A Process for COTS Software Product Evaluation

Comella-Dorda, Santiago; Dean, John R.; Lewis, Grace A.; Morris, Edwin J.; Oberndorf, Patricia; Harper, Erin

doi:10.21236/ada443491

Cited by 27 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Based on case studies, researchers have proposed several formal selection processes for COTS component selection, such as PECA [1] and RCPEP [2]. Generally, the formal selection processes include three basic elements, e.g.…”

Section: Results Of Previous Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

An empirical study on COTS component selection process in Norwegian IT companies

2004

"International Workshop on Models and Processes for the Evaluation of COTS Components (MPEC 2004)" W7S Workshop - 26th Internat

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The use of Commercial-Off-The-Shelf (COTS) software has become more and more important in software development. In COTS-based development, COTS component selection is the most crucial phase. Although some selection processes have been proposed, empirical studies are necessary to assess these processes. This paper describes an exploratory study by structured interviews of 16 COTS-based development projects in Norwegian IT companies. The results indicate that successful COTS component selection can be implemented without using formal processes, and projects with different contexts may use different selection processes. If members in new project has enough practical experience with actual COTS components, such experience can be the dominant factor in selection. In the case of using a new COTS component in the project, hands-on experimentation is needed as an effective way of evaluating the component.

show abstract

Section: Results Of Previous Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

An empirical study on COTS component selection process in Norwegian IT companies

2004

"International Workshop on Models and Processes for the Evaluation of COTS Components (MPEC 2004)" W7S Workshop - 26th Internat

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These areas include strategic planning, knowledge management, governance risk and compliance among others. This is the reason that the selection of the appropriate EA tool is an "increasingly essential activity" (Comella-Dorda et al, 2004). There are diverse methodologies for assessing software products each with different approaches depending on the goals of the evaluation.…”

Section: Assessing the Toolsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Three methodologies have been identified from a literature review which accomplish most of these characteristics. PECA process (Comella-Dorda et al, 2004), DESMET and AHP (Morera, 2002) and OTSO method (Kontio et al, 1995). These methodologies can support an evaluation of EA software tools, however it is recommended further analysis to point out the most appropriate to develop EA.…”

Section: Assessing the Toolsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sistemas de Información para Arquitectura Empresarial

Zea

2014

Enfoque UTE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

(Recibido: 2014/02/14 - Aceptado: 2014/03/25)La Arquitectura Empresarial (AE) ha emergido como uno de los temas más importantes a considerar en estudios de Sistemas de Información y ha evolucionado hasta convertirse en una actividad de gestión de negocios para visualizar y evaluar la dirección futura de una compañía. Hoy en día existen en el mercado diversas herramientas de software que apoyan a los Arquitectos Empresariales para trabajar con AE. Con el propósito de disminuir el riesgo de comprar herramientas de software que no satisfacen las necesidades de sus directores es importante evaluar el software antes de realizar la inversión. En este documento se realizará una revisión de literatura del estado de arte de AE. Además se analizan iniciativas de evaluación y sistemas de información que pueden dar dirección a las personas con poder de decisión para elegir las herramientas de software apropiadas para sus compañías.

show abstract

“…The process for tool evaluation used in this study was proposed by Azevedo et al (2008a) (Figure 3). It corresponds to an adaptation of the process proposed by SEI (Software Engineering Institute) (COMELLA- DORA, 2004). 1.…”

Section: Mechanism For Access Mechanism For Access Mechanism For Accementioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating Tools for Execution and Management of Authorization Business Rules

Azevedo¹,

Duarte²,

Baião³

et al. 2010

RESI

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Forma de avaliação: double blind review (mapa de palavras com os termos mais frequentes nos artigos desta edição) Esta revista é (e sempre foi) eletrônica para ajudar a proteger o meio ambiente. Ela voltou a ser diagramada em uma única coluna para facilitar a leitura na tela do computador. Mas, caso deseje imprimir esse artigo, saiba que ele foi editorado com uma fonte mais ecológica, a Eco Sans, que gasta menos tinta.

show abstract

A Process for COTS Software Product Evaluation

Cited by 27 publications

References 0 publications

An empirical study on COTS component selection process in Norwegian IT companies

An empirical study on COTS component selection process in Norwegian IT companies

Sistemas de Información para Arquitectura Empresarial

Evaluating Tools for Execution and Management of Authorization Business Rules

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About