Software or Service? That’s the question!

www.eng.it
25°International Workshop on Software
Measurement (IWSM) and 10th International
Conference on Software Process and Product
Measurement (MENSURA)
Krakow (Poland) - October 5-7, 2015
Luigi Buglione
Alain Abran
Christiane Gresse von Wangenheim
Fergal McCaffery
Jean C.R. Hauck
That’s the question!Software or Service?

www.eng.it2 IWSM-MENSURA 2015 – October 5, 2015
© 2015 Buglione; Abran, Gresse von Wangenheim, McCaffery, Hauck
Goals of the presentation
1. Discuss the differences between Software (product)
and Service
2. Look at the ‘big picture’ for achieving a lower Total Cost
of Ownership (TCO) when dealing with both ‘sides of the
story’ at the same time
3. Present a LEGO (Living EnGineering prOcess) example
with the KM process
Software or Service?

ETS - GELOG At a glance
gelog.etsmtl.ca

DKIT At a glance
Dundalk Institute of
Technology is a 90 acre
campus situated between
Dublin and Belfast (each
approximately 50 miles
away).
The Institute consists of 4
Schools:
1. Business & Humanities
2. Informatics & Creative
Arts
3. Engineering
4. Health & ScienceThe Regulated Software Research Group is part of
LERO (the Irish Software Engineering Research
Centre) at the School of Informatics & Creative
Media

UFSC At a glance
Federal University of Santa Catarina
Florianópolis/Brazil [http://www.ufsc.br]
• 25,737 Undergraduate students
• 8,543 Graduate students
• 34,280 Students
INCoD an institute for excellence in research, validation and dissemination
to support digital convergence. [http://www.incod.ufsc.br]
The Software Quality Group focuses on scientific research, development and
transfer of SE models, methods & tools. [http://www.gqs.ufsc.br]
[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V6E1Z5DEuvk]

Engineering At a glance
www.eng.it

Software or Service? Let’s Social...ize!
If you want to share
comments/notes/pics…
 @IWSMMensura
 @lbu_measure
 #LEGO
 #MCM
 #SvcMgmt
…

Agenda
• Introduction
– Software (product) or Service?
– Is it a glossary issue?
– Some examples…
• MCMs (Maturity & Capability Models) – Representations & Dimensions
– Why do we need choosing a MCM?
– Coverage & classification of MCMs
– Why KM could be valuable when joining Sw+Svc?
• MCMs & KM in Horizontal MCMs (H-MCMs)
– CMMI-DEV/SVC and ISO 15504-2
– Other Sources
• LEGO and KM
– The LEGO approach
– Applying LEGO to KM- Elements of Interest (EoI)
– Suggested Improvements
• Conclusions & Prospects
• Q & A

Are they the same or not?Introduction
• Can we manage them all in the same way or not?
• What are the commonalities & differences?
• What are you buying: a product or a service?

Some (important) questions...Introduction
What is a software project and what is a service?
E.g...which differences between CMMI-DEV and
CMMI-SVC?
Are ITIL or eTOM models valid only for the IT Service
Management domain or not?
How much value are we creating for our projects?

Introduction Product vs Service? ISO Glossary
• Service is the result of at least 1 activity necessarily performed at the interface
between the supplier and customer and is generally intangible” (ISO 9000:2005,§3.4.2, note 2).
• Product is the result of a process, and that “there are 4 generic product categories:
services, software, hardware, processed materials”.
• ..“many products comprise elements belonging to different product categories[…] Ex: the
offered product ‘automobile’ consists of hardware (e.g. tyres), processed materials (e.g.
fuel, cooling liquid), software (e.g. engine control software..) and service (e.g. operating
explanations given by the salesman)”. (ISO 9000:2005,§3.4.2, note 1).

Introduction (IT) Service Management – Value
• Value  Utility + Warranty
• Service is a means of delivering value to customers by facilitating outcomes
customers want to achieve without the ownership of specific costs and risks. (ITIL v3
Glossary, 2011)

Introduction The Entity question
• Is the ‘project scope’ a software or a service project?
• If a service has a wider scope than a strictly software project, why not use
such a representation where a service can include 2+ sub-projects (Sw+Svc)?
• BTW, maintenance…is a service!
• Thus…isn’t only a wording (more than a content) issue?
• Looking at MCMs, CMMI-DEV and CMMI-SVC: share 16 out of 22 processes
• …but what about the other potential MCMs to be explored?

Introduction Quality Models: only for Software?
• Substituting “System/Software Product” with “Service”, couldn’t ISO
25010 be applied to a service or not? Only to ICT services or to a generic
service?
• Direct consequences
 right now different ISO WG for software and services, with the risk to duplicate
models and efforts (e.g. maturity models for services from WG10 and WG25-40) with
possible confusions for adopters
 the adoption of the same standards for Software and Service communities could
lower the TCO (Total Cost of Ownership) for ICT projects

Introduction Sw/Svc: friends or foes?
Model Software Service
Differences • (Meant as a) ‘Product’
• ‘More’ tangible
• QMS: ISO 9001 (EA 33 code)
• ‘Service’
• ‘Less’ tangible
• QMS: ISO 9001 (EA 35 code)
• SMS: ISO 20000-x specifies better some
req’s
Commonalities • Same requirements in many cases among respective standards in each
domain
• ISO 9000 glossary mentions ‘product’ for ‘product/service’
• SaaS  «Software» as a Service or «Service as a Software»?
Possible benefits • Reduce the overall TCO for a project (including both) by:
 Unique, continuous lifecycle and process flow (lifetime for a system)
 Same glossary (e.g. SEVOCAB)  e.g. CR or RfC?
 Knowledge Management (KM)  see later
 Product/service (ROI + VOI)
 ...

Introduction Sw+Svc – Example: US2 + INVEST Grid

Agenda
• Introduction
– Coverage and classification of MCMs
– CMMI-DEV/SVC and ISO/IEC 15504-2
– Other Sources
• LEGO and KM
• Q & A

Why do we need choosing a MCMs?MCMs

Representations - StagedMCMs
• ML: 5
• PA: 24
• N.min PA : ML1 (0)
• N.max PA : ML3 (13)
ML Focus Id. PA Title
5 Optimizing OPM Organizational Performance Management
CAR Causal Analysis & Resolution
4 Predictable OPP Organizational Process Performance
QPM Quantitative Project Management
3 Defined RD Requirement Development
TS Technical Solution
PI Product Integration
VAL Validation
VER Verification
OPD Organizational Process Definition
OPF Organizational Process Focus
OT Organizational Training
IPM Integrated Project Management
RSKM Risk Management
DAR Decision Analysis & Resolution
2 Managed REQM Requirement Management
PP Project Planning
PMC Project Monitoring & Control
SAM Supplier Agreement Management
MA Measurement & Analysis
PPQA Process & Product Quality Assurance

Representations - ContinuousMCMs
• PA categories: 4
• PA: 24  22
• N.min PA per Category : Process Management (5)
• N.max PA per Category: Project Management (7)
Process Categories
Maturity Levels
Process
Management
Project
Management
Engineering Support
Optimizing OPM CAR
Predictable OPP QPM
Defined OPF
OPD
OT
IPM
RKSM
RD
TS
PI
VER
VAL
DAR
Managed PP
PMC
SAM
REQM CM
MA
PPQA
Initial Ad-hoc processes

Representations – Continuous (example)MCMs
Special cause
(GP.2.2 @ OT)
Common cause (GP.2.9 @
+PA)
• Source: http://goo.gl/i6IvI

MCMs Classifying MCMs by Dimension
• Horizontal: MMs going through the whole supply chain
 SwEng: ISO 15504, CMMI, FAA i-CMM, …
• Vertical: MMs focusing on a single perspective/group of processes
 Test Mgmt: TMM, TPI, …
 Project Mgmt: PM-MM, OPM3, …
 Requirement Mgmt: ....
• Diagonal: MMs focused on Organizational/Support processes
 People CMM, TSP, PSP, …
Source:BuglioneL.,AnEcologicalViewonProcessImprovement:SomeThoughtsfor
ImprovingProcessAppraisals,4WCSQ,4thWorldCongressonSoftwareQuality,
WashingtonD.C.(USA),15-18September2008

Agenda
• Introduction
– Other Sources
• LEGO and KM
• Q & A

CMMI-DEV and ISO 15504 – KM ref’sMCMs and KM
Model CMMI-DEV/SVC ISO 15504-12207
Domain Sw/Svc Sw-SE--Svc
PRM (source) CMMI-SVC v1.3 ISO 12207
PRM (# Processes) 22 47
Process Categories 4 (Engineering, Process, Project,
Support)
9 (Primary: Acquisition, Supply, Operation,
Engineering; Organizational: Management,
Reuse, Resource & Infrastructure, Process
Improvement Management; Support: Supporting)
KM-related process(es) None (KM practices are dealt in P-CMM) 3 (RIN.3 – Knowledge Mangaement)
PAM ext. Appraisals SCAMPI v1.3 ISO 15504-2
ISO 15504-5
PAM reuse-related
issues
GP 2.5 (Train People) 6 RIN.3 BPs

MCMs and KM
Model/ Framework
Repr.
Type
ML (#)
Architect-
Type
Comments/Notes
APQC KMMM Staged 5 [1-5] Level-based  ---
Siemens KMMM Staged 5 [1-5] Level-based  8 Key Areas
ONTOKNOM Staged 5 [1-5] Level-based  Ontology included
G-KMMM Staged 5 [1-5] Matrix -based  Assessment with questionnaire by ML
InfoSys KMMM Staged 5 [1-5] Level-based  ---
KPMG Knowledge
Journey
Staged 5 [1-5] Level-based  4 KPAs
K3M Staged 8 [1-8] Level-based  ---
KMCA Staged 6 [0-5] Level-based  Added a ‘zero’ ML
ITIL v3 Refresh 2011 --- --- ---  Svc Mgmt Framework, 5 SLC phases  KM in
the Svc Transition (ST) phase; 7-Step
Improvement Process in CSI (Continual Svc
Improvement) phase
Microsoft MOF v4 --- --- ---  Svc Mgmt Framework, 4 SLC phases  KM in
the ‘Manage’ phase
COBIT --- --- ---  IT Governance Framework  4 main phases
(PO, AI, DS, ME)
Choosing KM MCMs - Results

Agenda
• Introduction
– Other Sources
• LEGO and KM
• Q & A

LEGO and SvcMgmt The LEGO Approach
1. MCM Repository 2. Process
Architecture
4. Appraisal Method3. Mappings &
Comparisons
1.
Identify goals
2.
Query
the
MCM
repository
3.
Include
new
elements
4.
Adapt
&
Adopt
Source: Buglione L., Gresse von Wangenheim C., Hauck J.C.R., Mc Caffery F., The
LEGO Maturity & Capability Model Approach, Proceedings of 5WCSQ, 5th World
Congress on Software Quality, Shanghai (China), Oct 31- Nov 4 2011

Applying LEGO to KMExperiencing LEGO...
The LEGO steps & related activities & outcomes:
1. Identify Goals
 Improve the internal Knowledge Management (KM) capability in order to generate more
value to our organization along time (product+service)
 Assumed the target BPM (Business Process Model) to improve is generically the ISO 15504
RIN.3 process
2. Query the MCM repository
 Filtere the list of available KM-based MCMs from the MCM repository
 Next table (EoI – Element of Interest) is a filter of the elements by each of the KM MCMs
considered
3. Include new elements into the target BPM
 Next table (Suggested Improvements) lists the possible EoI matched with the requested
MCMs (both SPs and GPs)
4. Adapt & Adopt
 Map each practice of the improved process to the related internal QMS process(es)
 Validate the mapping results before using it in the daily activities

Applying LEGO to KM – Why?Experiencing LEGO...
• ITIL v3 DIKW
• Data/Information/Knowledge/Wisdom
 Four KM waves
 Verifying (DIKW): Data  Information 
Knowledge  Wisdom
 Building (WKID): Wisdom  Knowledge 
Information  Data
 ‘5W’s+H’ rule (who, what, when, where, how, why)
 Two dimensions: Context; Understanding
• SECI Model –
(Nonaka/Tageuchi, 1995)
 Socialization, Externalization,
Combination, Internalization
 From Tacit to Explicit
Knowledge

Step 2 - EoI: Elements of Interest (1/2)
Model/ Framework Elements of Interest (EoI)
APQC KMMM  ---
Siemens KMMM  8 Key Areas (Planning, Ext Knowledge, People, Informal Rules,
Operation, Int. Knowledge, Technology, Formal Rules)
ONTOKNOM  KM Maturity Model Ontology based on three components (Admin,
Author, User)
KPMG KJourney  4 KPAs (People, Process, Content, Technology)
G-KMMM  3 KPAs (People/Org, Process, Technology)
K3M  More refined levels for a gradual implementation
 Top-down retention measurement at ML3 and a formal Org Knowledge
Base (ML4)
KMCA  Separating ‘behavior’ and ‘infrastructure’ into the analysis
LEGO and KM

Step 2 - EoI: Elements of Interest (2/2)
Model/ Framework Elements of Interest (EoI)
ITIL v3 KM  Overall, global concept of SKMS (Service Knowledge Management
System)
 The four waves for KM: DIKW (Data, Information, Knowledge,
Wisdom)
 Goal-oriented KM, well linked with the Measurement perspective and
the CSI (Continual Service Improvement) process
Microsoft MOF v4  ‘Plan’ phase, POL (Policy) area, Process 2 (Create Policy), activity #5
(Create KM policies)
 ‘Operate’ phase, CUS (Customer Service) area, Process 3 (Resolve the
Request), activities asking to search, locate, verify knowledge base
articles
 ‘Manage’ phase, GRC (Governance, Risk, Compliance) area, Process 2
(Assess, Monitor & Risk), Activity #9 (Learn from prior effects and
update the Knowledge Base)  Stressed the ‘learning’ activity as a
‘risky’ element whether not properly managed
COBIT v4.1  PO2.1 (Enterprise Architecture Model)
 PO2.4 (Integrity Management)
 AI4.2 (Knowledge Transfer to Business Management)
 AI4.3 (Knowledge Transfer to End Users)
 AI4.4 (Knowledge Transfer to Operation and Support Staff)
LEGO and KM

Step 3 - Suggestions for Improvement
ISO 15504 RIN.3 process Suggested Improvements
BP 01 – Establish a KM system  Distinguish the ‘behavior’ from the ‘infrastructure’ [KMCA]
 Define/Refine which Information Systems are part of the overall SKMS in
Architectural terms [ITIL][COBIT PO2.1]
 Define – according to the ‘four waves of KM’ – the layers and related IS for gathering
and distributing data, information, knowledge and wisdom [ITIL]
BP 02 - Create the Network of
Knowledge contributors
 Create and update a list of (primary, secondary) stakeholders to consider as the
main input for formulating requirements and for checking their validity [COBIT PO2.4]
BP 03 – Develop a KM strategy  The strategy should have clear KM axes of interest well defined from the beginning,
to be periodically updated [ITIL SS, Siemens KMMM; KPMG KJourney; G-KMMM]
 The specification of which KM areas could be the most relevant to the organization
for a proper generation of value is welcome [Siemens KMMM, G-KMMM, KPMG]
 Consider KM process and its implication also from a Risk perspective [MOF]
 A KM Ontology could help during the creation/periodical update of the organizational
overall strategy [ONTOKNOM]
 The KM Strategy must be goal-oriented, receiving feedbacks from previous
improvements put in action [ITIL CSI; MOF Plan]
BP 04 - Capture Knowledge  Revise periodically the potential sources of data/information gathering, also
considering new technologies (e.g. Social media and the possibility to interface
organization’s website and intranet) [MOF Operate CUS; SECI model [14])
BP 05 – Disseminate Knowledge Assets
(KAs)
 Keep in mind several stakeholders, not only customers but mostly Users and their
perceptions in the creation of value [COBIT AI4.x][ITIL CSI]
BP 06 - Improve KAs  KAs must be managed as one of the several organization’s Configuration Items (CI)
to be updated on a regular basis [ITIL ST]
 KAs must be updated as part of a regular CSI (Continual Service Improvement)
program [ITIL CSI]
LEGO and KM

Agenda
• Introduction
– Other Sources
• LEGO and KM
• Q & A

Conclusions & Future Works
• Software and Service: friends or foes?
 Often there is a ‘wording’ barrier more than a real difference between the 2 worlds
 E.g. ‘product’ in the ISO glossary can refer to both to products and services
 E.g. ISO 20000-1 is a service-oriented specification of ISO 9001
 A service can manage a software, a software can be used by a service
 Value should be the sum of Utility+Warranty, both for a product and a service
 Thus, Value is the final goal to achieve in order to really improve our activities
• Models and Methods
 Many models, taxonomies and frameworks can be valid for both domains
 The value in better defined points of contacts with a lower TCO for projects
 E.g. ITIL is not only for IT services and can be a good framework for strategy and design
suggestions not valid, as well as for reinforcing the design of a software project
• LEGO’ (Living EnGineering prOcess) approach
• http://slideshare.re/nssLR8 [5WCSQ, Shangai, Nov 2011]
• Choose and integrate the ‘pieces of the puzzle’ you need for your goals the target is your QMS,
not the model(s) you are using
 Next Steps
 Identify further ‘silver bullets’ for leveraging the joint view of products and services, also from a
business viewpoint
 Hybridize more models and techniques between the two communities for benchmarking purposes
All models are wrong. Some models are useful.
(George Box, Mathematician, 1919-2013)

Lessons Learned...
URL:www.dilbert.com

Q & A
Dziękuję za uwagę!
Thanks for your attention!

Our Contact DataSoftware or Service?
Luigi
Buglione
Engineering Ing. Inf. /ETS
luigi.buglione@eng.it
Fergal
McCaffery
DKIT
fergal.mccaffery@dkit.ie
C. Gresse von
Wangenheim
UFSC
gresse@gmail.com
Alain
Abran
ETS
alain.abran@etsmtl.ca
Jean Carlo R.
Hauck
UFSC
jeanhauck@gmail.com

Software or Service? That’s the question!

Recomendados

Recomendados

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Mais procurados

Mais procurados (11)

Destaque

Destaque (11)

Semelhante a Software or Service? That’s the question!

Semelhante a Software or Service? That’s the question! (20)

Mais de Luigi Buglione

Mais de Luigi Buglione (19)

Último

Último (20)

Software or Service? That’s the question!