Identifying Key Software Development Practices in the English-Speaking Caribbean Using the Nominal Group Technique

This paper explains how a simplified process improvement framework was developed with practices from the capability maturity model integration (CMMI) model using the nominal group technique (NGT). The NGT was used to generate consensus on key software process improvement practices that are likely to lead to the improvement of the quality of information systems (IS) in the English-speaking Caribbean (ESC). We present the approach taken, the results derived, and the benefits of using this approach. NGT sessions, involving 30 IS professionals were conducted in four ESC territories to reduce and finalize a list of key software development practices that would be more suitable for ESC nations to focus on.

[1]  Murray Turoff,et al.  The Delphi Method: Techniques and Applications , 1976 .

[2]  Karl E. Weick,et al.  Group Techniques for Idea Building. , 1988 .

[3]  Judith G. Brodman,et al.  Realities and Rewards of Software Process Improvement , 1996, IEEE Softw..

[4]  Jatinder N. D. Gupta,et al.  The Impact of Decision-Making Methodology on Job Evaluation Outcomes , 1994 .

[5]  James D. Herbsleb,et al.  Software quality and the Capability Maturity Model , 1997, CACM.

[6]  Charles Weber,et al.  Measurement Maturity and the CMM: How Measurement Practices Evolve as Processes Mature , 2002 .

[7]  Mark C. Paulk,et al.  Capability Maturity Model for Software, Version 1.1 , 1993 .

[8]  Elizabeth Munive Herrera,et al.  A Methodology for Self‐Diagnosis for Software Quality Assurance in Small and Medium‐Sized Industries in Latin America , 2003 .

[9]  Robert J. Chapman,et al.  The effectiveness of working group risk identification and assessment techniques , 1998 .

[10]  David H. Gustafson,et al.  Group Techniques for Program Planning: A Guide to Nominal Group and Delphi Processes , 1976 .

[11]  Pasi Kuvaja,et al.  Software process maturity and certification , 1996, J. Syst. Archit..

[12]  Denise Silver,et al.  Joint Application Development , 1995 .

[13]  Donald J Reifer.  The CMMI: it's formidable , 2000, J. Syst. Softw..

[14]  Evan W. Duggan,et al.  Bridging the Digital Divide in Caribbean Group Decision‐Making , 2004, Electron. J. Inf. Syst. Dev. Ctries..

[15]  A. Gresham.  Expressed Satisfaction with the Nominal Group Technique among Change Agents. A Summary Report of Research. , 1986 .

[16]  Raul A. Trejo-Ramírez,et al.  A Methodology for Self-Diagnosis for Software Quality Assurance in Small and Medium-Sized Industries in Latin America , 2003, AMCIS.

[17]  Evan W. Duggan,et al.  A Modified Capability Framework for Improving Software Production Processes in Jamaican Organisations , 2007, Electron. J. Inf. Syst. Dev. Ctries..

[18]  J. Valacich,et al.  Idea Generation in Computer-Based Groups: A New Ending to an Old Story , 1994 .

[19]  Timothy J. Greene,et al.  Using the nominal group technique to elicit roadblocks to an MRP II implementation , 1991 .

[20]  Peter Axel Nielsen,et al.  Competing values in software process improvement: an assumption analysis of CMM from an organizational culture perspective , 2003, IEEE Trans. Engineering Management.

[21]  Thiagarajan Ravichandran,et al.  Quality Management in Systems Development: An Organizational System Perspective , 2000, MIS Q..

[22]  André L. Delbecq,et al.  A Group Process Model for Problem Identification and Program Planning , 1971 .

[23]  W. Edwards Deming,et al.  Out of the Crisis , 1982 .

[24]  A. V. D. Ven,et al.  The Effectiveness of Nominal, Delphi, and Interacting Group Decision Making Processes , 1974 .

[25]  Evan W. Duggan,et al.  Integrating nominal group technique and joint application development for improved systems requirements determination , 2004, Inf. Manag..

[26]  Volkmar H. Haase.  Software process assessment concepts , 1996, J. Syst. Archit..

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

[28]  Evan W. Duggan.  Silver Pellets for Improving Software Quality , 2004, Inf. Resour. Manag. J..

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

[30]  Elizabeth B. Richmond,et al.  Alternative user survey and group process methods nominal group technique applied to U.S. depository libraries , 1996 .

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

[32]  John C. Anderson,et al.  Maturity and its impact on new product development project performance , 2001 .

[33]  João Batista,et al.  SPI in a very small team: a case with CMM , 2000 .

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

[35]  Austen Rainer,et al.  Defining a Requirements Process Improvement Model , 2005, Software Quality Journal.

[36]  Reuben R. McDaniel,et al.  Strategic Issue Analysis: NGT + Decision Analysis for Resolving Strategic Issues , 1989 .

[37]  Mark C. Paulk,et al.  Capability Maturity Model for Software , 2001 .

[38]  Chee-Sing Yap,et al.  Top Management Support, External Expertise and Information Systems Implementation in Small Businesses , 1996, Inf. Syst. Res..

[39]  Ann MacPhail,et al.  Nominal Group Technique: a useful method for working with young people , 2001 .

[40]  A. Delbecq,et al.  Nominal Versus Interacting Group Processes for Committee Decision-Making Effectiveness , 1971 .

[41]  Blair Y. Stephenson,et al.  An Empirical Test of the Nominal Group Technique in State Solar Energy Planning , 1982 .