Tools selection criteria in software-developing Small and Medium Enterprises

  • Lornel Rivas General Education and Basic Sciences Department, Simón Bolívar University, Valle de Camurí Grande, Vargas, Venezuela
  • María Pérez Processes and Systems Department, Simón Bolívar University, Caracas, Venezuela
  • Luis E. Mendoza Processes and Systems Department, Simón Bolívar University, Caracas, Venezuela
  • Anna C. Grimán P. Processes and Systems Department, Simón Bolívar University, Caracas, Venezuela
Keywords: SMEs, Tool, Software Engineering, Selection Criteria, Tool Selection

Abstract

Nowadays,it's well-known that Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) generate important contributions to the software industry. Their particular characteristics constitute a challenge to decision makers when selecting technologies, like Software Engineering Tools (SETs). Deciding in which SET to invest requires managing limited resources as well as productivity pressures. Additionally, changes in SETs also affect the selection process. This article proposes a set of criteria, which were formulated with support on the Goal Question Metric approach and considered standards like ISO/IEC 14102 and IEEE 1209, to support SMEs in the selection of SETs. These criteria were also applied to three SETs, including both commercial and open-source, to obtain a set of opportunities for supporting software engineering areas, such as project management and software development process. This proposal is aimed at forming the basis to establish a SETs selection model for SMEs.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

[1] C. Laporte, A. April, “Applying Software Engineering Standards in Small Settings: Recent Historical Perspectives and Initial Achievements”, in First International Research Workshop for Process Improvement in Small Settings (Pittsburgh, USA, 2005); Pittsburgh: Software Engineering Institute. 39-51. 2005.
[2] F.Pino, F. García, M. Piattini, M., “Revisión sistemática de mejora de procesos software en micro, pequeñas y medianas empresas”, Revista Española de Innovación, Calidad e Ingeniería del Software, Vol. 2, No. 1, 2006, pp. 6-23.
[3] ISO/IEC, Information Technology—Guideline for the evaluation and selection of CASE tools. ISO/IEC JTC1/SC7. ISO/IEC 14102:2008.
[4] IEEE, IEEE Recommended Practice for the Evaluation and Selection of CASE Tools. IEEE Std 1209:1992.
[5] ISO/IEC, ISO/IEC 9126-1:2001. Software engineering-product quality-Part 1: Quality model edition: 1. 2001.
[6] V. Basili, C. Gianluigi, D. Rombach, Goal Question Metric Paradigm. Encyclopedia of Software Engineering. John Wiley & Sons. 1994.
[7] B. Lundell, B. Lings,“Comments on ISO 14102: the standard for CASE-tool evaluation”, Computer Standards & Interfaces, Vol. 24, No. 5, 2002, pp. 381–388.
[8] B. Kitchenham, “Evaluating software engineering methods ant tools. Part 1: The evaluation context and evaluation methods”, ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes, Vol. 21, No. 1, 1996, pp. 11–14.
[9] A. Kornecki, J. Zalewski, “Experimental evaluation of software development tools for safety-critical real-time systems”, Innovations in Systems and Software Engineering, Vol. 1, No. 2, 2005, pp. 176-188.
[10] V. Bosilj-Vuksic, V. Ceric, V. Hlupic, “Criteria for the Evaluation of Business Process Simulation Tools”, Interdisciplinary Journal of Information, Knowledge, and Management, Vol. 2, 2007, pp. 73-88.
[11] I. Richardson, C. Gresse, “Why are small software organization different?”, IEEE software, Vol. 24, No. 1, 2007, pp. 18-22.
[12] ESI, ITMARK [www document] http://www.esi.es/index.php?op=15.1.2 (accessed 15th November 2008).
[13] R. O’Connor, N. Baddoo, K. Smolander, and R. Messnarz, R., “Software Engineering Lifecycle Standard for Very Small Enterprises”, in Communications in Software Process Improvement 15th European Conference Proceedings (Dublin, Ireland, 2008); Ireland: Springer Berlin Heidelberg.129-141.
[14] O. Mondragon, “Addressing infrastructure issues in very small settings”, in First International Research Workshop for Process Improvement in Small Settings (Pittsburgh, USA, 2005); Pittsburgh: Software Engineering Institute, pp. 5 -11.
[15] G. Kelly, “Barriers to adoption of the CMMI process model in small settings”, in First International Research Workshop for Process Improvement in Small Settings (Pittsburgh, USA, 2005); Pittsburgh: Software Engineering Institute, pp. 18-22.
[16] M. Harris, K. Aebischer, T. Klaus (2007) “The Whitewater process: software product development in small IT business”, Communications of the ACM, Vol. 50, No. 5, pp. 89-93.
[17] L. Rivas, M. Pérez, L. Mendoza, A. Grimán, “Selection criteria for software development tools for SMEs”, in Tenth International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems (Barcelona, Spain, 2008); Spain: INSTICC. pp. 252-255
[18] L. Estrin, J. Foreman, S. Garcia, Overcoming Barriers to Technology Adoption in Small Manufacturing Enterprises (SMEs), Technical Report CMU/SEI-2003-TR-012, 2003. USA: Software Engineering Institute.
[19] D. Parada, G. Di Paula, L. Mendoza, M. Pérez, “Disciplina y agilidad en el proceso de desarrollo de software para SMEs y cooperativas en Latinoamérica”, in VII Jornadas Iberoamericanas de Ingeniería de Software e Ingeniería de Conocimiento (Guayaquil, Ecuador, 2008);Ecuador: Escuela Superior Politécnica del Litoral. 157-162.
[20] M. Fayad, M. Laitinen, R. Ward, R. Software engineering in the small, Communications of the ACM, Vol. 23, No. 3, 2000, pp. 115-118.
[21] K. El Emam, “Multi-Method Evaluation of the Practices of Small Software Projects”, in First International Research Workshop for Process Improvement in Small Settings (Pittsburgh, USA, 2005); Pittsburgh: Software Engineering Institute, pp.12-17.
[22] B. Lundell, B. Lings, “Changing perceptions of CASE technology”, Journal of Systems and Software, Vol. 7, No. 2, 2004, pp. 271-280.
[23] K. Thramboulidis, C. Tranoris, “ Developing a CASE tool for distributed control applications”, The International Journal of Advanced Manufacture Technology, Vol. 24, No. 1-2, 2004, pp. 24-31.
[24] T. San Feliu, S. Garcia, C. Graettinger, “Critical Success Factors (CSF) in SPI Bibliography”,in First International Research Workshop for Process Improvement in Small Settings (Pittsburgh, USA, 2005); Pittsburgh: Software Engineering Institute, pp. 72-80.
[25] K. Kendall, J. Kendall, Systems analysis and design, 6th Ed. USA: Prentice Hall. 2004.
[26] I. Sommerville, Ingeniería del Software, 7ma. Ed. España: Pearson Educación. 2005.
[27] IEEE, Guide to the software engineering body of knowledge SWEBOK. A project of the IEEE Computer Society Professional Practices Committee. USA: IEEE computer Society. 2004.
[28] L. Mendoza, M. Perez, E. Mendez, W. Baez, “Support disciplines for systems development in Sees, A Conceptual Map”, in: International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems, ICEIS 2008 (Barcelona, Spain, 2008); Spain: INSTICC, pp.86-93
[29] A. Murphy, A. Ledwith, “Project management tools and techniques in high technology SMES”, Management research news, Vol. 30. No. 2, 2007, pp. 153 – 166.
[30] B. Segupta, S. Chandra, V. Sinha, “.A research agenda for distributed software development”, in International conference on software engineering (Shangai, China, 2006); USA: ACM, pp. 731 - 740
[31] J. Herbsleb, “Global Software Engineering: The Future of Socio-technical Coordination, in International Conference on Software Engineering”, Future of Software Engineering, FOSE'07 (Washington, USA, 2007); USA: IEEE Computer Society, pp. 188-198
[32] M. Pérez, L. Mendoza, A. Grimán, L. Rivas, M. Reyes, Technical Report: Primeras Jornadas de Transferencia Tecnológica Proyecto METHODIUS. Caracas:, Venezuela: Laboratorio de Investigación en Sistemas de Información. Universidad Simón Bolívar. 2008.
[33] OMG (2008), UML vendor directory listing [www document] http://uml-directory.omg.org/vendor/list.htm (accessed 15th November 2008).
Published
2010-04-01
How to Cite
Rivas, L., Pérez, M., Mendoza, L. E., & Grimán P., A. C. (2010). Tools selection criteria in software-developing Small and Medium Enterprises. Journal of Computer Science and Technology, 10(01), p. 24-30. Retrieved from http://journal.info.unlp.edu.ar/JCST/article/view/712
Section
Original Articles