Process | Human resource | Information | Means | Control |
---|---|---|---|---|
Valuation aspects | People type | Metrics | Process tools | Estimating and planning |
Phasing | Involvement degree | Reporting | Implementation tools | Scope of methodology |
Implementation strategy | Acceptance degree | Management | Implementation functions | |
Integration | Communication channels | |||
Change management | Balance & Interrelation | |||
Process management |
Concept | Definition (source) |
---|---|
Implementation process | The process of preparing an organization for an organizational change and the actual implementation and embedding of that change (Rooimans et al., 2003, p. 199). |
Implementation factor | Factors that have to be taken into account when carrying out change-projects and when the goal is to achieve balance between the key areas organization and ICT. In the best situation, a change-project will strive to create balance and alignment between the various factors. The five implementation factors are (Rooimans et al., 2003, p. 199):
|
IMM-element | In each implementation process, certain areas (elements) need specific attention in order to achieve a well defined process. These areas, also called IMM-elements, are therefore the basis for improving and structuring the test process. The IMM has a total of 19 IMM-elements, which, grouped together, constitute each of the above-mentioned implementation factors. (Rooimans et al., 2003, p. 198; Koomen & Pol, 1998) |
Implementation Factor Maturity | Extent to which a specific implementation factor is explicitly defined, managed, measured, controlled and effective. The maturity levels that each implementation factor can take on correspond to the maturity levels of the implementation process (see below) (Rooimans et al., 2003, pp. 155–169). |
IMM-element Level | The five levels used to differentiate maturity levels of each IMM-element. These levels correspond to the maturity levels of the implementation process (see below) (Rooimans et al., 2003, p. 198). |
Dependency | A certain condition that has to be met before an IMM-element can reach a specific IMM-element level. Dependencies are defined in terms of IMM-elements (other than the one in focus) and their maturity levels (Rooimans et al., 2003, pp. 155–169). |
Checkpoint | A certain property that a specific IMM-element has to possess before they can reach a certain IMM-element level (Rooimans et al., 2003, pp. 155–169). |
Implementation Maturity Matrix | Instrument with which the degree of maturity regarding the implementation becomes visible after all the IMM-elements and their corresponding levels are filled in (Rooimans et al., 2003, p. 198). |
Implementation Process Maturity | Extent to which a specific implementation process is explicitly defined, managed, measured, controlled and effective. Maturity implies a potential for growth in capability and indicates both the richness of an organization's implementation process and the consistency with which it is applied in projects throughout the organization (Software Engineering Institute [SEI], 1995, p. 9). The five maturity levels that can be differentiated in the implementation process are:
|
Activity | Sub-activity | Description |
---|---|---|
Key areas analysis | Analyze implementation factors | In order to insert relevant values into the implementation maturity matrix, the current implementation process and its key areas needs to be analyzed. This analysis starts with the implementation factors and the IMM-elements. Each implementation process embodies five implementation factors, which are Process, Human Resource, Means, Information and Control. (Rooimans et al., 2003, p. 160) |
Analyze IMM-elements | Each implementation factor is subdivided into two or more IMM-elements that, altogether, represent the entire implementation process. This sub-activity ends in a total of 19 IMM-elements accompanied by information filled in for each element that reflects the current implementation processes. (Rooimans et al., 2003, pp. 160–163) | |
Requirements analysis | Check dependencies | In order to determine the level of an IMM-element, there are specific dependencies to consider. Dependencies state that other IMM-elements have to have achieved certain levels before the IMM-element in focus can be classified into a specific level. Each implementation process will result in different dependencies among IMM-elements and their levels. (Rooimans et al., 2003, pp. 166–169) |
Check checkpoints | In order to be classified into a specific IMM-element level, there are specific properties (called checkpoints) that the IMM-element has to possess. (Rooimans et al., 2003, pp. 166–169) | |
Determine implementation maturity model-elements levels | After all dependencies and checkpoints have been considered, the levels of the IMM-elements can be determined. (Rooimans et al., 2003, pp. 164–169) | |
Determine implementation factors maturities | After the levels of all IMM-elements have been determined, the maturity level of the implementation factors can be determined as well. (Rooimans et al., 2003, pp. 166–167) | |
Determine implementation process maturity | When the implementation maturity matrix contains all the factors, elements and their values, the implementation process maturity can be derived from it. (Rooimans et al., 2003, p. 167) |
Element & Level | Depends on | Requires |
---|---|---|
Implementation strategy (A) | Valuating aspects (A) Involvement degree (A) | All risks have to be taken into account and the people involved have to at least accept the technical changes in the organization. |
Communication channels (A) | People type (B) Involvement degree (A) | Extensive communication between project team members. |
Estimating and planning (A) | Metrics (A) Reporting (A) | Estimations and planning are supported. |
Estimating and planning (B) | Metrics (B) Reporting (B) | Each project needs to be supported by statistical data and estimations. |
Implementation Process | Because software implementation always results in a change within an organization, an implementation process is defined as the process of preparing an organization for an organizational change and the actual implementation and embedding of that change. In this context, the term implementation process represents the way implementations on overall are being realized within an organization (Rooimans, Theye & Koop, 2003). |
---|---|
Process-data diagram | A diagram constructed with meta-modeling to express a process. A process-data diagram consists of two integrated models. The meta-process model on the left-hand side is based on a UML activity diagram, and the meta-data model on the right-hand side is an adapted UML class diagram. Combining these two models, the process-data diagram is used to reveal the relations between activities and artifacts (Saeki, 2003). |
Test Process improvement (TPI) | Developed by Sogeti, an IT-solutions company located in the Netherlands, the test process improvement model supports the improvement of test processes. By considering different aspects, also called key areas, of the test process (e.g. use of test tools, design techniques), the model offers insight into the strengths and weaknesses of the test process and also the maturity of the test processes within an organization. A test maturity matrix is used to communicate, evaluate and derive the maturity of test processes within an organization (Koomen & Pol, 1998). |
Process | Human resource | Information | Means | Control |
---|---|---|---|---|
Valuation aspects | People type | Metrics | Process tools | Estimating and planning |
Phasing | Involvement degree | Reporting | Implementation tools | Scope of methodology |
Implementation strategy | Acceptance degree | Management | Implementation functions | |
Integration | Communication channels | |||
Change management | Balance & Interrelation | |||
Process management |
Concept | Definition (source) |
---|---|
Implementation process | The process of preparing an organization for an organizational change and the actual implementation and embedding of that change (Rooimans et al., 2003, p. 199). |
Implementation factor | Factors that have to be taken into account when carrying out change-projects and when the goal is to achieve balance between the key areas organization and ICT. In the best situation, a change-project will strive to create balance and alignment between the various factors. The five implementation factors are (Rooimans et al., 2003, p. 199):
|
IMM-element | In each implementation process, certain areas (elements) need specific attention in order to achieve a well defined process. These areas, also called IMM-elements, are therefore the basis for improving and structuring the test process. The IMM has a total of 19 IMM-elements, which, grouped together, constitute each of the above-mentioned implementation factors. (Rooimans et al., 2003, p. 198; Koomen & Pol, 1998) |
Implementation Factor Maturity | Extent to which a specific implementation factor is explicitly defined, managed, measured, controlled and effective. The maturity levels that each implementation factor can take on correspond to the maturity levels of the implementation process (see below) (Rooimans et al., 2003, pp. 155–169). |
IMM-element Level | The five levels used to differentiate maturity levels of each IMM-element. These levels correspond to the maturity levels of the implementation process (see below) (Rooimans et al., 2003, p. 198). |
Dependency | A certain condition that has to be met before an IMM-element can reach a specific IMM-element level. Dependencies are defined in terms of IMM-elements (other than the one in focus) and their maturity levels (Rooimans et al., 2003, pp. 155–169). |
Checkpoint | A certain property that a specific IMM-element has to possess before they can reach a certain IMM-element level (Rooimans et al., 2003, pp. 155–169). |
Implementation Maturity Matrix | Instrument with which the degree of maturity regarding the implementation becomes visible after all the IMM-elements and their corresponding levels are filled in (Rooimans et al., 2003, p. 198). |
Implementation Process Maturity | Extent to which a specific implementation process is explicitly defined, managed, measured, controlled and effective. Maturity implies a potential for growth in capability and indicates both the richness of an organization's implementation process and the consistency with which it is applied in projects throughout the organization (Software Engineering Institute [SEI], 1995, p. 9). The five maturity levels that can be differentiated in the implementation process are:
|
Activity | Sub-activity | Description |
---|---|---|
Key areas analysis | Analyze implementation factors | In order to insert relevant values into the implementation maturity matrix, the current implementation process and its key areas needs to be analyzed. This analysis starts with the implementation factors and the IMM-elements. Each implementation process embodies five implementation factors, which are Process, Human Resource, Means, Information and Control. (Rooimans et al., 2003, p. 160) |
Analyze IMM-elements | Each implementation factor is subdivided into two or more IMM-elements that, altogether, represent the entire implementation process. This sub-activity ends in a total of 19 IMM-elements accompanied by information filled in for each element that reflects the current implementation processes. (Rooimans et al., 2003, pp. 160–163) | |
Requirements analysis | Check dependencies | In order to determine the level of an IMM-element, there are specific dependencies to consider. Dependencies state that other IMM-elements have to have achieved certain levels before the IMM-element in focus can be classified into a specific level. Each implementation process will result in different dependencies among IMM-elements and their levels. (Rooimans et al., 2003, pp. 166–169) |
Check checkpoints | In order to be classified into a specific IMM-element level, there are specific properties (called checkpoints) that the IMM-element has to possess. (Rooimans et al., 2003, pp. 166–169) | |
Determine implementation maturity model-elements levels | After all dependencies and checkpoints have been considered, the levels of the IMM-elements can be determined. (Rooimans et al., 2003, pp. 164–169) | |
Determine implementation factors maturities | After the levels of all IMM-elements have been determined, the maturity level of the implementation factors can be determined as well. (Rooimans et al., 2003, pp. 166–167) | |
Determine implementation process maturity | When the implementation maturity matrix contains all the factors, elements and their values, the implementation process maturity can be derived from it. (Rooimans et al., 2003, p. 167) |
Element & Level | Depends on | Requires |
---|---|---|
Implementation strategy (A) | Valuating aspects (A) Involvement degree (A) | All risks have to be taken into account and the people involved have to at least accept the technical changes in the organization. |
Communication channels (A) | People type (B) Involvement degree (A) | Extensive communication between project team members. |
Estimating and planning (A) | Metrics (A) Reporting (A) | Estimations and planning are supported. |
Estimating and planning (B) | Metrics (B) Reporting (B) | Each project needs to be supported by statistical data and estimations. |
Implementation Process | Because software implementation always results in a change within an organization, an implementation process is defined as the process of preparing an organization for an organizational change and the actual implementation and embedding of that change. In this context, the term implementation process represents the way implementations on overall are being realized within an organization (Rooimans, Theye & Koop, 2003). |
---|---|
Process-data diagram | A diagram constructed with meta-modeling to express a process. A process-data diagram consists of two integrated models. The meta-process model on the left-hand side is based on a UML activity diagram, and the meta-data model on the right-hand side is an adapted UML class diagram. Combining these two models, the process-data diagram is used to reveal the relations between activities and artifacts (Saeki, 2003). |
Test Process improvement (TPI) | Developed by Sogeti, an IT-solutions company located in the Netherlands, the test process improvement model supports the improvement of test processes. By considering different aspects, also called key areas, of the test process (e.g. use of test tools, design techniques), the model offers insight into the strengths and weaknesses of the test process and also the maturity of the test processes within an organization. A test maturity matrix is used to communicate, evaluate and derive the maturity of test processes within an organization (Koomen & Pol, 1998). |