The Effect of Reusability on Perceived Competitive Performance of Australian Software Firms

This study set out to investigate how software firms can manage their software development efforts in order to compete effectively. Based on previous studies, a research model was developed. Reusability was expected to positively influence process flexibility, process productivity and process predictability. In turn these software process performance dimensions were expected to influence perceived competitive performance, assessed in terms of market responsiveness and product cost efficiency. Three hundred and twenty organisations were surveyed. In the data reduction stage, the research model was revised and process efficiency, technoregulatory flexibility, process effectiveness and labour flexibility resulted as the new software process performance variables. The revised model was tested and findings indicate that there is a relationship between reusability and techno-regulatory flexibility and market responsiveness.

[1]  Terry S. Overton,et al.  Estimating Nonresponse Bias in Mail Surveys , 1977 .

[2]  Watts S. Humphrey,et al.  Using A Defined and Measured Personal Software Process , 1996, IEEE Softw..

[3]  Karen A. Bantel.  Top Team, Environment, and Performance Effects on Strategic Planning Formality , 1993 .

[4]  Jill Smith Slater,et al.  SIM Paper Competition: The Application Software Factory: Applying Total Quality Techniques to Systems Development , 1991, MIS Q..

[5]  Wayne C. Lim,et al.  Effects of reuse on quality, productivity, and economics , 1994, IEEE Software.

[6]  Yeong R. Kim,et al.  Software Reuse: Survey and Research Directions , 1997, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[7]  Tridas Mukhopadhyay,et al.  Software Processes and Project Performance , 1995, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[8]  Even-André Karlsson,et al.  Software reuse: a holistic approach , 1995 .

[9]  Andrew C. Boynton,et al.  Beyond Flexibility: Building and Managing the Dynamically Stable Organization , 1991 .

[10]  S. Kotha.  Mass customization: Implementing the emerging paradigm for competitive advantage , 1995 .

[11]  M. Porter.  Competitive Advantage: Creating and Sustaining Superior Performance , 1985 .

[12]  Victor R. Basili,et al.  Support for comprehensive reuse , 1991, Softw. Eng. J..

[13]  D BankerRajiv,et al.  Reuse and productivity in integrated computer-aided software engineering , 1991 .

[14]  Mark C. Paulk,et al.  Capability Maturity Model , 1991 .

[15]  W BoehmBarry.  A Spiral Model of Software Development and Enhancement , 1988 .

[16]  T. Biggerstaff,et al.  Reusability Framework, Assessment, and Directions , 1987, IEEE Software.

[17]  Barry W. Boehm,et al.  A spiral model of software development and enhancement , 1986, Computer.

[18]  Watts S. Humphrey,et al.  Managing the software process , 1989, The SEI series in software engineering.

[19]  Gary Knotts,et al.  The Effects of Customizability and Reusability on Perceived Process and Competitive Performance of Software Firms , 1998, MIS Q..

[20]  Fiona Thorne.  Costs and Benefits of Reuse , 1999, Aust. Comput. J..

[21]  Ali Mili,et al.  Reusing Software: Issues and Research Directions , 1995, IEEE Trans. Software Eng..

[22]  Shari Lawrence Pfleeger,et al.  Economics of reuse: issues and alternatives , 1990 .

[23]  Acm Sigsoft.  13th International Conference on Software Engineering, Austin, Texas, May 13-17, 1991 , 1991 .

[24]  L. Fry,et al.  Flexible manufacturing organiza-tions: implications for strategy fonnulation and organization design , 1988 .

[25]  Ralph H. Sprague,et al.  Information systems management in practice , 1985 .

[26]  Michael A. Cusumano,et al.  Japan's Software Factories: A Challenge to U.S. Management, Michael A. Cusumano. 1991. Oxford University Press, New York, NY. 513 pages. ISBN: 0-19-506216-7 , 1991, The Journal of Asian Studies.

[27]  S. B. Kiselev,et al.  The capability maturity model: guidelines for improving the software process , 1995 .

[28]  Keith Mander,et al.  The decline and fall of the American programmer , 2001, CACM.

[29]  Edward Yourdon.  Decline and Fall of the American Programmer , 1992 .

[30]  Chetan S. Sankar,et al.  Reusability-Based Strategy for Development of Information Systems , 1990, MIS Q..

[31]  Richard E. Fairley,et al.  Case studies in software reuse , 1990, Proceedings., Fourteenth Annual International Computer Software and Applications Conference.

[32]  Karen D. Prenger,et al.  Costs and Benefits of Software Process Improvement , 1997 .

[33]  Thomas J. Haley,et al.  Software Process Improvement At Raytheon , 1996, IEEE Softw..

[34]  Sarma R. Nidumolu.  The Effect of Coordination and Uncertainty on Software Project Performance: Residual Performance Risk as an Intervening Variable , 1995, Inf. Syst. Res..

[35]  Gregory G. Dess,et al.  Measuring organizational performance in the absence of objective measures: The case of the privately-held firm and conglomerate business unit , 1984 .

[36]  Graham C. Low,et al.  Software Reusability in Australia , 1994, Aust. Comput. J..

[37]  Rebecca Joos.  Software reuse at Motorola , 1994, IEEE Software.

[38]  Bart Victor,et al.  New Competitive Strategies: Challenges to Organizations and Information Technology , 1993, IBM Syst. J..

[39]  Khaled El Emam,et al.  Costs and Benefits of Software Process Improvement , 1997 .

[40]  Richard Scudder,et al.  Productivity measures for information systems , 1991, Inf. Manag..

[41]  William C. Jordan,et al.  Principles on the benefits of manufacturing process flexibility , 1995 .

[42]  Neil C. Olsen.  Survival of the Fastest: Improving Service Velocity , 1995, IEEE Softw..

[43]  J. C. Henderson,et al.  Managing I/S Design Teams: A Control Theories Perspective , 1992 .

[44]  Mark Dowson,et al.  Software process themes and issues , 1993, [1993] Proceedings of the Second International Conference on the Software Process-Continuous Software Process Improvement.