DETERMINING SEVERITY AND RECOMMENDATIONS IN PROCESS NON-CONFORMANCE INSTANCES

Sean Thompson, Torab Torabi

Abstract

We have seen a variety of frameworks and methodologies aimed at dealing with non-conformance in processes presented in the literature. These methodologies seek to find discrepancies between process reference models and data returned from instances of process enactments. These range from methodologies aimed at preventing deviations and inconsistencies involved in workflow and process support systems to the mining and comparison of observed and recorded process data. What has not been presented in the literature thus far is a methodology for explicitly discerning the severity of instances of non-conformance once they are detected. Knowing how severe an instance of non-conformance might be, and therefore an awareness of the possible consequences this may have on the process outcome can be helpful in maintaining and protecting the process quality. Subsequently, a mechanism for using this information to provide some kind of recommendation or suggested remedial actions relating to the non-conformance for process improvement has also not been explored. In this paper we present a framework to address both these issues. A case study is also presented to evaluate the feasibility of this framework.

References

  1. Cangussu, J.W., DeCarlo, R.A., and Mathur, A.P. 2003. Monitoring the software test process using statistical process control: a logarithmic approach. Proceedings of the 9th European software engineering conference held jointly with 11th ACM SIGSOFT international symposium on Foundations of software engineering ESEC/FSE-11. 28, 5 (September 2003). ACM Press.
  2. Card, D. 1994. Statistical process control for software? IEEE Software. 11, 3 (May 1994). 95 - 97.
  3. Cîmpan, S., and Oquendo, F. 2000. Dealing with software process deviations using fuzzy logic based monitoring. ACM SIGAPP Applied Computing Review. 8, 2 (December 2000). ACM Press.
  4. Cook, J.E., and Wolf, A.L. 1998. Discovering models of software processes from event-based data. ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology (TOSEM). 7, 3 (July 1998).
  5. Cugola, G., Di Nitto, E., Fuggetta, A., and Ghezzi, C. 1996. A framework for formalizing inconsistencies and deviations in human-centered systems. ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology (TOSEM). 5, 3 (July 1996). ACM Press.
  6. Dowson, M., Nejmeh, B., and Riddle, W. 1990. Concepts for Process Definition and Support. Proceedings of the 6th International Software Process Workshop (Hakodate, Japan, October 28-31 1990). IEEE Computer Society Press.
  7. Ferrin, D.M., Miller, M.J., and Muthler, D. 2005. Six Sigma and simulation, so what's the correlation? Proceedings of the 37th conference on Winter simulation (December 2005). WSC 7805. Winter Simulation Conference.
  8. Florac, W.A., and Carleton, A.D. 1999. Measuring the Software Process: Statistical Process Control for Process Improvement, Addison-Wesley.
  9. Florac, W.A., Carleton, A.D., and Barnard, J.R. 2000. Statistical Process Control: Analyzing a Space Shuttle Onboard Software Process. IEEE Software. 17, 4 (July/Aug 2000). 97 - 106.
  10. Herlocker, J.L., Konstan, J.A., Terveen, L.G., and Riedl, J.T. 2004. Evaluating collaborative filtering recommender systems. ACM Transactions on Information Systems (TOIS). 22, 1 (January 2004). ACM Press.
  11. Huo, M., Zhang, H., and Jeffery, R. 2006. An Exploratory Study of Process Enactment as Input to Software Process Improvement. Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Software Engineering (Shanghai, China, May 2006). ICSE 7806. ACM Press.
  12. Jalote, P., and Saxena, A. 2002. Optimum control limits for employing statistical process control in software process. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering. 28, 12 (Dec. 2002), 1126 - 1134.
  13. Lantzy, M.A. 1992. Application of statistical process control to the software process. Proceedings of the ninth Washington Ada symposium on Ada: Empowering software users and developers (July 1992). ACM Press.
  14. McNee, S.M., Riedl, J., and Konstan, J.A. 2006. Work-inprogress: Making recommendations better: an analytic model for human-recommender interaction. Extended abstracts on Human factors in computing systems (April 2006). CHI 7806. ACM Press.
  15. Radice, R. 2000. Statistical Process Control in Level 4 and Level 5 Software Organizations Worldwide. The Twelfth Annual Software Technology Conference, Salt Lake City, Utah, May 4, 2000.
  16. Reese, J.D., and Leveson, N.G. 1997. Software deviation analysis. Proceedings of the 19th international conference on Software engineering (May 1997). ACM Press.
  17. Rezgui, Y., Marir, F., Cooper, G., Yip, J., and Brandon, P. 1997. A Case-Based Approach to Construction Process Activity Specification. Intelligent Information Systems (December 8-10, 1997) IIS 7897. 293 - 297.
  18. Rombach, H.D. 1990. Specification of software process measurement. Proceedings of the 5th international software process workshop on Experience with software process models (October 1990). IEEE Computer Society Press.
  19. Thompson, S., Torabi, T., and Joshi, P. 2007. A Framework to Detect Deviations during Process Enactment. 6th IEEE International Conference on Computer and Information Science (Melbourne, Australia, July 11-13, 2007). IEEE Computer Society Press.
  20. Thompson, S., and Torabi, T. 2007. A Process Improvement Approach to Improve Web Form Design and Usability. The 3rd Ubiquitous Web Systems and Intelligence Workshop (Regensburg, Germany, September 3-7, 2007). UWSI 2007 Colocated with DEXA 2007.
  21. VanHilst, M., Garg, P.K., and Lo, C. 2005. Repository mining and Six Sigma for process improvement. Proceedings of the 2005 international workshop on Mining software repositories. 30, 4 (May 2005). MSR 7805. ACM Press
  22. Wang, Q., Jiang, N., Gou, L., Liu, X., Li, M., and Wang, Y. 2006. BSR: a statistic-based approach for establishing and refining software process performance baseline. Proceedings of the 28th International Conference on Software Engineering (Shanghai, China, May 2006). ICSE 7806. ACM Press.
Download


Paper Citation


in Harvard Style

Thompson S. and Torabi T. (2008). DETERMINING SEVERITY AND RECOMMENDATIONS IN PROCESS NON-CONFORMANCE INSTANCES . In Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Software and Data Technologies - Volume 3: ICSOFT, ISBN 978-989-8111-53-1, pages 127-133. DOI: 10.5220/0001875701270133


in Bibtex Style

@conference{icsoft08,
author={Sean Thompson and Torab Torabi},
title={DETERMINING SEVERITY AND RECOMMENDATIONS IN PROCESS NON-CONFORMANCE INSTANCES},
booktitle={Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Software and Data Technologies - Volume 3: ICSOFT,},
year={2008},
pages={127-133},
publisher={SciTePress},
organization={INSTICC},
doi={10.5220/0001875701270133},
isbn={978-989-8111-53-1},
}


in EndNote Style

TY - CONF
JO - Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Software and Data Technologies - Volume 3: ICSOFT,
TI - DETERMINING SEVERITY AND RECOMMENDATIONS IN PROCESS NON-CONFORMANCE INSTANCES
SN - 978-989-8111-53-1
AU - Thompson S.
AU - Torabi T.
PY - 2008
SP - 127
EP - 133
DO - 10.5220/0001875701270133