud employees” – they have been asked about how the company should do things ~ „Working on SPI was the most interesting and challenging job I had” ~ ROI: would be good to know – but for the moment it is not, or just in subjective terms
26
09.10.2007. Where We are and What's Next in Hungarian SPI? 26 / 29 Contents
27
09.10.2007. Where We are and What's Next in Hungarian SPI? 27 / 29 Conclusion, further possibilities ~ SPI and CMMI-based SPI have entered the field of interest of Hungarian governmental and academic sphere. ~ It is important (also for Hungarian government) to have a permanent dialogue between industry and academy. ~ Interest in using software quality models, including CMMI, is growing among Hungarian software companies.
28
09.10.2007. Where We are and What's Next in Hungarian SPI? 28 / 29 Conclusion, further possibilities ~P~P~P~Possible strategies ~C~C~C~Centralizing, pushing CMMI (might be good, because companies would be prepared for foreign customers’ needs) – eg. in all big Hungarian governmental tenders CMMI certification could be a requirement. ~L~L~L~Leave companies to do SPI and get certified as their own business drives them (only those will do SPI for certification, who is forced by the customer) ~G~G~G~Golden-mean: propagating of SPI advantages, making available information about models, teaching courses - but it should not be mandatory for companies to get certified. ~W~W~W~Would be good to be able to learn form each-others’ experience… ~W~W~W~Would be good to do clustered SPI…
29
09.10.2007. Where We are and What's Next in Hungarian SPI? 29 / 29 balla.katalin@sqi.hu balla@iit.bme.hu
Similar presentations
© 2025 SlidePlayer.com. Inc.
All rights reserved.