Implementation of Software Process Improvement in ... - IEEE Xplore

2012

International Conference on Computer & Information Science (ICCIS)

Implementation of Software Process Improvement in Pakistan: An Empirical Study 2 ! ! ! Syed Nasir Mehmood Shah , Mehrosh Khalid , Ahmad Kamil Bin Mahmood , Nazleeni Haron , 2 Muhammad Younus Javed 1 Department of Computer and Information Sciences Universiti Teknologi PETRONAS, Bandar Seri Iskandar, 317S0 Tronoh, Perak, Malaysia. 2Department of Computer Engineering College of Electrical and Mechanical Engineering National University of Sciences and Technology Pakistan.

[email protected], (kamilmh, nazleeni)@petronas.com.my [email protected], [email protected] Abstract

-

Software Process Improvement is a set of activities

that leads to a better software process, and ensures the design and development of quality software in a timely manner. Recently, several software companies have decided to adopt maturity models such as the CMMlCMMI to ensure quality software processes. This paper presents the empirical study for successful implementation of CMMI in Pakistani Information Technology few

CMMI

(IT)

industry. Recent literature reveals that only

based

assessments

have

been

performed

at

software companies so far. Pakistani software companies are facing a lot of problems to attain a good level of CMMI. This paper has indentified the key factors to be used for analyzing the problems faced by these organizations. These factors have played a key role in analyzing the collected surveyed data from various perspectives. This research also presents the best practices for ease and successful implementation of CMMI to improve the quality of software processes in Pakistani IT industry.

Keywords - Capability Maturity Model Integration; Process Areas; Requirements Management; Project Planning; Project Monitoring and Control; Supplier Agreement Management; Measurement and Analysis; Process and Product Quality Assurance; Configuration Management.

I.

INTRODUCTION

Capability Maturity Model® Integration (CMMI) is a process improvement approach that provides organizations with the essential elements of effective processes through integrated models. It can be used to guide process improvement across a project, a division, or an entire organization. CMMI helps integrate traditionally separate organizational functions, set process improvement goals and priorities, provide guidance for quality processes, and provide a point of reference for appraising current processes [I]. CMMI for Development consists of best practices that address development and maintenance activities applied to products and services [2]. Standard CMMI Appraisal Method for Process Improvement (SCAMPI) is the official SEI method to provide benchmark-quality ratings relative to CMMI models [3]. Process Area groups related practices in that area, which are implemented collectively, for making improvement in that area. Capability Maturity Model

978-1-4673-193 8-6/12/$3l.00 ©2012 IEEE

[ 1006]

Integration deals with 22 process areas associated with different levels of the model [2]. But here we will consider only the process areas related with CMMI level 2. At CMMI level 2, the process areas are: Project Planning (PP), Requirements Management (REQM), Project Monitoring and Control (PMC), Measurement and Analysis (MA), Supplier Agreement Management (SAM), Process and Product Quality Assurance (PPQA), Configuration Management (CM). Our entire research is based on these 7 process areas of CMMI level 2. The problems highlighted in the literature survey will be mapped with the process areas practices and we will identify that which practices if not followed will arise what problems. Lessons learned will help the organization in achieving the maximum measurable benefits in terms of capability & maturity and control over the projects. II.

CURRENT STATUS OF PAKISTANI

IT

INDUSTRY

Pakistani Software industries are facing a lot of challenges to meet with the international criteria for the successful implementation of software process improvement (SPI) practices. In this paper different aspects related to Pakistan based software companies/houses for software process improvement are discussed. The following statistics clearly identify the status of Pakistani IT companies regarding successful CMMI implementation. A.

CMMllevel

1

Companies

Initially all the companies are at CMMI level I, but the following 16 companies took initiative to achieve CMMI level 2. These companies are registered with PSEB and have successfully conducted Class C appraisals for CMMI level 2 but not yet conducted Class A appraisals and therefore, these are not considered as CMMI Level 2 companies instead they are striving to achieve CMMI level 2. Statistics showed that out of approximately 700 registered software companies, only 22 took Imtmtlve for CMMI implementation. By May 2007, out of those 22 only 2 companies achieved CMMI level 2, 2 software companies achieved CMMI level 3 and only 1 software company achieved CMMI level S.

2012


Table 1. CMMI LEVEL 1 COMPANIES Sr

Name of Company

No.

CMMILevel2 Class

Status Class

C

B

A

Class

Appraisal

Appraisal

Appraisal

PrisLogix (Pvt) Ltd E-Dev Technology Systems Innovation (Pvt.) Ltd. Techlogix Pakistan (Pvt) Ltd

Done Done Done Done

Not Done Not Done Not Done Not Done

Not Done Not Done Not Done Not Done

CMMI level 2-in Progress CMMI level 2-in Progress CMMllevel 2-in Progress CMMI level 2-in Progress

5 6 7

Innovative (Pvt) Ltd. Descon IT 24 (Pvt) Ltd NADRA (Project & Technology Directorates)

Done Done Done

Not Done Not Done Not Done

Not Done Not Done Not Done

CMMllevel 2-in Progress CMMI level 2-in Progress CMMI level 2-in Progress

8

Abacus Consulting Technology (Pvt) Ltd

Done

Not Done

Not Done

CMMI level 2-in Progress

9 10

AMZ Access (Pvt.) Ltd. Advanced Computing & Engineering Solutions (Pvt) Ltd (ACES)

Done Done

Not Done Done

Not Done Not Done

CMMllevel 2-in Progress CMMI level 2-in Progress

II

CARE (Pvt) Ltd Avanza Solution (Pvt) Ltd SKMCH&RC GeoPaq Technologies (Pvt) Ltd. Prosol Technologies (Pvt) Ltd Masinfosoft (Pvt) Ltd *

Done Done Done Done Done Not Done

Not Done Not Done Not Done Done Done Not Done

Not Done Not Done Not Done Not Done Not Done Not Done

CMMI level 2-in Progress CMMI level 2-in Progress CMMllevel 2-in Progress CMMI level 2-in Progress CMMI level 2-in Progress CMMllevel 2-in Progress

I

2 3 4

12 13 14 15 16 B.

CMMIlevel2 Companies The latest reports of SEI showed that the following two Pakistani companies successfully achieved CMMI Level 2: Table 2

Sr.

Name of Company

CMMI LEVEL 2 COMPANIES [1-3]

Status

I

2

C.

Class

A

Appraisal

Appraisal Expiry Date

End Date

No.

CMMlievel 2 May 04, 2010 May 04, 2007 E Worx International (Pvt) Ltd Zhongxing Telecom Pakistan (Pvt.) CMMlievel 2 Mar 09, 2010 Mar 09, 2007 Ltd. * Masinfosoft (Pvt) Ltd. has not even done Class C appraisals and they have just ended up with their gap analysis CMMIlevel3 Companies

According to PSEB reports and SEI-CMU Published Appraisal Results, following Software/ IT companies of Pakistan achieved CMMI level 3. Table 3 Sr.

Name of Company

CMMT LEVEL 3 COMPANIES [1-3]

Status

I

2 3 D.

Class

A

Appraisal


End Date

No.

Digital Processing Systems, Inc. Systems Ltd. Kalsoft Pvt. Ltd.

CMMlievel 3 CMMlievel 3 CMMlievel 3

Jan 27, 2007 Mar 11, 2006 Feb 25, 2006

Jan 27, 2010 Mar 11, 2009 Feb 25, 2009

CMMIlevel4 Companies No Pakistani Software/ IT company has been reported to be at CMMI level 4.

E.

CMMIlevel5 Companies

According to PSEB reports and SEt-CMU Published Appraisal Results, only NetSol Technologies Ltd. achieved CMMI level 5 [4]. Table 4. CMMT LEVEL 3 COMPANIES [1-3] Sr.

Name of Company

Status

I

Class

A

Appraisal


End Date

No.

NetSol Technologies Ltd.

CMMlievel 5

Aug 11, 2006

Aug 11, 2009

[ 1007]

2012

III.


RESEARCH OBJECTIVES

Our research work examines organizations that have achieved CMMI level 2 and also those organizations that are trying to achieve CMMI level 2 and finds either these categories affects the SPI implementation strategy and the degree of SPI success. This paper also identifies the factors that have significant positive or negative effect on software business processes in different organizations. We focused on following points: • What are the key factors for success in successful achievement of Capability Maturity Model Integration Level 2? In response to the above research questions, our research focused on the following main objectives: • The first objective of our research thesis is to give suggestions/ recommendations to develop an optimized strategy on the basis of CMMI implementation in software process improvement in Pakistani context. • The second objective is to perform an empirical study of the practice of process areas lying at CMMI level 2 in Pakistani IT industry. • The third objective is to perform an analysis of the key factors for success in software process improvement. IV.

MAJOR ISSUES

By reviewing the related research carried out nationally and internally many factors were identified as challenging factors in the successful implementation of the SPI activity. In context of the Pakistani software industry, total 17 factors were selected and surveyed including organizational culture, organization's goals, lack of motivation, people factor,

technical staffing issues, lack of knowledge & skills, lack of new tools & technology, lack of trainings, inadequate budgets & schedules, lack of management support, lack of commitments, documentation issues, improper data management, improper change management, lack of stakeholder involvement, improper communication, lack of internal audits & reviews. The identification of major challenges and the areas for improvement lead to identification of practices and processes that are most important. V.

SURVEY METHODOLOGY

We used the questionnaire approach to collect the data from our respondents for a better research. The questionnaire was based on the 7 process areas of CMMI level 2. Related to each process area, numbers of questions were designed reflecting the standardized sub practices of particular process area. The questionnaire was designed in a way that it will not only highlight the practices that are not being followed in the industry but it will also identifY what practices in a particular process area are associated with which challenging factor. The implementation level of

[ 1008]

practices related to the process areas was rated according to the following criteria: (1) Fully Implemented (100% observance), (2) Largely Implemented (50-80% observance), (3). Partially Implemented (20-49% observance) and (4) Not Implemented (less than 20%). In addition to above mentioned we also worked on gathering information about respondents (experience, education, and job nature), organization (size, status, market access, culture). VI.

DATA ANALYSIS

Results are being analyzed by dividing the organization in two main categories: • Category I: Organizations that have successfully achieved CMMI level 2 • Category 2: Organizations that are trying to achieve CMMI level 2. We performed two-way analysis of results. Firstly, results were analyzed by process area wise implementation. It was observed that how much strongly organizations are implementing the practices of all the 7 process areas of CMMI level 2. Which practices are not being followed and why and what is the implementation percentage of particular practices in the industry. Separate analysis was done for both the two categories of organizations. Secondly, the results were analyzed factor wise. From the questions related to different process areas, we identified questions relevant to particular problem factor and analyzed each response. This methodology identifies sustaining percentage of a particular problem factor in the industry and also shows that what practices from the process areas relate to which problem factor. Then results were analyzed separately for both categories of organizations. To formalize the results, a criterion used was: TABLE 5

ANALYSTS KEY

Percentage

Remarks

Below 45% 45% to 65% 65% to 85% Above 85%

Poor Average Good Excellent

VII.

RESULTS & DISCUSSIONS

From the two-way data analysis, following major issues prevailing in the industry are highlighted. 7.1

Process-Area Wise Data Analysis

Process-area wise data analysis is discussed below: A.

Requirements Management (RM)

The results showed that the two CMMI level 2 companies implement 90% of the practices defined in the Requirement Management Process Area, but the percentage of implementation of these practices in the other 14 companies striving for CMMI level 2 varies from

2012


organization to organization. The analysis shows that only 7 % of the organizations fully implement the Requirement Management Practices. Hence, the industry showed the average implementation of the standard practices. And non implementation of the Requirement Management practices is about 21% in the organizations struggling to achieve CMMI level 2. Major deficiencies lie where organizations failed to assess the validity of requirements, keeping a consistent record of all the requirements, managing requirements change-history, analyzing requirements in term of cost and schedules. B.

Project Planning (PP)

In the area of project planning, the two CMMI level 2 companies implement 100% of the practices defined in the project planning process area but the category 2 organizations showed an average implementation rate of about 50 %. Mostly organizations are not observing the full or large implementation of these practices. Under the umbrella of project planning, organizations are not paying attention towards • proper re-planning of disputed issues • planning about how to identify threats early • documenting all the issues • involving stakeholders in the planning process • Not taking agreements on the planned issues from all the authorities C.

Project Monitoring and Control (PMC)

Category 1 organizations showed 100 % implementation rate of the practices defined in the project monitoring & control process area but the percentage of implementation in the other 14 companies striving for CMMI level 2 is not satisfactory. Mostly organizations are not observing the full or large implementation of these practices. Data analysis showed that Project Monitoring & Control practices have zero % full implementation in the companies striving for CMMI level 2. These practices are 57 % largely implemented and have 43% partial implementation in the category 2 organizations. From the survey, it is found that organizations don't pay stress on: •

starting the work as it was planned, actual cost and schedules are not measured against the estimated costs and schedules, • In case of changes, review activities are not properly performed and documented. Hence, overall performance is not properly monitored. •

D. Supplier Agreement Management (SAM) The survey results identified that the two CMMI level 2 companies have not 100% but good implementation rate of the practices defined in the Supplier Agreement Management process area. The category 2 organizations, on the other hand, show poor implementation of these practices as only 9% full implementation is observed. Although there is found 73% implementation found on large scale but even

though the problem existed as the standard practices are not being fully observed. Problem comes when organizations •

•

•

don't get agreements from the suppliers, don't follow any standard criteria for

selecting

suppliers, Don't ensure supplier involvement in technical and

management reviews. Hence supplier is ignorant of any technical and management discrepancies. E.

Measurement and Analysis (MA)

Survey results showed that the category 1 organizations have good implementation of these practices. While category 2 organizations have approximately zero % full implementation. These practices are 41 % largely implemented and have 42% partial implementation in the category 2 organizations. Even the non-implementation rate is 17% that is worth noticing. Major problems that organizations face are due to the following reasons: • proper feedbacks are not provided for refining and clarifying objectives • no specific measures are identified to review objectives • no specific measures are defined to perform certain activities such as data management, • organizations lack proper guidance and training activities • management is not actively participating in analyzing and reporting measurement results, • Measurement results are not distributed to all the relevant stakeholders. F.

Process and Product Quality Assurance (PPQA)

Category I organizations showed 93% implementation of the of the practices defined in the Process & Product Quality Assurance process area but the percentage of implementation in the other 14 companies striving for CMMI level 2 varies from organization to organization. Results showed that Process & Product Quality Assurance has approx. 14 % full implementation in the companies striving for CMMI level 2. These practices are 50 % largely implemented and have 29% partial implementation. Even the non-implementation rate is 7%. It means that organizations are not fully following the standard practices but somehow these practices prevail in the industry. The major issues on which organizations are not paying attention include • lack of defined evaluation mechanisms, • if some discrepancies are found those are not communicated to all the stakeholders • lack of modified plans and data descriptions in accordance with changes • Stakeholders are not properly communicated about the quality reviews.

[ 1009]

2012

G.


Configuration Management (CM)

From the survey, it becomes clear that the two CMMI level 2 companies have good implementation of the practices defined in the Configuration Management process area. The category 2 organizations show an average response towards the implementation of Configuration Management Practices. These organizations show approximately 14 % full implementation, 36% large implementation and have 29% partial implementation. Even the non-implementation rate is 21% that is worth noticing. The problems exists due to the reasons that • no proper configuration mechanisms are defined and followed, • lack of updated reports, • no back up and restoration files are made, • no proper configuration items are baseline, • changes are not analyzed properly, • Lack of standardized configuration management activities. 7.2

Factor Wise Data Analysis

The highlighted factors were analyzed on the basis of industry response. A.

Culture o/Organization The

survey

statistics

shows

that

category

organizations' culture is 100 % supportive towards SPI activities. But the category 2 organization's culture is not

that much supportive as the average response rate is 6570%. The main reasons identified for this are: • • •

•

B.

Organization's SPI goals are not properly defined

Proper Management Support is lacking There exists a major power distance between the management and the employees Uncertainty environment exists within the organization

Goals Orientation

Goals are what that clearly identifies what can be done and what cannot be done and at what cost [II]. The category 1 organizations proved to be more goal-oriented as compared to the organizations trying to achieve CMMI level 2. The category 1 organizations show 100% response while response rate from category 2 organizations was 61 %. Thus we can say that CMMI level 2 organizations are more focused towards goal consideration and their major goals are aligned with the SPI goals and policies as compared to the companies that are striving for CMMI level 2.The major problem identified that why companies are not goal-oriented is that there is no proper definition of organization's long

term and short-term goals. C.

Motivation

Lack of motivation also adversely affects the Process Improvement activities. Organizations must understand the motivation for process improvement. From the survey, it is

[ 1010 ]

found that the average rate of how motivated the employees are towards SPI is 57% in the companies that have not achieved CMMI level 2 yet. Similarly, in the CMMI level 2 companies the employee motivation rate is good rather than excellent on the basis of average response rate of 80%. Main issues that affect the employee motivation are: • Employees are not motivated towards change • Employees are unaware of the SPI benefits.

D.

•

There

•

activities have increased competence. People consider SPI as an overhead.

doesn't

exist a strong feeling

that

SPI

People Factor

The response obtained from the category organizations is excellent showing 95% importance towards motivating their employees, assigning them responsibilities and encouraging them as compared to the companies that are striving for CMMI level 2 as the average rate in those companies is about 63-64% towards increasing their employee participation. Personnel are of the view that the following factors decrease the employee participation and motivation: • People are not assigned proper authorities and responsibilities. • People are not aware of the SPI benefits. E.

Staffing Issues

Staffing issues are mostly related to the people factor but we considered it separately as to identifY whether organizations hire technical and skilled staff for SPI activities or not? The overall percentage of including technical staff in CMMI level 2 companies is about 93%. Thus we can say that CMMI level 2 organizations put more emphasis on hiring technical staff and involving them in SPI activities as compared to the companies that are striving for CMMI level 2 as the average rate in those companies is about 64%. F.

Knowledge

&

Skills

This factor is also related to the people factor but we considered it separately as to identifY the rate of experienced and skilled people in an organization. The overall percentage of including skilled staff in CMMI level 2 companies is about 97%. Thus we can say that CMMI level 2 organizations put more emphasis on hiring skilled staff and involving them in SPI activities as compared to the companies that are striving for CMMI level 2 as the average rate in those companies is about 70% towards increasing their skilled staff. The responses from both categories of the organization are satisfactory. Few problems exist due to: • Lack of proper trainings • Increased costs of trainings and hiring skilled staff G.

Tools

&

Technology

The survey results show that the overall percentage of practicing new tools and techniques in CMMI level 2

2012


companies is about 90%. And the companies that are striving for CMMI level 2 show the average rate of about 50% towards practicing new tools and technology. Such a major difference is observed due to the lack of following practices: • Standardized tools and techniques are not used for performing different activities • Data management is not performed according to the data management mechanisms (collecting, updating and retrieving data) • No standardized and defined technique exists for configuration management activities. H.

Trainings

The industry response shows that the category 1 organizations focus 97% on providing trainings to their staff. But the category 2 organizations are not implementing this practice showing a 55% response rate towards trainings. The major issues identified in this respect are: • Training costs are so high •

•

/.

Organization's politics act as a barrier towards

successful trainings It is very difficult to provide trainings on latest tools and teclmologies due to lack of professionals.

Budgets

&

Requirement tracking doesn't exist in terms of cost

and schedules. J

•

•

K.

Management Support

Upper management support is important for continued success [II]. From the survey, it is identified that in category 1 organizations; there is 100 % management support for performing SPI activities as compared to the companies that have not yet achieved CMMI level 2. The companies that are striving for CMMI level 2 show the average rate of about 62% management support. Organizations lack management support because of: • Management fails to assign sufficient resources, improvement plans, fails to implement no new processes • Management is not considering SPI as important as other organizational activities and projects.

Due to power distance, management is not supporting employee participation There are no established criteria for measuring the overall performance from management. Management is giving priorities to other tasks rather than SPI activities.

Lack of Commitments

One more reason why SPI fails is that organizations claim the best of intentions but the managers and practitioners lack a true commitment to process improvement. They hold a process assessment but fail to follow through with actual changes. Statistics showed that in CMMI level 2 companies, emphasis is more towards making commitments and sticking to those commitments as compared to the companies that have not yet achieved CMMI level 2. As the overall percentage of making commitments and observing those in CMMI level 2 companies is about 94%. And the companies that are striving for CMMI level 2 show the average rate of about 54% towards making commitments. Organizations fail to ensure proper commitments because: • Commitments are not properly documented •

Schedules

The overall percentage of maintaining budgets and schedules in CMMI level 2 companies is about 94%. And the companies that are striving for CMMI level 2 show the average rate of about 59-60% towards managing accurate budgets and schedules. The main problems identified in this area are: • Actual budgets and schedules are not measured periodically against the estimated budgets and schedules. • Deviations found are neither incorporated into the project plan nor communicated to the relevant stakeholders. •

•

•

L.

Organizations don't ensure to get agreements from

the authorities on all the defined commitments. There is no mechanism to ensure that all stakeholders understand fully the requirements and requirement changes

Documentation Issues On the basis of respondents' feedback, it is identified

that CMMI level 2 companies show 90 % trend towards making documentations to keep track of each and every thing, while the companies that not yet have achieved CMMI level 2 are not that much motivated for making documents and they show 49% trend towards maintaining proper records of all the activities. The survey points out the activities, organizations are not keeping track of that. Organizations lack documents related to: • Criteria of identifying potential suppliers • Identified risks and corrective actions • Data management activities • Review activities • Requirements change history • Configuration management reports These documents are not maintained by the organizations as organizations lack standard set of rules and criteria for performing these activities. M

Data Management

It is clear from the survey results that category 1 companies more strongly follow proper data management mechanism as compared to the companies that have not yet achieved CMMI level 2. As the overall percentage of proper data management in CMMI level 2 companies is about 92%.

[ 1011 ]

2012


And the companies that are striving for CMMI level 2 show the average rate of about 47% towards proper data management. Problems identified in adapting proper data management are: • Lack of proper mechanism to identifY, collect, store data • Data management review activities are not properly implemented • Lack of proper trainings for data management activities • Lack of proper measures to analyze and report data N.

Change Management

All people involved in software processes must be included in the practical implementation of process change [12]. Survey results showed that CMMI level 2 companies more strongly follow proper change management mechanism as compared to the companies that have not yet achieved CMMI level 2. As the overall percentage of proper change management in CMMI level 2 companies is about 93% and in the category 2 organizations is 56% towards managing and communicating changes. Organizations observe following major problems while dealing with changes: • Organizations find difficulty in replanning and making new agreements • Changes are often not incorporated into the project plans and all other related documents •

•

•

0.

People resist to change as they

don't receive

awareness about why to change Changes are not communicated to all the relevant stakeholders Change history is never maintained.

Stakeholder Involvement

The survey showed that organizations in category 1 ensure 93 % stakeholder involvement as compared to the organizations that lie in category 2 showing 54 % stakeholder involvement. Following problems are identified in this area: • Organizations hesitate to conduct technical and management reviews with the stakeholders, who remain ignorant about the technical and management discrepancies being observed in the organization. • Organizations are not properly following the trend of communicating the measurement and analysis results of all the activities to the concerned stakeholders. • Organizations rarely involve all the relevant stakeholders in all the requirement gathering and planning activities.

[ 1012 ]

P.

Communication

Communication is one of the factors that represent the most common problems related to SPI activities. Category 1 organizations ensure communications with all the stakeholders more accurately as compared to the companies that have not yet achieved CMMI level 2. As the overall percentage of properly communicating with all the stakeholders in CMMI level 2 companies is about 92% and in the category 2 organizations is 54 %. Communication issues arise because of the reason that: • Project background and benefits are not properly communicated to all the stakeholders • Organizations are not conducting technical and management reviews with the stakeholders to keep them informed about the technical and management discrepancies being observed in the organization. • Industry is not properly following the trend of communicating the measurement and analysis results of all the activities to the concerned stakeholders. Q.

Internal Audits

&

Reviews

Another important problem factor highlighted in literature is the lack of internal reviews and self-evaluations of an organization. Before starting an official CMMI appraisal project, an organization needs to perform an honest self-evaluation (or hire an outside, honest broker) [8]. Category 1 organizations show 93 % practice of conducting internal audits and reviews for self-evaluations. But the implementation percentage of same practices in category 2 organizations is just 53% that is not much satisfactory. Organizations show less implementation of the internal reviews because they find difficulties in: • Evaluating risks early in the development • Documenting and communicating results of review activities • If any, changes are not encouraged in the requirements, planning and other activities • Making action teams for auditing and revIew activities • Getting support from management for conducting internal reviews • Dealing with organizational politics VIII.

CONCLUSION

Under the umbrella of CMMI, we conducted an extensive research and identified the factors which have greater impact on Pakistani software industry. The responses from the organizations chosen for survey have shown that the proposed factors were as important as the process areas' practices. The ratio of the Comparison Means by paired sample tests showed a significant level of success for all of the proposed system factors. Thus we can state that our research was successful and according to the local

2012


industry trends. It has also proven that the Pakistani companies that have achieved CMMI level 2 showed 90100% implementation trend of the CMMI level 2 process areas but the companies striving to achieve CMMI level 2 showed average implementation of the CMMI level 2 process areas' practices. Also these companies have not followed the standard guidelines for implementing CMMI practices.

[I]

SEI-CMM 2011: http://www.sei.cmu.edu/cmmi/

[2]

CMMI®

Development,

Version

1.2

CMMI-DEV,

V1.2,

CMU/SEI-2006-TR-008 ESC-TR-2006-008, Improving processes for CMMI® Appraisals http://www.sei.cmu.edu/cmmi/appraisals/appraisals.html (2006-0923). [4]

by Ahern, Dennis; Jim Armstrong. Aaron Clouse. Jack Ferguson, Will Hayes, Kenneth Nidiffer, Addison-Wesley Professional, 240. CMMI® SCAMPI Distilled: Appraisals for Process Improvement

ISBN 0-321-22876-6. [5]

[7]

Results

Appraisal

SEI-CMU:

by

Software Process Improvement Problems in Twelve

Software

Companies An Empirical Analysis Empirical Software Engineering, 8, 7-42, 2003.Kluwer Academic Publishers. Manufactured in The Netherlands by SARAH BEECHAM ,TRACY HALL and AUSTEN RAINER [8] [9]

better products by CMMI Product Team, August 2006 [3]

Published

http://sas.sei.cmu.edu/pars/

CMMI Level 2 Within Six Months? No Way! By George Jackelen in February 2007, www.stsc.hill.af.mil

REFERENCES

for

[6]

Pakistan's Software Industry Best Practices & Strategic Challenges, an Exploratory Analysis, Ministry Of Information Technology Government Of Pakistan Islamabad, February 2005

Managing change for software process improvement initiatives: a practical

experience

based

approach..

Software

Process-

Improvement and Practice 4(4): 199-207 by Moitra, D. 1998. [!O] Software Process Maturity: Is level five enough? 21st International Conference on Software Engineering, May, LosAngeles, California. By Fordham, R. G. 1999 [II] Lessons Learned from 25 years of Software Process Improvement: the rise and fall of NASA Software Engineering Laboratory, by Victor R. Basili , Frank E. McGarry, Rose Pajerski, Marvin V. Zelkowitz, ICSE'02, May 19-25, 2002, Orlando, Florida, USA Copyright 2002 ACM 1-58113-472-X/02/0005... $5 [12] How

software

process

improvement

helped

Motorola,

IEEE

Software, (September/October): 75-81, by Diaz, M., and Sligo, .I. 1997

[ 1013 ]