Benefits and relevance of International Standards in a design science research project for process assessments

Shrestha, Anup; Cater-Steel, Aileen; Toleman, Mark; Rout, Terry

doi:10.1016/j.csi.2018.04.011

Cited by 21 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The Design Science Research (DSR) methodology, commonly used in the development of computational artifacts [15], was adopted in this study for the tool development process. The focus group was the research method used to evaluate the tool developed, in several cycles of the DSR methodology, allowing potential tool users to suggest and test the tool, helping to achieve the main expected tool requirements.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Capacity Management Tool for a Portfolio of Industrialization Projects

Lima

Tereso

Araújo

2020

Trends and Innovations in Information Systems and Technologies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The management of a project portfolio is a complex decision process because it encompasses the achievement of multiple objectives. A critical point that increases the complexity in the decision-making process of a portfolio manager is the allocation of human resources to manage the projects of the portfolio, project managers, which is crucial to the organization's performance. In this case, the project manager can manage more than one project simultaneously and it is necessary to assign project managers to the projects, considering that project activities have an amount of work to be accomplished. The main objective of this work was to provide support for this capacity management problem, which aims to provide an easier decision-making process for the capacity management of an industrialization project portfolio. Therefore, it was developed: a hybrid model that creates a schedule respecting the resource constraints and the established due dates; a recommendation system that considers project managers' allocation and projects requirements; and, an automatic status report that allows identifying the project portfolio capacity usage.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Capacity Management Tool for a Portfolio of Industrialization Projects

Lima

Tereso

Araújo

2020

Trends and Innovations in Information Systems and Technologies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The article of Miah, Kerr, and von Hellens (2014) stated that a focus group had been formed with typical users: "The UCDE enables end-users to apply locally specific and contextual knowledge using [...] and other aspects were positively evaluated using focus groups method which is justified for artefact refinement and evaluation in design science research paradigm" (p. 274). The article of Shrestha, Cater-Steel, Toleman, and Rout (2018) combined both these techniques, focus group and interviews, as evaluation processes: "The SMPA method was evaluated with focus group discussions of SMPA survey participants and one-on-one interviews with the assessment facilitators at the two IT service providers" (p. 6). These situations demonstrate the importance of observing the four codes identified and used in this study to analyze the evaluation process, striving for a clearer and more objective definition of it.…”

Section: Aspects Associated With the Use Of The Artifactmentioning

confidence: 99%

Design Science Research in Practice: What Can We Learn from a Longitudinal Analysis of the Development of Published Artifacts?

Sordi

Azevedo

Meireles³

et al. 2020

InformingSciJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim/Purpose: To discuss the Design Science Research approach by comparing some of its canons with observed practices in projects in which it is applied, in order to understand and structure it better. Background: Recent criticisms of the application of the Design Science Research (DSR) approach have pointed out the need to make it more approachable and less confusing to overcome deficiencies such as the unrealistic evaluation. Methodology: We identified and analyzed 92 articles that presented artifacts developed from DSR projects and another 60 articles with preceding or subsequent actions associated with these 92 projects. We applied the content analysis technique to these 152 articles, enabling the preparation of network diagrams and an analysis of the longitudinal evolution of these projects in terms of activities performed and the types of artifacts involved. Contribution: The content analysis of these 152 articles enabled the preparation of network diagrams and an analysis of the longitudinal evolution of these projects in terms of the activities and types of artifacts involved. Evidence was found of a precedence hierarchy among different types of artifacts, as well as nine new opportunities for entry points for the continuity of DSR studies. Only 14% of the DSR artifacts underwent an evaluation by typical end users, characterizing a tenth type of entry point. Regarding the evaluation process, four aspects were identified, which demonstrated that 86% of DSR artifact evaluations are unrealistic. Findings: We identified and defined a set of attributes that allows a better characterization and structuring of the artifact evaluation process. Analyzing the field data, we inferred a precedence hierarchy for different artifacts types, as well as nine new opportunities for entry points for the continuity of DSR studies. Recommendation for Researchers: The four attributes identified for analyzing evaluation processes serve as guidelines for practitioners and researchers to achieve a realistic evaluation of artifacts. Future Research: The nine new entry points identified serve as an inspiration for researchers to give continuity to DSR projects.

show abstract

“…This standard is currently being revised and transformed into a new standard family of ISO/IEC 33000 series [11]. The references made to ISO/IEC 15504 standards as applied in this research can be viewed as a specific and valid instance of the ISO/IEC 33000 standard series in terms of the process assessment model and the measurement framework [12]. While the new standard series presents a generic and more abstract view of process assessment, it still corresponds to related ISO/IEC 15504 content.…”

Section: Itsm Process Assessmentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interpretation and Reporting of Process Capability Results: Focus on Improvement

Behari

Cater-Steel

Shrestha

et al. 2018

Communications in Computer and Information Science

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A global financial services company followed a softwaremediated process assessment (SMPA) approach based on ISO/IEC 15504, ISO/IEC 20000 and the IT Infrastructure Library (ITIL®). Using an action research approach, the Incident Management, Problem Management, and Change Management processes were assessed at two points in time during an ITSM process improvement project. This paper analyzes the results of the process assessments, highlights issues with the interpretation of the results, and offers an alternative method to report process capability results to motivate process improvement. The study found that by using the proportion of SMPA recommendations as a proxy measure for process improvement, the processes did improve yielding fewer recommendations in cycle 2 when compared to cycle 1 of the action research.

show abstract

Benefits and relevance of International Standards in a design science research project for process assessments

Cited by 21 publications

References 33 publications

A Capacity Management Tool for a Portfolio of Industrialization Projects

A Capacity Management Tool for a Portfolio of Industrialization Projects

Design Science Research in Practice: What Can We Learn from a Longitudinal Analysis of the Development of Published Artifacts?

Interpretation and Reporting of Process Capability Results: Focus on Improvement

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About