Software Process Diversity: Conceptualization, Measurement, and Analysis of Impact on Project Performance

This article investigates software process diversity, defined as the project condition arising out of the simultaneous use of multiple software development process frameworks within a single project. Software process diversity is conceptualized as the response of a project team to such contingencies as requirements volatility, design and technological novelty, customer involvement, and the level of organizational process compliance enforced on the project. Moreover, we conceptualize that the degree of fit (or match) between a project's software process diversity and the level of process compliance enforced on the project impacts overall project performance. This conceptualization was empirically tested by utilizing data collected from 410 large commercial software projects of a multinational firm. The results show that higher levels of requirements volatility, design and technological novelty, and customer involvement increased software process diversity within a project. However, software process diversity decreased relative to increases in the level of process compliance enforced on the project. A higher degree of fit between the process diversity and process compliance of a project, rather than the effects of those variables independently, was found to be significantly associated with a higher level of project performance, as measured in terms of project productivity and software quality. These results indicate that increasing software process diversity in response to project-level contingencies improves project performance only when there is a concomitant increase in organizational process compliance efforts. The implications of these results for research are discussed and prescriptive guidelines derived to manage the fit between process diversity and process compliance for improving software project performance.

[1]  Chris F. Kemerer,et al.  Reliability of function points measurement: a field experiment , 2015, CACM.

[2]  Arun Rai,et al.  Production , Manufacturing and Logistics How should process capabilities be combined to leverage supplier relationships competitively ? , 2014 .

[3]  Sabine Matook,et al.  A Competency Model for Customer Representatives in Agile Software Development Projects , 2014, MIS Q. Executive.

[4]  Alan Moran,et al.  Agile Risk Management , 2014, SpringerBriefs in Computer Science.

[5]  Narayan Ramasubbu,et al.  Governing Software Process Improvementsin Globally Distributed Product Development , 2014, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering.

[6]  Ramanath Subramanyam,et al.  In Search of Efficient Flexibility: Effects of Software Component Granularity on Development Effort, Defects, and Customization Effort , 2012 .

[7]  Lan Cao,et al.  Ambidexterity in Agile Distributed Development: An Empirical Investigation , 2012, Inf. Syst. Res..

[8]  Cláudia Maria Lima Werner,et al.  Reconciling software development models: A quasi-systematic review , 2012, J. Syst. Softw..

[9]  Ramanath Subramanyam,et al.  User participation in software development projects , 2010, CACM.

[10]  Alan R. Hevner,et al.  Control of Flexible Software Development Under Uncertainty , 2009, Inf. Syst. Res..

[11]  Richard T. Vidgen,et al.  Coevolving Systems and the Organization of Agile Software Development , 2009, Inf. Syst. Res..

[12]  Viswanath Venkatesh,et al.  A Control Theory Perspective on Agile Methodology Use and Changing User Requirements , 2009, Inf. Syst. Res..

[13]  Robert D. Austin,et al.  Research Commentary - Weighing the Benefits and Costs of Flexibility in Making Software: Toward a Contingency Theory of the Determinants of Development Process Design , 2009, Inf. Syst. Res..

[14]  Jeff Sutherland,et al.  Scrum and CMMI Going from Good to Great , 2009, 2009 Agile Conference.

[15]  Anandasivam Gopal,et al.  Certification in the Indian Offshore IT Services Industry , 2009, Manuf. Serv. Oper. Manag..

[16]  Rajesh Krishna Balan,et al.  The impact of process choice in high maturity environments: An empirical analysis , 2009, 2009 IEEE 31st International Conference on Software Engineering.

[17]  Carsten Ruseng Jakobsen,et al.  Mature Agile with a Twist of CMMI , 2008, Agile 2008 Conference.

[18]  Tore Dybå,et al.  Empirical studies of agile software development: A systematic review , 2008, Inf. Softw. Technol..

[19]  Klaus Hörmann,et al.  From CMMI to SPICE - Experiences on How to Survive a SPICE Assessment Having Already Implemented CMMI , 2008, 2008 32nd Annual IEEE International Computer Software and Applications Conference.

[20]  Mark Staples,et al.  Systematic review of organizational motivations for adopting CMM-based SPI , 2008, Inf. Softw. Technol..

[21]  Pekka Abrahamsson,et al.  The impact of agile practices on communication in software development , 2008, Empirical Software Engineering.

[22]  Narayan Ramasubbu,et al.  Work Dispersion, Process-Based Learning, and Offshore Software Development Performance , 2008, MIS Q..

[23]  D. Harrison,et al.  What's the difference? Diversity constructs as separation, variety, or disparity in organizations. , 2007 .

[24]  Andrew Begel,et al.  Usage and Perceptions of Agile Software Development in an Industrial Context: An Exploratory Study , 2007, First International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement (ESEM 2007).

[25]  J. Alberto Espinosa,et al.  Learning from Experience in Software Development: A Multilevel Analysis , 2007, Manag. Sci..

[26]  Ajay K. Kohli,et al.  Rethinking Customer Solutions: From Product Bundles to Relational Processes , 2007 .

[27]  Manish Agrawal,et al.  Software Effort, Quality, and Cycle Time: A Study of CMM Level 5 Projects , 2007, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering.

[28]  C. D. De Dreu,et al.  Bridging faultlines by valuing diversity: diversity beliefs, information elaboration, and performance in diverse work groups. , 2006, The Journal of applied psychology.

[29]  Sridhar P. Nerur,et al.  Can Agile and Traditional Systems Development Approaches Coexist? An Ambidextrous View , 2006, Inf. Syst. Manag..

[30]  Takashi Ishikawa,et al.  Practical approach to development of SPI activities in a large organization: Toshiba's SPI history since 2000 , 2006, ICSE.

[31]  Brian Fitzgerald,et al.  Customising agile methods to software practices at Intel Shannon , 2006, Eur. J. Inf. Syst..

[32]  Harbir Singh,et al.  Organizing for Innovation: Managing the Coordination-Autonomy Dilemma in Technology Acquisitions , 2006 .

[33]  Chris F. Kemerer,et al.  Environmental Volatility, Development Decisions, and Software Volatility: A Longitudinal Analysis , 2006, Manag. Sci..

[34]  David J. Anderson,et al.  Stretching agile to fit CMMI level 3 - the story of creating MSF for CMMI/spl reg/ process improvement at Microsoft corporation , 2005, Agile Development Conference (ADC'05).

[35]  Lars Mathiassen,et al.  Managing Risk in Software Process Improvement: An Action Research Approach , 2004, MIS Q..

[36]  Mark Keil,et al.  How Software Project Risk Affects Project Performance: An Investigation of the Dimensions of Risk and an Exploratory Model , 2004, Decis. Sci..

[37]  A. Lewin,et al.  Co-evolutionary Dynamics Within and Between Firms: From Evolution to Co-evolution , 2003 .

[38]  Mani R. Subramani,et al.  The Matrix of Control: Combining Process and Structure Approaches to Managing Software Development , 2003, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[39]  Barry W. Boehm,et al.  Using Risk to Balance Agile and Plan-Driven Methods , 2003, Computer.

[40]  Mark Lycett,et al.  Migrating Agile Methods to Standardized Development Practice , 2003, Computer.

[41]  Alan MacCormack,et al.  Managing the Sources of Uncertainty: Matching Process and Context in Software Development , 2003 .

[42]  Ramanath Subramanyam,et al.  Empirical Analysis of CK Metrics for Object-Oriented Design Complexity: Implications for Software Defects , 2003, IEEE Trans. Software Eng..

[43]  Frank E. McGarry,et al.  Attaining Level 5 in CMM Process Maturity , 2002, IEEE Softw..

[44]  Vijay S. Mookerjee,et al.  A Dynamic Coordination Policy for Software System Construction , 2002, IEEE Trans. Software Eng..

[45]  Russell L. Purvis,et al.  Controlling Information Systems Development Projects: The View from the Client , 2002, Manag. Sci..

[46]  Robert W. Zmud,et al.  A Contingency Approach to Software Project Coordination , 2002, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[47]  Mark C. Paulk,et al.  Extreme Programming from a CMM Perspective , 2001, IEEE Softw..

[48]  M. Beck,et al.  Managing process diversity while improving your practices , 2001 .

[49]  Rajiv D. Banker,et al.  The Moderating Effects of Structure on Volatility and Complexity in Software Enhancement , 2000, Inf. Syst. Res..

[50]  Mark Keil,et al.  An investigation of risk perception and risk propensity on the decision to continue a software development project , 2000, J. Syst. Softw..

[51]  M. S. Krishnan,et al.  An Empirical Analysis of Productivity and Quality in Software Products , 2000 .

[52]  Mayuram S. Krishnan,et al.  Effects of Process Maturity on Quality, Cycle Time, and Effort in Software Product Development , 2000 .

[53]  Ajay Mehra,et al.  Top Management-Team Diversity and Firm Performance: Examining the Role of Cognitions , 2000 .

[54]  Mayuram S. Krishnan,et al.  Measuring Process Consistency: Implications for Reducing Software Defects , 1999, IEEE Trans. Software Eng..

[55]  Phani Tej Adidam,et al.  Antecedents and Consequences of Marketing Strategy Making: A Model and a Test , 1999 .

[56]  Thorsten von Eicken,et al.  技術解説 IEEE Computer , 1999 .

[57]  Rajiv D. Banker,et al.  A Field Study of Scale Economies in Software Maintenance , 1997 .

[58]  J. G. Verrijdt,et al.  ISO 9000 versus CMM: Standardization and certification of IS development , 1997, Inf. Manag..

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

[60]  Erran Carmel,et al.  Customer-developer links in software development , 1995, CACM.

[61]  J. MacKinnon,et al.  Estimation and inference in econometrics , 1994 .

[62]  Suzanne Rivard,et al.  Toward an Assessment of Software Development Risk , 1993, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[63]  Chris F. Kemerer,et al.  Now the learning curve affects CASE tool adoption , 1992, IEEE Software.

[64]  C. D. Beaumont,et al.  Regression Diagnostics — Identifying Influential Data and Sources of Collinearity , 1981 .

[65]  David A. Belsley,et al.  Regression Diagnostics: Identifying Influential Data and Sources of Collinearity , 1980 .

[66]  J. Werbel,et al.  Universalistic and Contingency Predictions of Employee Satisfaction and Conflict. , 1979 .

[67]  Jack P. Gibbs,et al.  Urbanization, Technology, and the Division of Labor: International Patterns , 1962 .

[68]  Chris F. Kemerer,et al.  Ieee Transactions on Software Engineering, Manuscript Id 1 Does Software Process Improvement Reduce the Severity of Defects? a Longitudinal Field Study , 2022 .

[69]  Ioannis Stamelos,et al.  Software project management anti-patterns , 2010, J. Syst. Softw..

[70]  Torsten Biemann,et al.  SIZE DOES MATTER: HOW VARYING GROUP SIZES IN A SAMPLE AFFECT THE MOST COMMON MEASURES OF GROUP DIVERSITY. , 2009 .

[71]  Nannette P. Napier,et al.  From Dichotomy to Ambidexterity: Transcending Traditions in Software Management , 2008, AMCIS.

[72]  David A. Tepper,et al.  Aligning Software Processes with Strategy , 2006 .

[73]  Sendil K. Ethiraj,et al.  Where Do Capabilities Come from and How Do They Matter? A Study in the Software Services Industry , 2005 .

[74]  Gary Klein,et al.  An exploration of the relationship between software development process maturity and project performance , 2004, Inf. Manag..

[75]  Barry W. Boehm,et al.  Get Ready for Agile Methods, with Care , 2002, Computer.

[76]  Marco Iansiti,et al.  Special Issue on Design and Development: Developing Products on "Internet Time": The Anatomy of a Flexible Development Process , 2001, Manag. Sci..

[77]  Michael Deck,et al.  Managing Process Diversity While Improving Your Practices , 2001, IEEE Softw..

[78]  Agile Manifesto,et al.  Manifesto for Agile Software Development , 2001 .

[79]  武石 彰,et al.  Knowledge partitioning in the inter-firm division of labor : the case of automotive product development , 1999 .

[80]  Adler,et al.  Flexibility versus efficiency? A case study of model changeovers in the Toyota production system , 1999 .

[81]  Michael Frese,et al.  Don't underestimate the problems of user centredness in software development projectsthere are many! , 1996, Behav. Inf. Technol..

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