=Paper=
{{Paper
|id=Vol-1135/paper6
|storemode=property
|title=A Learning Support for the Definition of Process Flexibility
|pdfUrl=https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1135/paper6.pdf
|volume=Vol-1135
|dblpUrl=https://dblp.org/rec/conf/quatic/JaufmanDSSK04
}}
==A Learning Support for the Definition of Process Flexibility==
https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1135/paper6.pdf
1
A Learning Support for the Definition of
Process Flexibility
O. Jaufman, M. Stupperich, K. Schneider, A. Dold, N. Kleiner
Abstract —At present, software development in the automotive industry is characterized by frequent changes caused by new
innovations, fast-growing system complexity, growing software portion in cars, changing business relationships. This dynamical
environment demands for flexible software processes. In order to improve a software development process with respect to flexibility,
it is necessary to characterize what kind of flexibility is required. Therefore, we defined a set of requirements for desired processes
based on our process analysis in DaimlerChrys-ler’s engineering departments and analysis of related contributions proposed in the
literature. Based on this requirement the existed processes can be analyzed to identify its improvement potential. The application of
the requirements is illustrated in the context of a case study.
Index Terms — Process flexibility, requirements, case study, software development
—————————— u ——————————
1 INTRODUCTION
N owadays, the automotive industry is confronted with
a highly dynamic environment which is chara cterized
by frequent changes due to innovations, business re-
a way as to be measurable enabling a systematic evaluation
of the process flexibility. Consequently, a suitable support
for the definition and evaluation of the process flexibility is
lationships or new product structures. One of the reasons called for.
for this trend is the fact that software has come to play a In this paper, such a support is presented. It consists of
more and more important role in the automotive industry an emergent knowledge base and a flexibility definition
and will be the major source of innovation in the future. As process. The emergent knowledge base provides generic
software is a relatively new science, the corresponding new knowledge related to the definition and evaluation of the
effective and efficient processes for software development process flexibility. The flexibility definition process defines
which consider the mechanical and electrical engineering the steps to be performed in order to define the process
domains are needed. Especially important in such dynamic flexibility for a specific software development process.
environments is flexibility: software engineers desire flex i- The benefit of our approach is support, first, through the
ble software development processes in order to be able to definition and evaluation of the process flexibility and, sec-
quickly react to the changes in the development environ- ond, through the identification of process weaknesses and
ment. improvement potentials with respect to process flexibility.
The problem is that the processes proposed for devel- This paper sets out both the emergent knowledge base
opment of large, complex, and safety-critical software are and the flexibility definition process and introduces a case
not flexible enough for our ever-changing environment. For study for validation. It therefore targets project managers,
example, last year our prescriptive issue tracking process software engineers, and process quality assurance staff who
was changed significantly three times. The reasons for the are interested in defining or evaluating process flexibility.
changes were newly gained knowledge during the applica- The remainder of the paper is structured as follows.
tion of the “old” process and the need for three depart- Chapter 2 discusses related work. Chapter 3 defines the
ments to work together collaboratively. objectives of our research work. Chapter 4 presents our
The research question arising from the problem is basic: approach, viz. the support for the definition and the evalua-
What should a flexible software development process look tion of process flexibility. In Chapter 5 our approach is il-
like? In order to define a flexible software development lustrated by means of a case study. Finally, Chapter 6
process, the requirements as to the process flexibility are summarizes the most important contributions of the paper
first needed. These requirements should be defined in such and addresses future work.
————————————————
2 RELATED WORK
• O. Jaufman is with the DaimlerChrysler AG, Ulm, HPC U800, E-mail: There are two chief ways to define the quality of a proc-
Olga.Jaufman@DaimlerChrysler.com.
• M. Stupperich is with the DaimlerChrysler AG, Ulm, HPC U800, E-mail: ess. One is to employ a process assessment sta ndard such
Michael.Stupperich@DaimlerChrysler.com. as SPICE [5][6]. Another way is the application of a define-
• K. Schneider is with the University of Hanover, Hannover, E-mail: your-own-model approach such as the GQM measurement
Kurt.Schneider@Inf.Uni-Hannover.de. method [9].
• Dold is with the DaimlerChrysler AG, Ulm, HPC U800, E-mail: A-
xel.Dold @DaimlerChrysler.com. The process assessment standards [5], [6], [8] character-
• N. Kleiner is with the University of Ulm, Ulm, E-mail: ize processes based on a reference model. This reference
nikolaus.kleiner@informatik.uni-ulm.de.
2 QUATIC’2004 PROCEEDINGS
model typically defines the process capability levels and We aim to achieve the second goal with our learning
the criteria that have to be fulfilled for a considered level. support: our objective is to be able to effectively and effi-
The process assessments are then performed on the basis of ciently define and evaluate process flexibility in a measur-
the criteria. The advantage of the standards lies in the fact able way. “Effective” means that the measurement program
that they define the necessary criteria to be fulfilled in order covers all the aspects that are important for process flexibil-
to develop a product of the desired quality. The weak point ity from the project stakeholders’ point of view. “Efficient”
of the standards considered is that they provide neither an means that the effort required for the definition of process
explicit definition for process flexibility nor the criteria or flexibility should be as minimal as possible. We firmly be-
metrics for the evaluation of process flexibility. lieve that reuse of the available knowledge and experience
To define process flexibility in a measurable way, a would contribute to a more effective and efficient evalua-
measurement approach can be applied. As different con- tion of process flexibility.
texts have different understandings of the process flexibil- We aim to achieve the third goal to make it clear how the
ity, a define-your-own-model approach should be applied knowledge provided in the emergent knowledge base can
[2]. The representative for define-your-own approaches is be reused for the definition and evaluation of a concrete
the GQM method. project.
The GQM method is a goal-oriented measurement The benefit of our approach is a support for software en-
method according to which a measurement goal should be gineers, first, through the definition of requirements placed
refined into metrics via questions. The advantage of the on process flexibility and, second, through the evaluation of
GQM approach is that it allows the context and the project process flexibility.
stakeholders’ views of the process flexibility to be consid-
ered. The key drawback of the method, however, is that it
4 LEARNING S UPPORT FOR THE EVALUATION OF
calls for comprehensive knowledge and experience from
measurement personnel. Unfortunately, a lot of companies PROCESS FLEXIBILITY
do not have the experts with the necessary knowledge and
experience. 4.1 The Informal Definition of Process Flexibility
The missing knowledge and experience needed to define Process flexibility is defined as the ability of a process to be
and evaluate process flexibility can be gained by learning easily and quickly adaptable to a new situation. A new situation
from past knowledge and experience. Several approaches can be caused through an innovation, a new business con-
for supporting the learning process have been proposed in nection, changes in product structure, or other factors.
the area of artificial intelligence. For example, deriving a In order to make this key definition clear, the history of a
process model based on logging of the activities of the peo- process, called issue tracking, is considered. The issue
ple involved in the process [4] is one such method. These tracking process targets capturing of issues such as changes
approaches address more the implementation aspect of in the product requirements, faults in the realization of the
learning; yet before addressing the implementation aspect requirements or a decision to realize a specific feature ear-
of process flexibility by learning, concrete requirements for lier than planned. Figure 1 illustrates the issue tracking
process flexibility are needed. If process flexibility is to be process with respect to its four different phases. The proc-
evaluated systematically, it needs to be measurable. There- ess is considered to be in another phase, if any process
fore we aim at supporting a measurable definition and the changes are occurred. In the first phase, the issue tracking
systematic evaluation of process flexibility by defining and process is described by two statuses “issue open” (i.e., a
providing the following: new issue that needs to be remedied is identified) and “is-
• The generic knowledge related to the process flexibil- sue closed” (i.e. the issue has been remedied).
ity definition and evaluation. During the application of the issue tracking process
• A process for the usage of the knowledge provided. (phase 1) for tracking the issues arising during the software
development of an electrical device, for example, new ex-
perience is gained. Based on this experience, the issue track-
3 T HE G OALS ing process is refined. The following steps are added: ana-
The goals of our proposed concept are threefold: lyse an issue, confer with an expert, evaluate an issue, re-
• To define the term “process flexibility” informally. fuse the correction of the issue, assign the issue to a person
• To organize generic knowledge and experience related responsible for it, remedy the issue, and verify the correc-
to the definition and evaluation of the process flexibil- tion.
ity in the emergent knowledge base. During the application of the issue tracking process in
• To define a process for the use of the emergent knowl- accordance with phase 2, the following modifications were
edge base. found to be needed:
We aim to achieve the first goal with our learning support, The assign step is modified: in this step not only the as-
since the term “process flexibility” is not at all explicitly signment of an issue to a responsible person is to be per-
defined in the process assessment standards considered; formed. Additionally, whether the issue is a software issue,
however the industry needs such support for the definition a mechanical issue, or a hydraulic issue should be defined.
and evaluation of process flexibility.
JAUFMAN ET AL.: A LEARNING SUPPORT FOR THE DEFINITION OF PROCESS FLEXIBILITY
3
Fig. 1. Emergence of the Issue Tracking Process1 In order to support the identification, the causes for the
process modification are analysed. As an input for the iden-
The order of the activities is changed: the assign step is tification of change drivers, the Aalst et al. autonomy of the
performed before the analyse and evaluate steps. The con- workflow change [1] is used. This autonomy is abstracted
fer step is omitted. A new step is added - release: during to the autonomy of software development changes and
this p the integration is performed. modified based on the experience gained in a case study.
The process in the third phase shows the modifications. The modification encompasses the introduction of roles
The emergence of the issue tracking process (phase 4) is who initiate the process modification. The case study is
caused by a need for inter-departmental collaborative performed in the context of the issue tracking process. Fig-
working. To achieve a consistent process, an additional ure 2 indicates that our autonomy of changes distinguishes
process step, confer, is first added and a transition from the between the following change driving factors: market,
assign* step to the close step is then omitted. software development legislation, new knowledge, techni-
Referring to this example, process flexibility can be in- cal experience, errors made during software development,
formally characterized by the ease to quickly and system failures.
• identify the need for a process modification. These drivers are introduced by the roles: marketing de-
• understand what kind of process modification is partment, client, customer, project manager, researcher,
needed. cooperation partner, development team or the system plat-
• perform a required process modification. form.
Based on the knowledge taken from Figure 2, six issue
Identification of the Need for a Process Modification classes are distinguished:
Issue class 1: issues caused through availability of new
knowledge, experience or laws (initiated by researchers or
developers).
Issue class 2: issues caused through a change in the internal
organizational structure (initiated by the project manager).
Issue class 3: issues caused through a change in the external
organizational structure (initiated by cooperation partners
or by the project manager).
Issue class 4: issues caused through an incorrect implemen-
tation of the requirements from the product concept catalog
(initiated by a product developer).
Issue class 5: issues caused through a change in product
requirements (initiated by a customer/client or a marketing
team).
Issue class 6: issues caused through system failures (initi-
ated by the system platform).
The issue classes identified here are not to be seen as a
silver bullet but as an emergent shopping list for the identi-
fication of the relevant process-specific issue classes.
Fig. 2. Drivers for a Process Modification “Emergent” means that this set should be updated in line
with the newly acquired knowledge and the experience
gained from its application. Both the autonomy of the
change drivers and the issue classes are intended to first
1 The purpose and the content of the figure will be explained later.
4 QUATIC’2004 PROCEEDINGS
help to quickly identify a need for a process modification provement of software development processes to achieve
(e.g. by process monitoring with respect to relevant issue enhanced product quality. Nevertheless, improvement of
classes). Second, the knowledge helps to define the issue software development processes with respect to flexibility
classes that a given process should be especially flexible for. is a pivotal aspect, especially in such dynamic environ-
ments as we are faced with today. Unfortunately, such
Understanding the Type of the Process Modification standards do not define the criteria or metrics for the
In order to understand what kind of process modifications evaluation of the process flexibility.
are needed, the software development process at hand It is for this reason that the GQM method [9] is applied for
should be understandable for people involved in the proc- this purpose. We decided to utilize the GQM method, as it
ess. This means, for example, that everybody should be able is a widely used measurement method that allows a goal-
to evaluate which activities have been carried out, which oriented identification of the desired criteria and metrics for
ones are to be performed next, who should do which activi- process flexibility. To derive the desired criteria and met-
ties, when the activities to be performed should be started, rics, the following activities are performed:
and what kinds of resources are needed to perform the ac- The GQM goal is described with respect to its attributes
tivities. (object: process, purpose: to define and to evaluate, focus:
process flexibility, viewpoint: researcher, developer, man-
Carrying out the Process Modification ager, context: software development).
Looking back at our issue tracking example (Fig. 1), we Based on the knowledge presented in Section 4.1 and focus-
note that the modification is performed through executing ing on the GQM goal, the process flexibility is described by
one or several of the following modification activities : four high-level questions. Then different aspects of each of
1. Removing an existing process step. the four questions are described by sub-questions. The
2. Adding a new process step. modification activities, autonomy of the drivers, and the
3. Modifying an existing process step. issue classes presented in Section 4.1 are taken into account
4. Changing the order of the process steps. in doing so with the focus on the GQM goal. This “decom-
5. Removing a transition between two process steps. position” (i.e. refinement of different aspects of the high -
6. Adding a new transition. level question through sub-questions) is performed until
Consequently, a flexible process is characterized by ease questions that are not concrete enough from our point of
and speed of performance of modification activities. view are derived. The defined questions are the desired
criteria.
4.2 Emergence Knowledge Base Finally, the metrics are assigned to the “concrete enough”
questions. Metrics propose a scale for “answering” the
In order to define and evaluate process flexibility system-
questions. We proposed both qualitative and quantitative
atically, it is important to understand four aspects:
metrics.
1. The changes that can cause the process modifica- In this way, all the criteria and the metrics were defined.
tion. The proposed set of criteria and metric is a generic, reus-
2. The changes to which the process should be espe- able set. The approach for the reusage of the set will be dis-
cially sensitive. cussed later.
3. What the relevant stakeholders understand by a Organizing the Knowledge in the Knowledge Base
flexible software development process (i.e. what
are the criteria and metrics for the evaluation of the The knowledge and experience gained during the analy-
sis is stored in the emergent base with respect to the scheme
process flexibility).
4. The constraints that are to be fulfilled (e.g. quality depicted in Figure 4. The scheme is adapted from the de-
fine-your-own-model, the so-called SQUID model [7]. The
assurance, documentation, product preparation).
SQUID model is employed, since it supports top-down de-
The fourth aspect is essential as process flexibility is desired
composition as defined by the GQM method. Figure 3
but may not negatively affect the product quality. There are
shows that each criterion can either be decomposed in sub-
process steps that have to be performed for this. The focus
criteria that describe different aspects of the criterion in
of the paper is, however, on the first three aspects. Conse-
more detail or be made measurable through assignment of
quently, the emergent knowledge base should provide the
a measurement model. Each criterion is captured in the
issue classes, the criteria and the metrics for the measurable
emergent knowledge base as shown in Table 1.
definition and evaluation of process flexibility, and the
relevance of the criteria with respect to the issue classes. To
achieve this knowledge, the criteria and metrics for the
process flexibility are to be defined.
Defining the Criteria and Metrics
A set of criteria and metrics that might be relevant for the
definition and evaluation of the process flexibility is
needed. Before defining the desired set, existing process
assessment standards [5], [6], [8] are considered. This is
done because process assessment standards aim at the im-
JAUFMAN ET AL.: A LEARNING SUPPORT FOR THE DEFINITION OF PROCESS FLEXIBILITY
5
very important, important, somewhat important, and not
important at all. Before evaluating the issue classes, the pro-
ject stakeholders should understand which effect the repre-
sentatives of the issue classes have and how often the
changes occur.
In the third step, the appropriate criteria and metrics for
the definition of the process flexibility are to be selected and
identified. Which criteria are relevant for a given software
development process is to be decided contingent on the
importance of the issue classes. The relevant criteria and
metrics are to be selected from the emergent base. The miss-
ing criteria can be identified in a top-down manner by ap-
plication of the GQM method.
Fig. 3. Schema of the Emergent Knowledge Base In the fourth step, a process flexibility model is to be
produced. This should be done by first deleting the criteria
and metrics not relevant for a given software development
TABLE 1 EXERPT FROM THE EMERGENT KNOWLEDGE BASE process from the decomposition tree. Second, the identified
missing criteria and metrics have to be inserted into the
decomposition tree with respect to the decomposition
structure. Third, by specifying the criteria in the context of a
given process. Finally, the relevance of missing criterion
and metrics is to be evaluated on the same scale. The
evaluation has to take the importance of the issue classes
into account.
The table indicates that each criterion in the emergent base
is characterized by the reference to the father question. 5. APPLICATION EXAMPLE AND EXPERIENCE
In order to clarify our approach and its benefits, a case
4.3 Using the Emergent Knowledge Base study in the context of the issue tracking process was per-
The emergent knowledge base provides the issue classes, formed.
criteria, and metrics for the definition and evaluation of
5.1 Application of Our Approach
process flexibility. In order to keep the contents of the
emergent base up to date, it should continually be evalu- The following sets out the four steps taken in defining
ated and updated. Consequently, the corresponding proc- the flexibility of the process.
esses are needed. The focus of the paper is, however, the
process flexibility definition process. Step 1: Identify the process-specific issue classes.
The objective of the process is to select and identify suit- As cited in the history of the si sue tracking process, the
able criteria and measures for a given software develop- knowledge and experience we gain from the definition of
ment process by reusing the knowledge from the emergent issue tracking process lets us identify the following drivers
knowledge base. An overview of the process is set out in for a process modification:
Fig. 4. 1. New experience, knowledge.
2. A change in the internal organizational structure.
3. A change in the external organizational structure.
Consequently, when referring to the generic issue classes,
the following issue classes are identified as issue tracking
specific:
Issue class 1: issues caused through availability of new
knowledge or experience (initiated by developers).
Fig. 4. The Flexibility Definition Process
Issue class 2: issues caused through a change in the internal
organizational structure (initiated by the project manager
In the first process step, the relevant issue classes from the
or developers).
knowledge base are to be selected and the missing issue
classes identified for a given specific software development Issue class 3: issues caused through a change in the external
process are to be identified. organizational structure (initiated by cooperation partners
The task of the second process step is to evaluate the is- or by the project manager).
sue classes for which the process should be especially flex i-
ble. The evaluation is to be performed by all relevant proc- Step 2: Evaluate the importance of the issue classes.
ess stakeholders (e.g. software developers, process quality Based on the history of the issue tracking process, it is as-
assurance staff, etc.). The importance of the issue classes sumed that the issues from the first issue class have the
should be evaluated on the basis of the four-point scale: greatest impact and the highest likelihood of occurrence.
6 QUATIC’2004 PROCEEDINGS
Therefore the first issue class is evaluated as very important.
The effects of the second and third issue classes are as-
sumed to be relatively small, because, for example, due to
the wish to cooperate with each other the cooperation part-
ners usually try to achieve a consistent process with as few
process modifications as possible. The occurrence likeli-
hood for the issues from the second and third issue classes
is low, as a rule. Therefore the second and third issue
classes are evaluated as somewhat relevant.
Consequently, the issue tracking process should be espe-
cially flexible with respect to the newly gained knowledge
and experience.
Step 3: Define the process-specific criteria and metrics
First, the relevance of the criteria and metrics provided by
the emergent knowledge base is evaluated based on the Fig. 5. An Excerpt from the Process Flexibility Model
scale very relevant, relevant, somewhat relevant, and not
relevant at all. Second, the missing criteria and metrics are
identified by application of the GQM approach in a manner 5.2 Benefits of the Flexibility Model
similar to that set out in Section 4.2 for the context issue The benefits of the process flexibility model are outlined in
tracking process. The criteria and metrics provided in the the following.
emergent knowledge base serve as a support.
1. We can evaluate the issue tracking process based on
Step 4: Define a process specific flexibility model the criteria and metrics provided in the model. For ex-
The process specific flexibility model is defined by ample, the issue tracking process (phase 3) presented
• omitting criteria evaluated as non -relevant from the de- in Figure 1 can be evaluated as follows:
composition tree. For example, the criterion “Does the • The process is complex, as it has nine activi-
process have a high level of information hiding? (i.e., only ties and eight roles involved in the process;
the absolutely necessary information produced during a but the process is part of the process hierar-
process step should be passed on)” is removed. The crite- chy and the maturity of the process is quite
rion is not relevant because, in the issue tracking process, high.
the people involved in the process should be able to see • The process is understandable, as it has a
the information of interest to them even if they do not clear responsibility concept; but it has many
necessarily have anything to do with the information. dependencies (i.e. the synchronization and
• adding missing criteria and metrics in the decomp osition coordination points) between process steps.
tree with respect to its relationships to other tree criteria. • The organization intends to perform the ex-
For example, the criterion “How easy it is to quickly iden- plicit process monitoring and has captureed
tify the risk and attractiveness of the implementation of a the knowledge with respect to the attractive-
considered issue?“ is identified as missing and is, there- ness and the risk of an implementation of the
fore, added in the decomposition tree. issue.
• specifying the criteria and metrics in the context of the 2. The improvement potentials of the issue tracking
issue tracking process, for example, the specification of process are as follows:
the criterion “How complex is the process?” (based on
• It would be helpful if the variants of the issue
our experience related to the issue tracking process):
tracking process together with its context were
• An issue tracking process is very complex if it has
provided in the emergent knowledge base. The
more than ten process steps, more than eight differ-
ent roles are involved in the process, and it is not de- reuse of the process variants would help to
quickly modify the process.
fined hierarchically.
• An issue tracking process is complex if it defines • An efficient re-reuse process would support a
more than five process steps and has more than five quick and easy identification of the kind and
different roles involved in the process. extent of the requisite process modification.
• An issue tracking process is non -complex if it has • A tool-supported, regularly performed identifi-
fewer than six process steps and has at most six dif- cation of the difference between the prescrip-
ferent roles involved in the process, a clear responsi- tive issue tracking process and the activities
bility concept, and few dependencies between proc- performed by the developers would help to
ess steps. quickly identify the need for a process modifi-
Thus, a flexibility model specific for the issue tracking cation.
process described in Fig. 1 is provided. Fig. 5 portrays an 3. We achieve a definition of the requirements for the
excerpt from the model. process flexibility. For example, in order to be flexible
a process should
JAUFMAN ET AL.: A LEARNING SUPPORT FOR THE DEFINITION OF PROCESS FLEXIBILITY
7
• define what artifacts need to be developed, flexibility is needed but may not have a negative impact on
when the development of the artifacts should the final product quality. A further step is to analyze how
be started, who should develop which artifact, much flexibility is permissible and whether the flexibility
when an artifact should be finished, etc. alternatives proposed are sufficient.
• be defined hierarchically in order to be well
understandable and traceable for the people in-
volved in the process. REFERENCES
• explicitly define process monitoring.
• explicitly define delta analysis between the pre-
[1] Aalst, W. M. P., Jablonski, S. Dealing with Workflow
scriptive and currently performed processes.
Change: Identification of Issues and Solutions, Intern a-
• systematically package and reuse the acquired
tional Journal of Computer Systems, Science, and
knowledge and experience related to process
Engineering, 15(5), 2000: pp. 267 – 276.
flexibility.
[2] Boehm, B. and Turner, R., Balancing Agility and
Discipline: A Guide for the Perplexed, Addison
6. C ONCLUSION Wesley, 2004.
[3] Fenton, N. and Pfleger, S. Software Metrics – A
A present trend in software development is a highly dy- Practical and Rigorous Approach. International
namic environment. Such an environment is characterized Thomson Computer Press, 2 nd edition ed., 1996.
by frequent changes caused by innovations, business rela-
tionships, and other factors. In order to be able to quickly [4] Joachim Herbst, Niko Kleiner Workflow Mining: A
react to a change, software engineers wish to have flexible Case Study from Automotive Industry, the 10th
software development processes. And to be able to define European Concurrent Engineering Conference, Ply-
flexible software development processes, the requirements mouth, UK, April 2003
placed on the process flexibility are needed. The require-
ments should be defined in such a way that they are meas- [5] ISO/IEC TR 15504-2:1998(E), ISO Standard. Infor-
urable in order to be able to evaluate whether a process is mation technology — Software process assessment
sufficiently flexible for a given software development envi- — Part 2: A reference model for processes and proc-
ronment. We have hence, in this paper, outlined our ap- ess capability, ISO/IEC, 1998.
proach to support the research question “How can process
flexibility be defined in a measurable way?”. [6] ISO/IEC TR 15504-5:1998(E) , ISO Standard Infor-
For this purpose, we have first informally defined proc- mation Technology-Process Assessment-Part 5: An
ess flexibility, second an emergent knowledge base has example process Assessment Model, ISO/IEC
been developed, and, third, a process for the measurable JTC1/SC7, 2003.
definition of the process flexibility has been derived. The
informal definition of process flexibility was needed, as the [7] Kitchenham, B., Linkman, A. Pasquini, and Nanni,
standards considered do not explicitly define the term. The V. The SQUID-Approach to Defining a Quality
emergent knowledge base aims at providing the knowledge Model, Software Quality Journal, vol. 6, no. 3, pp.
related to the definition of process flexibility in a measur- 211-233, 1997.
able way. We believe that the application of the knowledge
provided would help to more effectively and efficiently [8] ISO 15497, Road Vehicles – Development Guide-
define the process flexibility for a concrete process. The lines for Vehicle based Software, the Motor Industry
flexibility definition process allows us to define the issues Research Association, 2000.
with respect to which the process should be especially
flexible and, based on the evaluation of the issue's impor- [9] Rombach, R. Practical benefits of goal-oriented
tance, to select and to identify the criteria and measures measurement. In N. Fenton and B. Littlewood, edi-
relevant for the process flexibility of a software develop- tors, Software Reliability and Metrics. Elsevier
ment process at hand.
The knowledge stored in the experience base such as the
flexibility definition process is validated and illustrated by
means of a case study. The activities and the results gained
in the case study are elaborated. We therefore feel that the
work presented in the paper can be easily transferred into
other business units and organizations and enable them to
define the flexibility of their processes in a measurable way.
Our next steps in context of this work are first to explic-
itly define the constraints to be taken into account. This is
essential as, in the automotive industry application domain,