(54.225.59.242) 您好!臺灣時間:2017/09/26 04:21          離開系統
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果

詳目顯示:::

我願授權國圖
本論文永久網址: 
研究生:何泰弘
論文名稱:台灣地區企業資訊部門實施軟體流程管理之縱時性研究
論文名稱(外文):A Longitudinal Study of Software Process Management in MIS Departments of Taiwanese Business
指導教授:李有仁李有仁引用關係
指導教授(外文):Li, Eldon Y.
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立政治大學
系所名稱:資訊管理研究所
學門:電算機學門
學類:電算機一般學類
論文出版年:2008
畢業學年度:97
語文別:中文
論文頁數:151
中文關鍵詞:軟體流程管理
外文關鍵詞:Software process managementCMMCMMI
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:518
  • 評分評分:系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔
  • 下載下載:0
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:0
隨著資訊技術的崛起與發展,無論是政府、企業組織乃至於個人對於資訊系統的依賴愈大,軟體的功能變的愈多,整體的複雜度也日漸提高,相對於軟體品質也就越受重視。對企業而言,軟體是昂貴的物品,但開發的過程卻又很難預測時間與成本。所以如何進行軟體流程管理,進而提昇軟體品質,也就成為學者所熱衷的研究議題。美國國防部遂委託卡內基美隆大學軟體工程學院進行一項研究,用以提供成熟的軟體組織之指引架構(能力成熟度模式,Capability Maturity Model),自1991年推出後,歷經多次增修,為統合其他各式標準再推出CMMI(Capability Maturity Model-Integrated,能力成熟度整合模式)。
本研究延續李有仁(2004)之研究,針對台灣地區的資訊部門之能力成熟度,透過歷史資料的分析,找出長期被追蹤之組織,進行深入研究與探討。在本研究裡,除對CMM至CMMI的演進做闡述外,也整理了國內外數年對軟體流程管理之研究。此外透過本研究,研究者可以觀察到對台灣地區中的資訊部門進行長期追蹤,有哪些組織是逐步的改善;有哪些組織在過程中反而退步了。再針對兩類型之公司進行歷史問卷資料與訪談資料的整理分析,發現成長的公司與退步的公司,其最主要的差異實務層面在於組織架構、技術管理、文件、資源與人力訓練。因為組織是企業的根本,也就是企業的體質,一個企業如果在體質上出了問題,後續訓練的投入也就無以為繼,於是整體的表現就會不佳。研究結果提供給欲投入軟體流程管理之公司及相關研究者參考。
In the wake of information technology(IT), the government or business and even the individuals rely heavily on the information system. The more functions of software, the more complexity it has. The research about how to improve software quality through software process management has long been a hot topic. The U.S. Department of Defense commissioned Software Engineering Institute (SEI) at Carnegie Mellon University to develop a standard framework for software organization called Capability Maturity Model. Since it was announced in 1991 and revised many times, SEI released Capability Maturity Model Integrated that integrates other standards.
This research extends Li’s 2004 study and examines the capability in MIS departments of Taiwanese top 1000 businesses. It discusses the evolution of CMM and CMMI, and reviews the literature about software process management. This research discovers improved and retrogressive organizations of software process management in Taiwan. It utilizes two sources of data, one is the historical questionnaire data and the other is the interview materials. It discovers that the most significant difference practices are in organizational structure, technology management, document, resource and training. Organization is the base of business, without the base, all the other work is meaningless.
1.緒論---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1
2.文獻探討----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------7
2.1軟體流程--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------7
2.2能力成熟度CMM與能力成熟度整合CMMI-----------------------------------------8
2.3軟體流程評估------------------------------------------------------------------------------28
2.4軟體流程相關文獻研究------------------------------------------------------------------30
2.5其他構面之研究---------------------------------------------------------------------------43
2.6小結------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------46
3.研究設計--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------48
3.1研究方法------------------------------------------------------------------------------------48
3.2訪談問卷設計------------------------------------------------------------------------------50
4.訪談內容--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------53
4.1研究分析構面------------------------------------------------------------------------------53
4.2訪談對象一---------------------------------------------------------------------------------55
4.3訪談對象二---------------------------------------------------------------------------------60
4.4訪談對象三---------------------------------------------------------------------------------65
4.5訪談對象四---------------------------------------------------------------------------------69
4.6訪談對象五---------------------------------------------------------------------------------73
4.7訪談對象六---------------------------------------------------------------------------------79
5.資料分析--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------84
5.1 A公司資料分析---------------------------------------------------------------------------84
5.2 B公司資料分析---------------------------------------------------------------------------88
5.3 C公司資料分析---------------------------------------------------------------------------91
5.4成功個案公司因素歸納------------------------------------------------------------------95
5.5 D公司資料分析--------------------------------------------------------------------------100
5.6 E公司資料分析--------------------------------------------------------------------------103
5.7 F公司資料分析--------------------------------------------------------------------------106
5.8原地踏步或退步個案公司因素歸納--------------------------------------------------109
5.9個案公司歷史資料之比較--------------------------------------------------------------113
6.結論與建議----------------------------------------------------------------------------------120
7. 研究限制與未來展望--------------------------------------------------------------------125
圖一、研究流程圖-----------------------------------------------------------------------------5
圖二、架構的泥沼-----------------------------------------------------------------------------9
圖三、CMMI階層式架構圖-----------------------------------------------------------------15
圖四、連續式模式架構圖--------------------------------------------------------------------19
圖五、連續式能力等級剖析圖---------------------------------------------------------------20
圖六、CBA-IPI流程圖------------------------------------------------------------------------29
圖七、台灣千大企業近九年來軟體成熟度------------------------------------------------46
圖八、研究架構圖-----------------------------------------------------------------------------52
圖九、鑽石模型圖-----------------------------------------------------------------------------53
圖十、A公司組織圖--------------------------------------------------------------------------57
圖十一、B公司組織圖-----------------------------------------------------------------------61
圖十二、TortoiseSVN執行畫面--------------------------------------------------------------63
圖十三、C公司組織圖-----------------------------------------------------------------------66
圖十四、C公司資訊系統發展圖-------------------------------------------------------------67
圖十五、D公司組織圖-----------------------------------------------------------------------71
圖十六、E公司組織圖-----------------------------------------------------------------------75
圖十七、F公司組織圖-----------------------------------------------------------------------80
圖十八、A公司構面雷達圖-----------------------------------------------------------------86
圖十九、B公司構面雷達圖-----------------------------------------------------------------90
圖二十、C公司因素雷達圖-----------------------------------------------------------------94
圖二十一、成功個案之柏拉圖---------------------------------------------------------------99
圖二十二、D公司構面雷達圖--------------------------------------------------------------102
圖二十三、E公司構面雷達圖--------------------------------------------------------------105
圖二十四、F公司構面雷達圖-------------------------------------------------------------108
圖二十五、失敗個案之柏拉圖-------------------------------------------------------------112
表一、CMM/CMMI 版本演進---------------------------------------------------------------10
表二、CMMI各模型領域起始模型---------------------------------------------------------12
表三、CMMI兩種模式比較-----------------------------------------------------------------12
表四、CMMI階層式一般實務之共同特徵-----------------------------------------------14
表五、CMMI階層式流程領域--------------------------------------------------------------17
表六、連續式能力等級與一般目標---------------------------------------------------------20
表七、流程領域對照表-----------------------------------------------------------------------22
表八、CMMI與SW-CMM之比較---------------------------------------------------------26
表九、CMMI評鑑等級表--------------------------------------------------------------------29
表十、流程改善效益之相關研究-----------------------------------------------------------31
表十一、 SEI公佈之CMMI導入效益----------------------------------------------------36
表十二、軟體流程管理因素之相關研究--------------------------------------------------37
表十三、成功因素彙總-----------------------------------------------------------------------41
表十三之一、研究對象資料表--------------------------------------------------------------49
表十四、本研究所使用關鍵因素------------------------------------------------------------51
表十五、因素與構面--------------------------------------------------------------------------54
表十六、A公司填答因素--------------------------------------------------------------------59
表十七、B公司填答因素--------------------------------------------------------------------63
表十八、C公司填答因素--------------------------------------------------------------------68
表十九、D公司執行情況--------------------------------------------------------------------72
表二十、E公司大事紀------------------------------------------------------------------------76
表二十一、E公司執行情況-----------------------------------------------------------------78
表二十二、F公司執行情況------------------------------------------------------------------82
表二十三、A公司執行最好的因素--------------------------------------------------------84
表二十四、A公司因素構面-----------------------------------------------------------------85
表二十五、B公司執行最好的因素--------------------------------------------------------88
表二十六、B公司因素構面-----------------------------------------------------------------90
表二十七、C公司執行最好的因素--------------------------------------------------------91
表二十八、C公司因素構面-----------------------------------------------------------------92
表二十九、成功個案公司比較表-----------------------------------------------------------95
表三十、成功因素次數表--------------------------------------------------------------------97
表三十一、D公司執行最差因素-----------------------------------------------------------100
表三十二、D公司因素構面 ---------------------------------------------------------------101
表三十三、E公司執行最差因素---------------------------------------------------------103
表三十四、E公司因素構面---------------------------------------------------------------104
表三十五、F公司執行最差因素---------------------------------------------------------106

表三十六、F公司因素構面-------------------------------------------------------------107
表三十七、失敗個案比較表------------------------------------------------------------109
表三十八、失敗因素次數表------------------------------------------------------------110
表三十九、顯著的項目與CMMI中的實務-----------------------------------------114
表四十、歷史問卷題目之構面---------------------------------------------------------115
表四十一、失敗公司因素構面---------------------------------------------------------120
表四十二、成功公司因素構面---------------------------------------------------------121
表四十三、各構面比較------------------------------------------------------------------123
中文部份
[1] 吳純慧(2001),「軟體程序成熟度與專案績效」,國立中正大學資訊管理所碩士論文。
[2] 李有仁,臺灣大型企業之軟體程序管理: 1996,2000,及2004之縱時分析行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫成果報告(計畫編號:NSC 92-2416-H-155-034)。
[3] 郭怡岑(2006),「軟體流程改善量化績效指標分類之研究」,碩士論文,國立台灣科技大學。
[4] 陳相亨(2000),「以組織文化的觀點來探討全面品管對軟體程序成熟度的影響」,國立中正大學資訊管理研究所碩士論文。
[5] 陳燿昇(1999),「組織特性、資訊化成熟度、資訊部門特性與企業軟體程序成熟度關係的探討」,國立中正大學資訊管理研究所碩士論文。
[6] 葉承鑫(2002),「專案團隊、軟體能力成熟度與專案績效之探討」,國立中正大學資訊管理研究所碩士論文。
[7] 蕭怡祺(2003),「使用者因素與成熟度層級對組織績效的影響:軟體能力成熟度為例」,國立清華大學科技管理研究所碩士論文。
[8] 謝國棟(1996).,「台灣地區大型企業資訊部門軟體程序成熟度及相關因素之探討」,國立中正大學資訊管理研究所碩士論文。





英文部份
[1] Aaker, David A. (1984). Strategic Market Management, N.Y.: JohnWiley & Sons.
[2] Ashrafi. N. (2003). The impact of software process improvement on quality: in theory and practice. Information and Management ,40(7), 677-690.
[3] Baddoo, N. & Hall, T. (2002). Motivators of software process improvement: an analysis of practitioners' views. Journal of Systems and Software ,62(2), 85-96.
[4] Bonoma, T.V., (1985) Case Research in Marketing: Opportunities, Problems, and a Process, Journal of Marketing Research, vol. 22, pp.199-208.
[5] Brooks, H. M.(1987) .Expert Systems and Intelligent Information Retrieval. Information Processing & Management, Oxford
[6]Capability Maturity Model Integration, Version 1.1, CMMI-SW/SE/IPPD/SS, Continuous Representation CMU/SEI-2002-TR-012, SEI.
[7]Capability Maturity Model Integration, Version 1.1, CMMI-SW/SE/IPPD/SS, Staged Representation CMU/SEI-2002-TR-011, SEI.
[8]CMM Based Appraisal for Internal Process Improvement(CBA IPI): Method Description(1996)
[9]Crosby, P., (1996). Philip Crosby’s Reflections on Quality. McGraw-Hill
[10]Damian, D., Zowghi, D., Vaidyanathasamy, L. & Pal, Y. (2002). An industrial experience in process improvement: An early assessment at the Australian Center for Unisys software. International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering (ISESE'02), 111-123.
[11]Derniame, J.C., Kaba B.A. and Wastell D., (1989)Software Process: Principle,Methodology, and Technology, German, Springer.
[12]Dion, R. (1993). Process improvement and the corporate balance
sheet. IEEE Software ,10(4), 28-35.
[13]Dowson, M.(1993) .Software Process themes and issues,The second international conference on the software process:Continuous software process improvement ,IEEE Computing.,pp.54-62
[14]Emam, K & Briand, L. (1997). Costs and benefits of software process improvement,Institute for Experimental Software Engineering (IESE) Report No 047.97/E.
[15]Emam, K., Goldenson, D., McCurley, J. & Herbsleb, J. (1998). Success or Failure? Modeling the likelihood of software process improvement. International Software Engineering Research Network technical report ISERN-98-15
[16]Goldenson, D.R. & Gibson, D.L. (2003). Demonstrating the impact and benefits of CMMI : an update and preliminary results. Special Report,CMU/SEI-2003-SR-009
[17]Goldenson, D.R. & Herbsleb, J. (1995). After the Appraisal: A Systematic Survey of Process Improvement, its Benefits, and Factors that Influence Success. Technical Report, CMU/SEI-95-TR-009
[18]Herbsleb J, Carlton A, Rozum J, Siegel J, Zubrow D. (1994). Benefits of CMM-based software process improvement: initial returns. Technical Report, CMU/SEI-94-TR-013.
[19]Herbsleb, J. & Goldenson, D.R. (1996). A systematic survey of CMM experience and results. 18th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE), 323-330.
[20]Herbsleb, J. D., Zubrow, D., Goldenson, D. R., Hayes, W. and Paulk, M.(1997) Software Quality and the Capability Maturity Model, Communication of the ACM (40:6), pp.30-40. ,
[21]Humphrey, W.S.(1989). Managing the Software Process, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA
[22]Hyde, K. & Wilson, D. (2004). Intangible benefits of CMM-based software process improvement. Software Process Improvement and Practice, 9(4), 217-228.
[23]Jiang, J.J., Klein, G. Hwang, H.G. Huang, J & Hung, S.Y. (2004) An exploration of the relationship between software development process maturity and project performance. Information & Management ,41(3), pp.279-288.
[24]Keil, M.(1995). Pulling the Plug: Software Project Management and the Problem of Project escalation,.MIS Quarterly, Vol. 19, No. 4, pp. 421-447.
[25]Kitson D.& Masters S. (1992) An analysis of SEI software process assessment results 1987–1991,Technical Report CMU/SEI-92-TR-24, Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA 15213.
[26]Leavitt, H. J. (1965). Applying organizational change in industry: Structural, technological and humanistic approaches. In Handbook of organizations, Rand McNally, Skokie, IL., 1144-1170
[27]Li, E.Y., Chen, H.G., and Lee, T.S.(2003) A Longitudinal Study of Software Process Management in Taiwan's Top Companies, Total Quality Management and Business Excellence (U.K.), Vol. 14, No. 5,, pp. 571-590
[28]Li, E.Y., Chen, H.G., and Lee, T.S. (2002) Software Process Management of Top Companies in Taiwan: A Comparative Study, Total Quality Management, Vol. 13, No. 5, pp. 701-713.
[29]McGibbon, T. (1999). A business case for software process improvement revised. DoD Data Analysis Center for Software (DACS).
[30]Mehner, Messer, T., Paul, P., Paulisch, F, Schless, P. & Volker, A. (1998). Siemens process assessment and improvement approaches: experiences and benefits. 22nd International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE), 186-195.
[31] Nathan, B. & Tracy, H. (2003).De-motivators for software process improvement: an analysis of practitioners' views. Journal of Systems and Software, 66 (1), 23-33
[32] Niazi M.,Wilson and Zowghi (2006), Critical Success Factors for Software Process Improvement: An Empirical Study, Software Process Improvement and Practice Journal, 11(2). 193-211
[33] Rainer, A., & Hall, T. (2002). Key success factors for implementing software process improvement: A maturity-based analysis. Journal of Systems and Software. 62, 71-84.
[34] Robert K. Yin(2001),Case Study Research:Design and Methods,pp.148-240.
[35]Rockart J.F.,(1979).Chief Executives Define Their Own DataNeeds. Havard Business Review, Vol.57, pp.137-145
[36] Sheard S. (1997). The Frameworks Quagmire, A Brief Look.Proceedings of INCOSE Conference , 1997
[37] The Standish Group, (2004) , Chaos, Standish Group Report.
[38] Stelzer, D., Mellis, W., Herzuwurm, G., (1996)Software Process Improvement via ISO 9000? Result of two survey among European software houses, Proceedings of the 29th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences,1996.
[39] Upgrading from SW-CMM to CMMI, Retrieved, 2008 , from http://www.sei.cmu.edu/cmmi/adoption/pdf/upgrading.pdf
[40] Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods. 3rd Edition. London: Sage
[41] Phan, D.D(2001) Software Quality and Management-How the world’s most powerful software makers do it, Information System Management, pp56-67
[42] Pitterman, B. (2000). Telcordia Technologies: the journey to high maturity. IEEE Software, 17(4), pp89-96.
[43] Wohlwend, H. & Rosenbaum, R. (1993). Software improvement in an international company. 15th international conference on Software Engineering, 212-220.
[44] Yourdon, E., (1993) Decline and Fall of the American Programmer, Prentice-Hall, Inc.,
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
無相關期刊
 
系統版面圖檔 系統版面圖檔