Characterising the state of the practice in software testing through a TMMi-based process

BackgroundThe software testing phase, despite its importance, is usually compromised by the lack of planning and resources in industry. This can risk the quality of the derived products. The identification of mandatory testing-related practices may lead to the definition of feasible processes for varied sizes of software companies. In this context, this work aims at identifying a set of key practices to support the definition of a generic, streamlined software testing process, based on practices that are described in the TMMi (Test Maturity Model integration), and verify the alignment of the devised process with the TMMi levels.MethodsWe have performed a survey amongst Brazilian software testing professionals who work in both academia and industry, in order to identify priority practices to build the intended, streamlined process; additionally, we applied a diagnosis tool in order to measure the level of TMMi which is fulfilled with the devised process.ResultsA set of 33 (out of 81) practices were ranked as mandatory by most of participants, which represents 40 % of the TMMi’s full set of practices; on the downside, a testing process that relies on this subset of TMMi practices does not fully fulfil level 2 (Managed) of the maturity model.ConclusionsThe identified subset of practices can guide the definition of a lean testing process when compared to a process that includes all TMMi practices; it is expected that such a process encourages a wider adoption of testing activities in software development; even though the streamlined process does not encompass many practices that are spread across TMMi levels, a substantial subset of level 2 practices (Managed) should be accomplished with its adoption.

[1]  Anne Mette Jonassen Hass Testing Processes , 2008, 2008 IEEE International Conference on Software Testing Verification and Validation Workshop.

[2]  Claes Wohlin,et al.  Experimentation in software engineering: an introduction , 2000 .

[3]  James Miller Statistical significance testing--a panacea for software technology experiments? , 2004, J. Syst. Softw..

[4]  Fabiano Cutigi Ferrari,et al.  Identifying a Subset of TMMi Practices to Establish a Streamlined Software Testing Process , 2013, SBES.

[5]  J. Ball,et al.  Statistics review 6: Nonparametric methods , 2002, Critical care.

[6]  Jari Andersin TPI – a model for Test Process Improvement , 2004 .

[7]  Carla Blanck Purper Transcribing Process Model Standards into Meta-Processes , 2000, EWSPT.

[8]  Adriano Bessa Albuquerque,et al.  The Definiton of a Testing Process to Small-Sized Companies: The Brazilian Scenario , 2010, 2010 Seventh International Conference on the Quality of Information and Communications Technology.

[9]  Ke Liu,et al.  An optimal release policy for software testing process , 2010, Proceedings of the 29th Chinese Control Conference.

[10]  Victor R. Basili,et al.  A Controlled Experiment Quantitatively Comparing Software Development Approaches , 1981, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering.