Symptom‐based improvement recommendations

For this paper, we have identified a list of 32 characteristic symptoms that is often discussed during assessments, generated by two experienced assessors who had undertaken maturity assessments in more than 300 companies. We then use cognitive mapping and the “five whys” technique to look beyond th...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of software : evolution and process 2023-08, Vol.35 (8), p.n/a
Hauptverfasser: Pries‐Heje, Jan, Johansen, Jørn, Korsaa, Morten
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page n/a
container_issue 8
container_start_page
container_title Journal of software : evolution and process
container_volume 35
creator Pries‐Heje, Jan
Johansen, Jørn
Korsaa, Morten
description For this paper, we have identified a list of 32 characteristic symptoms that is often discussed during assessments, generated by two experienced assessors who had undertaken maturity assessments in more than 300 companies. We then use cognitive mapping and the “five whys” technique to look beyond the symptoms and reveal the underlying problems or causes of the problems. Following that, we evaluate our findings through the design and evaluation of a web‐based tool where users can score statements based on a formulation of the symptoms. This enables us to recommend to users the areas where they probably need to improve. We designed the tool in three learning cycles of design evaluation and ended up in a summative evaluation where we compared the outcome of using the website tool with a CMMI maturity assessment. We conclude that a systematic quest for symptoms coupled with scoring statements based on the symptoms can point to improvement areas. However, we conclude that doing so is no substitute for a maturity assessment; the scoring of statements cannot reveal the maturity of the organization, but it can quickly and easily point in a useful direction and provide recommendations for going in that direction. Analyzing the symptoms described by the participants in maturity assessments with “five times why” reveals a pattern that can be used to provide improvement recommendations without a formal assessment.
doi_str_mv 10.1002/smr.2375
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2847133568</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2847133568</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2885-3b1f17df320cb7ee107afd1b619fbf9058db2a72e419d75e78fd275233256b913</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kMtKxDAUhoMoOIwDPsKAG0E65tI06VIGbzAiOLoOSXMCHSZtTTpKdz6Cz-iTmLHizrM5_-LjP4cPoVOCFwRjehl9WFAm-AGaUJyLTOSSHP5lwY7RLMYNTlNQzHM-QRfrwXd9678-Po2OYOe170L7Bh6afh6gan1KVvd128QTdOT0NsLsd0_Ry8318_IuWz3e3i-vVllFpeQZM8QRYR2juDICgGChnSWmIKUzrsRcWkO1oJCT0goOQjpLBaeMUV6YkrApOht70yevO4i92rS70KSTispcEMZ4IRN1PlJVaGMM4FQXaq_DoAhWexsq2VB7GwnNRvS93sLwL6fWD08__DcdfWB6</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2847133568</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Symptom‐based improvement recommendations</title><source>Wiley Journals</source><creator>Pries‐Heje, Jan ; Johansen, Jørn ; Korsaa, Morten</creator><creatorcontrib>Pries‐Heje, Jan ; Johansen, Jørn ; Korsaa, Morten</creatorcontrib><description>For this paper, we have identified a list of 32 characteristic symptoms that is often discussed during assessments, generated by two experienced assessors who had undertaken maturity assessments in more than 300 companies. We then use cognitive mapping and the “five whys” technique to look beyond the symptoms and reveal the underlying problems or causes of the problems. Following that, we evaluate our findings through the design and evaluation of a web‐based tool where users can score statements based on a formulation of the symptoms. This enables us to recommend to users the areas where they probably need to improve. We designed the tool in three learning cycles of design evaluation and ended up in a summative evaluation where we compared the outcome of using the website tool with a CMMI maturity assessment. We conclude that a systematic quest for symptoms coupled with scoring statements based on the symptoms can point to improvement areas. However, we conclude that doing so is no substitute for a maturity assessment; the scoring of statements cannot reveal the maturity of the organization, but it can quickly and easily point in a useful direction and provide recommendations for going in that direction. Analyzing the symptoms described by the participants in maturity assessments with “five times why” reveals a pattern that can be used to provide improvement recommendations without a formal assessment.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2047-7473</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2047-7481</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/smr.2375</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Chichester: Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</publisher><subject>Assessments ; CMMI ; cognitive map ; Design analysis ; improvement ; maturity ; process improvement</subject><ispartof>Journal of software : evolution and process, 2023-08, Vol.35 (8), p.n/a</ispartof><rights>2021 John Wiley &amp; Sons, Ltd.</rights><rights>2023 John Wiley &amp; Sons, Ltd.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2885-3b1f17df320cb7ee107afd1b619fbf9058db2a72e419d75e78fd275233256b913</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-4521-454X</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002%2Fsmr.2375$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002%2Fsmr.2375$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,1417,27924,27925,45574,45575</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Pries‐Heje, Jan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Johansen, Jørn</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Korsaa, Morten</creatorcontrib><title>Symptom‐based improvement recommendations</title><title>Journal of software : evolution and process</title><description>For this paper, we have identified a list of 32 characteristic symptoms that is often discussed during assessments, generated by two experienced assessors who had undertaken maturity assessments in more than 300 companies. We then use cognitive mapping and the “five whys” technique to look beyond the symptoms and reveal the underlying problems or causes of the problems. Following that, we evaluate our findings through the design and evaluation of a web‐based tool where users can score statements based on a formulation of the symptoms. This enables us to recommend to users the areas where they probably need to improve. We designed the tool in three learning cycles of design evaluation and ended up in a summative evaluation where we compared the outcome of using the website tool with a CMMI maturity assessment. We conclude that a systematic quest for symptoms coupled with scoring statements based on the symptoms can point to improvement areas. However, we conclude that doing so is no substitute for a maturity assessment; the scoring of statements cannot reveal the maturity of the organization, but it can quickly and easily point in a useful direction and provide recommendations for going in that direction. Analyzing the symptoms described by the participants in maturity assessments with “five times why” reveals a pattern that can be used to provide improvement recommendations without a formal assessment.</description><subject>Assessments</subject><subject>CMMI</subject><subject>cognitive map</subject><subject>Design analysis</subject><subject>improvement</subject><subject>maturity</subject><subject>process improvement</subject><issn>2047-7473</issn><issn>2047-7481</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp1kMtKxDAUhoMoOIwDPsKAG0E65tI06VIGbzAiOLoOSXMCHSZtTTpKdz6Cz-iTmLHizrM5_-LjP4cPoVOCFwRjehl9WFAm-AGaUJyLTOSSHP5lwY7RLMYNTlNQzHM-QRfrwXd9678-Po2OYOe170L7Bh6afh6gan1KVvd128QTdOT0NsLsd0_Ry8318_IuWz3e3i-vVllFpeQZM8QRYR2juDICgGChnSWmIKUzrsRcWkO1oJCT0goOQjpLBaeMUV6YkrApOht70yevO4i92rS70KSTispcEMZ4IRN1PlJVaGMM4FQXaq_DoAhWexsq2VB7GwnNRvS93sLwL6fWD08__DcdfWB6</recordid><startdate>202308</startdate><enddate>202308</enddate><creator>Pries‐Heje, Jan</creator><creator>Johansen, Jørn</creator><creator>Korsaa, Morten</creator><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7SC</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>JQ2</scope><scope>L7M</scope><scope>L~C</scope><scope>L~D</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4521-454X</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202308</creationdate><title>Symptom‐based improvement recommendations</title><author>Pries‐Heje, Jan ; Johansen, Jørn ; Korsaa, Morten</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c2885-3b1f17df320cb7ee107afd1b619fbf9058db2a72e419d75e78fd275233256b913</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><topic>Assessments</topic><topic>CMMI</topic><topic>cognitive map</topic><topic>Design analysis</topic><topic>improvement</topic><topic>maturity</topic><topic>process improvement</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Pries‐Heje, Jan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Johansen, Jørn</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Korsaa, Morten</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Computer Science Collection</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies Database with Aerospace</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts – Academic</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts Professional</collection><jtitle>Journal of software : evolution and process</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Pries‐Heje, Jan</au><au>Johansen, Jørn</au><au>Korsaa, Morten</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Symptom‐based improvement recommendations</atitle><jtitle>Journal of software : evolution and process</jtitle><date>2023-08</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>35</volume><issue>8</issue><epage>n/a</epage><issn>2047-7473</issn><eissn>2047-7481</eissn><abstract>For this paper, we have identified a list of 32 characteristic symptoms that is often discussed during assessments, generated by two experienced assessors who had undertaken maturity assessments in more than 300 companies. We then use cognitive mapping and the “five whys” technique to look beyond the symptoms and reveal the underlying problems or causes of the problems. Following that, we evaluate our findings through the design and evaluation of a web‐based tool where users can score statements based on a formulation of the symptoms. This enables us to recommend to users the areas where they probably need to improve. We designed the tool in three learning cycles of design evaluation and ended up in a summative evaluation where we compared the outcome of using the website tool with a CMMI maturity assessment. We conclude that a systematic quest for symptoms coupled with scoring statements based on the symptoms can point to improvement areas. However, we conclude that doing so is no substitute for a maturity assessment; the scoring of statements cannot reveal the maturity of the organization, but it can quickly and easily point in a useful direction and provide recommendations for going in that direction. Analyzing the symptoms described by the participants in maturity assessments with “five times why” reveals a pattern that can be used to provide improvement recommendations without a formal assessment.</abstract><cop>Chichester</cop><pub>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</pub><doi>10.1002/smr.2375</doi><tpages>16</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4521-454X</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 2047-7473
ispartof Journal of software : evolution and process, 2023-08, Vol.35 (8), p.n/a
issn 2047-7473
2047-7481
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_2847133568
source Wiley Journals
subjects Assessments
CMMI
cognitive map
Design analysis
improvement
maturity
process improvement
title Symptom‐based improvement recommendations
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-25T19%3A05%3A16IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Symptom%E2%80%90based%20improvement%20recommendations&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20software%20:%20evolution%20and%20process&rft.au=Pries%E2%80%90Heje,%20Jan&rft.date=2023-08&rft.volume=35&rft.issue=8&rft.epage=n/a&rft.issn=2047-7473&rft.eissn=2047-7481&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/smr.2375&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2847133568%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2847133568&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true