6Current methods to measure process adoption, such as standardizedassessments, appraisals, and evaluations, are disruptive and highlyinvasive. They are heavily reliant on staff and are consequently costlyboth in terms of external consultants and, more importantly, in terms ofinternal disruption to day-to-day operations. The still-heavy reliance onhuman judgment for most appraisal types also makes conducting consistentand reliable appraisals challenging.For those organizations that do make the leap of faith, or that have beenmotivated by business drivers such as perceived marketing advantage orthe ability to increase their customers’ confidence levels in their performance,process deployment has often been an ad-hoc procedure, offeringlittle opportunity for insight into the reasons why the deploymentwas successful, or conversely, a poor understanding of why the initiativefailed. Although techniques and models have been promulgated tosupport understanding of organizational, group, and individual behaviorduring a process adoption, research in these approaches is sporadic andsignificant gaps in knowledge of effective approaches is seen in differentsystem domains.We do not know the best infrastructure for process improvement.<strong>Software</strong> engineering process groups (SEPGs) have been part of thedictum [Fowler 1990], but their effectiveness has not been objectivelymeasured. Further, alternatives to SEPGs been not been systematicallyproposed and evaluated. In particular, we do not have an adequatecontingency view: Under what conditions do the various infrastructurealternatives perform best and why?6.4 Characterizing the Desired State of thePracticeWe would understand how organizations work and what motivates themto change, to improve. We would be able to assess how much change isreasonable and how quickly it could be introduced. And we would beable to estimate the resources and duration to accomplish the targetedlevel of adoption.We would know what we would have to tailor, both with respect to newthe process technology and the organization. Our tailoring guidelineswould be sensitive to a range of contexts, including, but not limited to,competitive landscape (e.g., time-to-market pressure), national culture,organizational culture, professional culture, external and internal drivers,organizational strategy, and rewards and reinforcement.56 Theme D | IPRC <strong>Framework</strong>
Accordingly, processes will be deployed effectively and flexibly, employingempirically confirmed tool support to implement flexible andresponsive tailoring of process models. The performance of processeswill be enhanced by capturing and analyzing performance data and byimproving processes based on that data and analysis. We will have thecapability to define a common basis for capturing, storing, comparing,and sharing experiences in implementing processes that links tocommon approaches to process, organizational, and implementationmodeling. We will have frameworks, grounded in appropriate theory,for knowledge acquisition from process implementation experiencesand a theoretical basis for relating results of process implementation tothe formal specifications and organizational context into which the processesare being deployed.6And we will know which kind(s) of deployment infrastructure is appropriateand how much investment would be necessary to achieve thedesired level of adoption.6.5 Description of the <strong>Research</strong> NodesThere are six research nodes in this theme:• establishing the infrastructure to be the focal point fordeployment (D.1)• motivating process use (D.2)• formulating process and deployment requirements (D.3.1)• supporting effective adoption (D.3.2)• assessing effectiveness (D.3.3)• managing ongoing process deployment (D.4)The research in this theme supports several activities needed when deployingprocesses and measuring their effectiveness in an organization:• Establish the desire, need, and fit for the new process, for the change.Then establish sponsorship for deploying those processes, aligningprocesses to business goals, and investing in process infrastructureand process improvement (relates to research nodes “establishing theinfrastructure” and “motivating process use”).• Establish the process needs within the organization context. Theseneeds are satisfied by the capabilities of the process engineeringtheme in the framework (relates to research node “formulatingprocess requirements”).• Adopt the engineered processes based upon the adoptioninfrastructure (relates to research node “supporting effectiveadoption”).IPRC <strong>Framework</strong> | Theme D 57
- Page 1:
A ProcessResearchFrameworkThe Inter
- Page 4:
This report was prepared for theSEI
- Page 8:
viIPRC Framework
- Page 11 and 12:
Executive SummaryThe discipline of
- Page 13 and 14:
Forces Driving Process Research Fra
- Page 15 and 16:
Process Research FrameworkThis docu
- Page 17 and 18:
MembersTwenty-seven leaders in indu
- Page 19 and 20:
A colleague from SAIC, Ms. Mary Ann
- Page 21 and 22:
1Introductionto the Framework
- Page 23 and 24:
As the work of the IPRC developed,
- Page 25 and 26: 1. The Relationships Between Proces
- Page 27 and 28: 2Architecture of theResearch Themes
- Page 29 and 30: Managing Project Processes (Section
- Page 31 and 32: 2.2 Instantiating the Core ProcessR
- Page 33 and 34: The product, process, people, and p
- Page 35 and 36: 2. These advances will be followed
- Page 37 and 38: 2.4 How Each Theme Presentation isS
- Page 39 and 40: 3Theme Q:The RelationshipsBetween P
- Page 41 and 42: • security• usability (human-ma
- Page 43 and 44: plan to address the underlying issu
- Page 45 and 46: In addition, processes are effectiv
- Page 47 and 48: Q-13 How do we make well-informed d
- Page 49 and 50: 4Theme E: ProcessEngineeringThis th
- Page 51 and 52: create defined 8 processes for spec
- Page 53 and 54: Mechanisms for SpecificationE-5 How
- Page 55 and 56: Research questions associated with
- Page 57 and 58: Research questions associated with
- Page 59 and 60: 5Theme P: ManagingProject Processes
- Page 61 and 62: Developing software across borders
- Page 63 and 64: Where higher levels of integration
- Page 65 and 66: 5.5.1 Research Node P.1: Operating
- Page 67 and 68: P-6 How do we capture and share exp
- Page 69 and 70: 5.5.2 Research Node P.2: Managing T
- Page 71 and 72: P-27 Do locations need a primary an
- Page 73 and 74: 6Theme D:Process DeploymentThis the
- Page 75: Readers need to recognize the criti
- Page 79 and 80: D-6 What is the quantitative relati
- Page 81 and 82: The “assess” activity identifie
- Page 83 and 84: Research questions associated with
- Page 85 and 86: The objective of process research u
- Page 87 and 88: 7 Process Effects ofEmerging Techno
- Page 89 and 90: If this sounds like Fred Brooks Jr.
- Page 91 and 92: Figure 5 provides a framing of thre
- Page 93 and 94: Process ChallengesIntegrated OrHete
- Page 95 and 96: and management of stakeholder expec
- Page 97 and 98: T-18 What replaces “quality = con
- Page 99 and 100: have a comfort level with uncertain
- Page 101 and 102: When trying to integrate in a conte
- Page 103 and 104: T-49 How do we analyze the communic
- Page 105 and 106: 8Scenarios
- Page 107 and 108: Jurassic Park(Reconfigurable packs
- Page 109 and 110: Pandemic Triggers Global Instabilit
- Page 111 and 112: Embedded Software Rules(Rapid co-de
- Page 113 and 114: 9Sponsor Statements
- Page 115 and 116: We also monitor and evaluate the bu
- Page 117 and 118: Lockheed Martin Corporation IS&S(Pr
- Page 119 and 120: The SEI, with its reputation as a
- Page 121 and 122: As a sponsor, TCS has introduced th
- Page 123 and 124: A passion for innovation lies at th
- Page 125 and 126: Appendix
- Page 127 and 128:
Research Node S.2: Establishing the
- Page 129 and 130:
Research Node S.6: Usable SecurityT
- Page 131 and 132:
Q-16 When composing systems of indi
- Page 133 and 134:
E-22 How can we define the scope of
- Page 135 and 136:
E-55 What level of statistical anal
- Page 137 and 138:
P-10 How do we handle different tim
- Page 139 and 140:
P-24 How do we identify suitable pa
- Page 141 and 142:
D-16 What organization-based confid
- Page 143 and 144:
D-43 What lessons can be learned fr
- Page 145 and 146:
T-14 How do you sustain and evolve
- Page 147 and 148:
T-46 How do you analyze data collec
- Page 149 and 150:
Further Readingand References
- Page 151 and 152:
[Boegh 1999]Boegh, J.; Depanfilis,
- Page 153 and 154:
[Wang 1999]Wang, W.; Pan, D.; & Che
- Page 155 and 156:
[Yoon 2001]Yoon, I.-C.; Min, S.-Y.;
- Page 157 and 158:
[Kaba 1995]Kaba, A. B. & Derniame,
- Page 159 and 160:
[Becker-Kornstaedt 2002]Becker-Korn
- Page 161 and 162:
[Prikladnicki 2003]Prikladnicki, R.
- Page 163 and 164:
[Smite 2004]Smite, D. “Global Sof
- Page 165 and 166:
[Smith 1996]Smith, M. A.; Mitra, S.
- Page 167 and 168:
[Weisbord 1987]Weisbord, M. Product
- Page 169 and 170:
Appendix[Beznosov 2005]Beznosov, K.
- Page 172:
Julia AllenVic BasiliBarry BoehmGon