Software or service that's the question luigi buglione

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.it 2 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

http://gelog.etsmtl.ca/

http://www.eng.it/

http://en.etsmtl.ca/Unites-de-recherche/GELOG/Accueil?lang=en-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 & Science

The 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]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V6E1Z5DEuvk



Engineering At a glance

www.eng.it

http://www.eng.it/

http://www.eng.it/

http://www.eng-it.it/spimq



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 - Staged MCMs

• 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 - Continuous MCMs

• 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

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, … S

ou

rce

: B

ug

lion

e L

., A

n E

co

logic

al

Vie

w o

n P

rocess I

mp

rove

me

nt:

So

me

Tho

ugh

ts f

or

Imp

rovin

g

Pro

cess

App

rais

als

, 4W

CS

Q,

4th

W

orl

d

Con

gre

ss

on

So

ftw

are

Q

ua

lity,

Wash

ing

ton

D.C

. (U

SA

), 1

5-1

8 S

ep

tem

be

r 2

00

8

http://www.asq.org/conferences/wcsq

http://www.asq.org/conferences/wcsq



Agenda

• Introduction










– Other Sources

• LEGO and KM





• Q & A




CMMI-DEV and ISO 15504 – KM ref’s MCMs 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 Method 3. 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 KM Experiencing 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)


http://slideshare.re/nssLR8







http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/George_E._P._Box



Lessons Learned...

UR

L:

ww

w.d

ilbe

rt.c

om


http://www.dilbert.com/







Q & A

Dziękuję za uwagę!

Thanks for your attention!




Our Contact Data Software or Service?

Luigi

Buglione Engineering Ing. Inf. /ETS

[email protected]

Fergal

McCaffery

DKIT [email protected]

C. Gresse von

Wangenheim

UFSC [email protected]

Alain

Abran

ETS [email protected]

Jean Carlo R.

Hauck

UFSC

[email protected]

http://www.eng.it/