Scribd
Upload
42 views5 pages

CS5212 Critique1

This paper discusses metrics for evaluating the cost of software quality improvements. It introduces three metrics: Cost of Software Quality (COSQ), Return on Software Quality (ROSQ), and Software Quality Profitability Index (SQPI). The paper applies these metrics in a case study of an IT company, finding that quality improvements increased but at a decreasing rate. The paper is still relevant for evaluating quality improvements to reduce costs but could provide clearer definitions of metrics and more analysis of intangible benefits.

Uploaded by

kkootha
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
42 views5 pages

CS5212 Critique1

This paper discusses metrics for evaluating the cost of software quality improvements. It introduces three metrics: Cost of Software Quality (COSQ), Return on Software Quality (ROSQ), and Software Quality Profitability Index (SQPI). The paper applies these metrics in a case study of an IT company, finding that quality improvements increased but at a decreasing rate. The paper is still relevant for evaluating quality improvements to reduce costs but could provide clearer definitions of metrics and more analysis of intangible benefits.

Uploaded by

kkootha
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 5

National University of Singapore

School of Computing
Software Project Management (CS5212)

Critique Paper:
Evaluating the Cost of Software Quality
Sandra A. Slaughter;
Donald E. Harter; and Mayuram S. Krishnan
Summary

Facing the challenge of delivering quality product within budget and schedule, this paper
discussed the economics of improving software quality. It described the costs of software
quality and return of software quality improvements. The authors introduced 3 metrics:

1. Cost of Software Quality (COSQ)


2. Return on Software Quality (ROSQ)
3. Software Quality Profitability Index (SQPI)

The authors applied the metrics and studied the issue on how to make profitable decisions
on quality expenditures in an IT company - BDM International. They observed that with
the implementation of each quality initiatives, the quality improvement actually increases
at a decreasing rate.

Critique

Although the paper is written 8 years ago, it is still relevant in today’s context of software
development. Furthermore, the increase in number, costs and complexity of the software
projects now show that it is more relevant to look into the issue of quality improvement
to reduce total software development costs.

The paper has identified various measures for software quality improvements, but the
definition of the individual metrics may need to be made clearer to have a general
acceptance of the method in the industry.

3Critique1.doc 1
The authors could have given a further analysis of intangible benefits and the
methodology to consistently and reliably measure the returns. These benefits could be
from the customers’ satisfactions or better customer relationships or improve image of
the organization.

The paper does not prove that whether it is the overall software quality improvement
initiatives or it is the specific process improvements in BDM which leads to the initial
cost reduction during the software development. It also does not show past BDM projects
that do not use the same process improvements so as to show that having the initiatives is
better.

The authors should give more software quality measuring techniques and other
improvement initiatives practiced in the industry for comparison and benchmarking.

The authors should clearly estimate the cost of a quality control effort such as total
quality cost, conformance cost, nonconformance cost, costs of prevention, costs of
appraisal, internal failure cost and external failure costs.

The paper did not explain why the impact (defect density reduction rate) of the initiatives
reduces over time in case study. It is not clear whether BDM has adopting an industry
standard development methodology such as CMMi and their current level of maturity.

The study is conducted only in one company - BDM and one selected project. Therefore,
the statistical results shown in the case study does not necessarily mean that it will apply
to other industries or firms. In additional, the scale of the study is too small to generalize
the findings. It is one company’s analysis in this case study.

Suggestions to improve the paper

3Critique1.doc 2
The result of the case study suggests that it is important to monitor software conformance
and nonconformance costs so that conformance policies can be adjusted to reduce the
total costs of software quality.

In appraisal costs, when you say software testing, it should only include the first round of
testing and subsequent regression testing should be part of internal failure effort.

The paper could include other non-tangible benefits and other projects with and without
software quality improvement initiatives to further substantiate the claim.

We believe the following information should have been included in the paper whereby a
cost of quality is clearly determined by:

 Customer Satisfaction
 Value to Stakeholders
 Development Effectiveness
 Defectiveness

In addition, there is typographical error in Figure 4. Cost of quality. In the diagram,


“Tool” should be “Total”.

Grading of the paper and why

Software quality is difficult to define because there is no single comprehensive and


complete standard definition of its lexicon. Various aspects and terms are found in
sources such as ISO 9000-3, IEEE Software Engineering Standards, and various books on
the subject.

Through the paper has gaps in its research, we do agree with the authors when he
highlights that it is important to monitor software conformance and nonconformance
costs so that conformance policies can be adjusted to reduce the total costs of software

3Critique1.doc 3
quality. However, we need to be careful in others measuring units such as level of
satisfaction, product value, key attributes, defectiveness, process quality.

We rate the paper 7 out of 10 given its simple explanation of the 3 quality metrics make it
a good entry-level paper in understanding software quality measurement and economics.
The paper lacked insufficient comparative studies and it did not touched on the impact of
formal software development methodology on software quality improvement and cost
reduction.

References:

1. A guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge, Project Management


Institute

2. Using The Cost Of Quality Approach For Software, Previous version published in
CrossTalk, The War on Bugs, Vol. 11, No. 11, November, 1998,
pp 6-11

3. CMMI for Development version 1.2

3Critique1.doc 4

You might also like