한국정보과학회논문지:소프트웨어및응용 (Journal of KIISE:Software and Applications)

한국정보과학회 (Korean Institute of Information Scientists and Engineers)
권호 표지

기업 고유환경기반 실제구현을 위한 소프트웨어 프로세스 개선모델 확장

Expanding SPI Model for Practical Implementation based on Industry Characteristics

  • 발행 : 2006.03.01
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

소프트웨어 개발 성숙도를 향상시키기 위한 프로세스 프레임워크로써 IS 15504(SPICE) 및 CMMI 등은 이미 검증된 모델이다. 하지만 이들 프로세스 성숙도 모델들이 기업의 개발능력 및 효율을 높여주는 구체적인 실천방법을 제시하지는 않는다. 기업 내에서의 실제적인 적용을 위해서는 위의 모델들을 기반으로 제품이나 기술 도메인, 사업 및 조직의 규모 등 기업환경이 고려된 기업 고유의 모델의 개발 및 적용이 필요하다. 본 논문에서는 소프트웨어 개발 프로세스에 대한 수년 간의 지속적인 적용 및 개선 경험을 바탕으로 기존의 SPI(Software Process Improvement) 모델을 확장하여 기업의 비즈니스 목적과 환경에 부합하도록 조직차원의 전반적인 소프트웨어 개발 경쟁력을 강화한 사례를 소개한다. 기존의 SPI 모델이 프로세스 각 분야에 대한 정의와 성숙도를 판단하기 위한 능력 수준을 정의한 것에 비해 본 논문에서는 그 영역을 핵심기술 및 조직구조까지 확대하고, 능력 수준을 일반적인 프로세스 능력 수준이 아닌 조직에서의 모델의 확산도로 확장하여 소프트웨어 개발 경쟁력을 강화하기 위한 통합된 모델을 정의하여 적용하였다. 본 논문은 기업에서 확장된 프로세스 성숙도 모델을 이용하여 조직의 능력을 향상시키는 구체적인 사례로 유사 영역에서 참조 모델로 활용될 수 있을 것이며, 프로세스 성숙도 모델 연구에 대한 기업의 피드백으로의 기여가 있을 것이다.

IS 15504 and CMMI, etc are already proven models as a framework to improve the maturity of enterprise software development. However, these process maturity models can't present the detail and practical methods with which people can enhance the development competence and efficiency of an enterprise. Each company or organization should develop its own model or tailor the above models to make them suitable to its unique environment such as product or technology domain, scale of business or organization and cultural environment, etc for the practical application. This study introduces experiences that organizational and technical capability was reinforced based on our own process capability improvement model to improve software development strength in Samsung Electronics. We modeled our own improvement model which is expanded from IS 15504 against our experience. Our SPI model expanded its capability to organizational and technical issues including newly introduced capability level for evaluating its implementation. We expect that our study would give contribution for presenting industry experience and reference model for reinforcing software development competence.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Hall T, Rainer A, Baddoo N, 'Implementing soft-ware process improvement: An Empirical Study,' Software process improvement and practice, John willey & sons. 7:3-1510, 2002 https://doi.org/10.1002/spip.150
  2. VDC(Venture Development Corporation), 'Global Markets and Application for Embedded Software,' 2004
  3. Humphery WS, Snyder TR, Wiiliis RR, 'Software process improvement at Hughes Aircraft,' IEEE software 8(4):11-23, 1991 https://doi.org/10.1109/52.300031
  4. McDermid JA, Bennett KH, 'Software Engineering Research: A Critical Appraisal,' IEE proceedings-software 146(4): 179-186, 1999 https://doi.org/10.1049/ip-sen:19990618
  5. Kangtae kim, Taesik kim, 'Reinforcing the S/W development competence by the SCRM(Samsung's S/W Competence Reinforcement Model),' Proceeding of SERA 05, IEEE, 2005
  6. ISO/IEC 15504-1:2004, 'Information technology -- Process assessment -- Part 1: Concepts and vocabulary,' 2004
  7. Paulk MC, Weber CV, Curtis B, Chrissis MB, 'The capability maturity model: Guidelines for improving the software process,' Addison-Wesley Publishing, Carnegie Mellon University Software Engineering Institute, 1995
  8. Paulk MC, 'Analyzing the conceptual Relationship between ISO/lEC 15504 (Software Process Assessment) and the capability maturity model for software,' Software Engineering Institute Carnegie Mellon University Pittsburgh PA, 1999
  9. Boehm B. and Port D., 'Escaping the Software Tar Pit: Model Clashes and How to Avoid Them,' Software Engineering Notes, Association for Computing Machinery, pp. 36-48, January, 1999 https://doi.org/10.1145/308769.308775
  10. Johnson A, 'Software process improvement experience in the DP/MIS function,' Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Software Engineering, 1994 https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSE.1994.296794
  11. El Emam K, Briand L, 'Lister costs and benefits of software process improvement,' Technical report ISERN-97-12, Fraunhofer institute for experimental software engineering, 1997
  12. Humphrey WS, 'Why don't they practice what we preach?,' Annals of software engineering 6:201-222, 1998 https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1018997029222
  13. Kalito T, Kinnula A, 'Deploying the defined software process,' Software process improvement journal 5: 65-83, 2000 https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1670(200003)5:1<65::AID-SPIP112>3.0.CO;2-R
  14. Paulk MC, Chrissis MB, 'The november 1999 high maturity workshop,' Software Engineering Institute Carnegie Mellon University, 2000
  15. Hall T, Baddoo N. 'The software process improvement paradox: Approaches to quality management,' British computer society publication, BCS, 97-107, 2000
  16. Butler KL, 'Process lessons learned while reaching level 4,' CrossTalk 10:1-6, 1997
  17. Paulish DJ, Carleton AD, 'Case studies of software process improvement measurement,' IEEE computer 27(9) 50-57, 1994 https://doi.org/10.1109/2.312039
  18. Herbsleb JD, Goldenson DR, 'A systematic survey of CMM experience and results,' 18th international Conference on Software Engineering -ICSE, Berlin Germany 25-29 March, 323-330, 1996 https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSE.1996.493427
  19. Austen R, Tracy H. 'An analysis of some 'core studies' of software process improvement,' Software process improvement and practice 6:169-187, 2001 https://doi.org/10.1002/spip.147