Value-based software engineering: reinventing

The Value-Based Software Engineering (VBSE) agenda described in the preceding article has the objectives of integrating value considerations into current and emerging software engineering principles and practices, and of developing an overall framework in which they compatibly reinforce each other. In this paper, we provide a case study illustrating some of the key VBSE practices, and focusing on a particular anomaly in the monitoring and control area: the "Earned Value Management System." This is a most useful technique for monitoring and controlling the cost, schedule, and progress of a complex project. But it has absolutely nothing to say about the stakeholder value of the system being developed. The paper introduces an example order-processing software project, and shows how the use of Benefits Realization Analysis, stake-holder value proposition elicitation and reconciliation, and business case analysis provides a framework for stakeholder-earned-value monitoring and control.

[1]  Julie Johnson.  What is the Rational Unified Process ? , 1999 .

[2]  Jim Highsmith,et al.  Agile Software Development Ecosystems , 2002 .

[3]  John H. Holland,et al.  Emergence. , 1997, Philosophica.

[4]  Vladan Devedzic,et al.  Software Project Management , 2001 .

[5]  Webster's Collegiate Dictionary , 1933, Nature.

[6]  Gerard O’Regan,et al.  The Capability Maturity Model , 2002 .

[7]  James A. Highsmith,et al.  Adaptive Software Development: A Collaborative Approach to Managing Complex Systems , 1999 .

[8]  Barry Boehm,et al.  The Spiral Model as a Tool for Evolutionary Acquisition , 2001 .

[9]  R. Dorf,et al.  The Balanced Scorecard: Translating Strategy Into Action , 1997, Proceedings of the IEEE.

[10]  Ivar Jacobson,et al.  The Unified Software Development Process , 1999 .

[11]  H. D. Rombach,et al.  THE EXPERIENCE FACTORY , 1999 .

[12]  Barry Boehm,et al.  Avoiding the Software Model-Clash Spiderweb , 2000, Computer.

[13]  Walker Royce,et al.  Software Project Management: A Unified Framework , 1998 .

[14]  Kim B. Clark,et al.  Design Rules: The Power of Modularity , 2000 .

[15]  K. Sweeney.  The information paradox. , 1998, Occasional paper.

[16]  Barry Boehm,et al.  Achieving CMMI Level 5 Improvements with MBASE and the CeBASE Method , 2002 .

[17]  Kim B. Clark,et al.  Design Rules: The Power of Modularity Volume 1 , 1999 .

[18]  Ruth Milkman,et al.  Microsoft Secrets: How the World's Most Powerful Software Company Creates Technology, Shapes Markets, and Manages People , 1995 .

[19]  Barry Boehm,et al.  Using the Spiral Model and MBASE to Generate New Acquisition Process Models: SAIV, CAIV, and SCQAIV , 2002 .

[20]  Donald J. Reifer,et al.  Making the Software Business Case , 2001 .

[21]  Daniel Noah Port,et al.  Balancing Discipline and Flexi-bility with The Spiral Model and MBASE , 2001 .

[22]  Barry Boehm,et al.  Realizing the benefits of the CMMISM with the CeBASE method , 2002 .

[23]  William G. Griswold,et al.  The structure and value of modularity in software design , 2001, ESEC/FSE-9.

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

[25]  David Lorge Parnas,et al.  Review of David L. Parnas' "Designing Software for Ease of Extension and Contraction" , 2004 .

[26]  Philippe Kruchten,et al.  The Rational Unified Process: An Introduction , 1998 .

[27]  Barry W. Boehm,et al.  Software Engineering Economics , 1993, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering.

[28]  Richard W. Selby,et al.  Microsoft Secrets-How the World''s Most Powerful Software Company Creates Technology , 1995 .

[29]  David Raffo,et al.  Value-based software engineering (VBSE) , 2000, SPLC.

[30]  Barry Boehm,et al.  Software economics: a roadmap , 2000, ICSE '00.

[31]  H. D. Rombach,et al.  The Goal Question Metric Approach , 1994 .

[32]  Girish Seshagiri,et al.  Software Process Improvement Works , 1999 .

[33]  Linda Duxbury.  The corporation of the 1990s: Information technology and organizational transformation , 1993 .