조직변화관리 수준에 따른 SW공학수준과 프로젝트의 성과

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

With rapid convergence of information technology and expending role of software, many organizations have taken interested in We explore the relationship between the level of change awareness and deployment of software process improvement (SPI) approaches using a competing values framework. To measure awareness level of organization's change, DICE framework which provides means for predicting the outcome of change management initiatives is used. The four factors for organizaton's change: duration, integrity, commitment, and effort are evaluated and a score is calculated. In this paper, we apply the DICE(R) score as an independent variable to predict the outcome of a software process improvement. Our results indicated that the Organization have a higher chance of success have the better outcome in software process improvement.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 El Emam, Khaled, "Validating the ISO/IEC 15504 measures of software development process capability" 51 (51): 119-149, 2000

2 Ravichandran, T., "Total Quality management in information systems development: key constructs and relationships" 24 (24): 81-415, 1999

3 Clark, B. K., "The effects of software process maturity on software development effort" 1997

4 Harold L. Sirkin, "The Hard Side of Change Management" 2005

5 Nielsen, P.A., "Software process maturity and organizational politics" 221-240, 2001

6 Humphrey, W. S., "Software process improvement at Hughes Aircraft. Software" 8 (8): 11-23, 1991

7 SEC, "Software Engineering White Book : Korea 2013" Software Engineering Center 6-, 2013

8 Bartłomiej, Z., "Rolling the DICE for Agile Software Projects" 114-122, 2006

9 Brodman, J. G., "Return on investment(ROI)from software process improvement as measured by US industry" 1 (1): 35-47, 1995

10 SEI, "Process Maturity Profile: Software CMM 2004, Mid-year Update"

11 Hansen, B., "Prescription, description, reflection: the shape of the software process improvement field" 24 (24): 457-472, 2004

12 SEI, "Maturity Profile Reports: CMMI v1.2/V1.3Class A Appraisal Results" SEI.Caregie Mellon Univ 2013

13 Mathiassen, L., "Managing change in software process improvement" 22 (22): 84-91, 2005

14 Diaz, M., "How software process improvement helped Motorola. Software" 14 (14): 75-81, 1997

15 Madeyski, L., "Capable Leader and Skilled and Motivated Team Practices to Introduce eXtreme Programming" CEE-SET 96-102, 2007

16 SEI, "CMMI for Development, Version 1.3"

17 Dennis R. Goldenson, "After the Appraisal: A Systematic Survey of Process Improvement, its Benefits, and Factors that Influence Success" Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University 1995

18 Aaen, I., "A conceptual MAP of software process improvement" 13 : 79-99, 2001

19 Lawlis, P., "A Correlational Study of the CMM and Software Development Performance" 8 (8): 21-25, 1995