Journal of Korea Society of Digital Industry and Information Management (디지털산업정보학회논문지)

Korea Society of Digital Industry and Information Management (디지털산업정보학회)
권호 표지

The Influence of Software Engineering Levels on Defect Removal Efficiency

소프트웨어공학수준이 결함제거효율성에 미치는 영향

  • 이종무 (한라대학교 경영학과) ;
  • 김승권 (정보통신산업진흥원 SW공학센터) ;
  • 박호인 (부천대학교 e-비즈니스과)
  • Received : 2013.11.08
  • Accepted : 2013.12.03
  • Published : 2013.12.30
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The role of software process is getting more important to make good quality softwares. One of the measures to improve the software process is Defect Removal Efficiency(DRE). DRE gives a measure of the development team ability to remove defects prior to release. It is calculated as a ratio of defects resolved to total number of defects found. Software Engineering Levels are usually decided by CMMI Model. The model is designed to help organizations improve their software product and service development, acquisition, and maintenance processes. The score of software engineering levels can be calculated by CMMI model. The levels are composed of the three groups(absent, average, and advanced). This study is to find if there is any difference among the three categories in term of the result of software engineering levels on DRE. We propose One way ANOVA to analyze influence of software engineering levels on DRE. Bootstrap method is also used to estimate the sampling distribution of the original sample because the data are not sampled randomly. The method is a statistical method for estimating the sampling distribution of an estimator by sampling with replacement from the original sample. The data were collected in 106 software development projects by the survey. The result of this study tells that there is some difference of DRE among the groups. The higher the software engineering level of a specific company becomes, the better its DRE gets, which means that the companies trying to improve software process can increase their good management performance.

Keywords

References

  1. Standish Group, "Chaos: A Recipe for Success," tech. report, Standish Group Int'l, 2009.
  2. ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 7, ISO/IEC TR 15504, ISO, 1998.
  3. Team, CMMI Product. "CMMI for Development, version 1.2," CMU/SEI, 2006.
  4. B. Clark, and D. Zubrow, How good is the software: a review of defect prediction techniques. sponsored by the US department of Defense, 2001.
  5. T. Jeff, "Quality Assurance Alternatives and Techniques: A Defect- Based Survey and Analysis," ASQ by Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Southern Methodist University , SQP, Vol. 3, No. 3, 2001.
  6. C. Jones, "Software defect-removal efficiency," Computer, Vol, 29, No4, 1996, pp. 94-95. https://doi.org/10.1109/2.488361
  7. CMMI Distilled: A Practical Introduction to Integrated Process Improvement, Dennis M. Ahern, Aaron Clouse, Richard Turner , Addison-Wesley Professional, June 2001.
  8. 변다니엘, "혁신 저해요소와 기업의 혁신활동 그리고 기업 성과의 관계," 디지털산업정보학회, 제9권, 제2호, 2013, pp. 151-163.
  9. 이종무, "IT 도입요소의 성과에 관한 탐색적 연구," 디지털산업정보학회, 제8권, 제4호, 2012, pp. 205-215.
  10. W. Humphrey, T. Snyder, and R. Willis, "Software Process Improvement at Hughes Aircraft," IEEE Software, Vol, 8, Issue, 4, 1991, pp. 11-23.
  11. 이상엽, "소프트웨어 프로세스 성숙도가 프로젝트성과에 미치는 영향에 대한 연구," 한국외국어대학교 박사학위논문, 2000.
  12. 윤재욱, 김인재, "소프트웨어 프로세스 개선활동이 조직의 성과에 미치는 영향," 경영과학회지, 제31 권, 제1호, 2006, pp. 37-53.
  13. M. Diaz, & J. Sligo, How software process improvement helped Motorola. IEEE Software, Vol 14, No 5, 1997, pp. 75-81.
  14. F. McGarry, B, Decker, "Attaining level 5 in CMM process maturity," Software, IEEE, Vol 19, No. 6, 2001, pp. 87-96.
  15. B. Pitterman, Telcordia technologies: The journey to high maturity. IEEE Software, Vol. 17, No 4, 2000, pp. 89-96.
  16. T. Haley, B, Ireland, E, Wojtaszek, D, Nash, & R, Dion, "Raytheon Electronic Systems Experience in Software Process Improvement,"(No. CMU/SEI-95-TR-017). CMU/SEI, 1995.
  17. M, Kerr, M. Martin, M. and G. Churchill, "Analysis of Variance for Gene Expression Microarray Data," Journal of Computational Biology, Vol. 7, 2000, Vol. 7, No. 6, 2000, pp. 819-837. https://doi.org/10.1089/10665270050514954
  18. Efron, B., "Bootstrap Methods: Another Look at the Jackknife," The Annals of Statistics, Vol. 7, No. 1, 1979. pp. 1-26. https://doi.org/10.1214/aos/1176344552
  19. Efron, B., "The Jackknife, the Bootstrap and Other Resampling Plans," Society for Industrial and Mathematics CBMS-NSF Monographs, Vol. 38, 1982.
  20. Efron, B. and Tibshirani, R., "Bootstrap Methods for Standard Errors, Confidence Intervals, and Other Measures of Statistical Accuracy," Statistical Science, Vol. 1, No. 1, 1986, pp. 54-75. https://doi.org/10.1214/ss/1177013815
  21. Efron, B. and Tibshirani, R., "An Introduction to the Bootstrap," Chapman and Hall, 1994.
  22. El-Emam, K. and Garro, I., "Estimating the Extent of Standards Use: The Case of ISO/IEC 15504," Journal of Systems and Software, Vol. 53, No. 2, 2000, pp. 137-143. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0164-1212(00)00051-0
  23. Ho-Won, Jung and Hunter, R., "An Evaluation of the SPICE Rating Scale with Regard to the Internal Consistency of Capability Measurement," Proceedings of the Second International SPICE Conference, 2002, pp. 105-115.
  24. Ho-Won, Jung, & Goldenson, D., "The Internal Consistency of Key Process Areas in the Capability Maturity $Model^{(R)}$ (SW-$CMM^{(R)}$) for Software," Carnegie Mellon University/Software Engineering Institute, CMU/SEI-2002 -TR-037, 1994.