\markboth{Davis\_T}{Davis\_T}
%%%%%% DAVIST.TEX for WISR'93 %%%%%%
\documentstyle[11pt]{article}
\oddsidemargin  0.26in % Leave enough for binding margin
\evensidemargin 0.26in %
\topmargin      -1.00in % (adjusted for printer bias)
\headheight      .00in  % (no headers)
\headsep         .75in  % (top margin + headers + skip)
\footheight     12.0pt  % ??? (seems to work ok)
\footskip       25.0pt  % ??? ( "   "  )
\textheight     9.425in % (instructions: 9 1/8" min, 9 7/16" max)
\textwidth      6.5in   %

% Define the page footer to be the POLN plus the page number
\markboth{Davis\_T}{Davis\_T}
\pagestyle{myheadings}


\parindent=0pt
\parskip=10pt
\def\@maketitle{\vbox to 2.6in{\hsize\textwidth
    \linewidth\hsize \vfil \centering
    {\large \@title \par}
    \vskip 2em
    {\normalsize
    \begin{tabular}[t]{c}\@author
    \end{tabular}\par}
    \vfil}
}

\input{epsf}
\begin{document}

\bibliographystyle{ieeetr}

\title{Reuse Capability Assessment: Case Study Results}

\author{Ted Davis\\
\\
Software Productivity Consortium\\
SPC Building\\
2214 Rock Hill Road\\
Herndon, Virginia  22070\\
Tel: (703) 742-7335, fax: (703) 742-7200\\
Email: davis@software.org\\
}
\date{}

\maketitle

\begin{abstract}

This paper provides preliminary results of case studies conducted by the
Software Productivity Consortium
on the validity and usefulness of its Reuse Capability Model (RCM) and
assessment process. The Consortium conducted the case studies with
organizations who have
successfully instituted software reuse. The objective was to evaluate the RCM
against the
experience of these organizations. Questions posed by the case studies and
presented in this paper
include: Does the RCM capture the factors critical to improving an
organization's reuse practice? Does the RCM assessment process accurately
identify an organization's reuse strengths and improvement opportunities?
Is the RCM assessment process cost-effective?


\vspace{0.2in}
\noindent
{\bf Keywords:} Reuse adoption, reuse capability, reuse process, assessment,
case study

\vspace{0.2in}
\noindent
{\bf Workshop Goals:} Promote discussion on issues critical to instituting
software reuse in an organization.

\vspace{0.2in}
\noindent
{\bf Working Groups:} Reuse management, organization, and economics; reuse
maturity models; reuse process models

\vspace{0.2in}
\noindent
Copyright \copyright 1993,  Software Productivity Consortium Services
Corporation. All rights reserved. This material is based in part upon
work sponsored by the Advanced Research Projects Agency under
Grant \# MDA972-92-J-1018. The content does not necessarily
reflect the position or the policy of the U.S. Government, and no
official endorsement should be inferred.

\vspace{0.1in}
\noindent
Produced by the Software Productivity Consortium under contract to the
Virginia Center of Excellence for Software Reuse and Technology Transfer.

\end{abstract}

\newpage

\section{Background}

In 1992 the Software Productivity Consortium released the first version of
its {\em Reuse Adoption Guidebook} \cite{spc92}. The guidebook provides a
comprehensive approach to institutionalizing and improving an organization's
software reuse practice. This approach includes three major elements: the Reuse
Adoption Process, Domain Assessment Guidelines, and Reuse Capability Model.
The Reuse Adoption Process provides step-by-step guidance on initiating,
planning, and implementing a program to institutionalize software reuse
practices. The Domain Assessment Guidelines provide guidance on qualitatively
estimating the potential for reuse in an organization's business area. The
Reuse Capability Model is a self-assessment and planning aid used to gain a
comprehensive understanding of an organization's process with respect to reuse
and to establish priorities for improvement.

The Consortium developed the {\em Reuse Adoption Guidebook} by leveraging
industry, government, and academic work in reuse, and through an evolutionary
development approach including many internal and external expert reviews. In
1993 the Consortium is continuing to evolve its reuse technologies by applying
them in:
\begin{itemize}
\item {\bf Reuse adoption case studies.} Collaborative efforts to evaluate the
reuse adoption technologies against the experience of
organizations who have successfully instituted reuse.

\item {\bf Reuse adoption pilot projects.} Collaborative efforts with
organizations seeking to initiate and implement a reuse program to improve
their reuse practice.
\end{itemize}

The Consortium plans to conduct three case studies and three pilot projects in
1993. This paper presents some preliminary results of the three case
studies on the RCM and its associated assessment process.

\section{Position}

Institutionalizing software reuse in an organization requires that many
technical, organizational, economic, and cultural issues be
addressed. As attention on reuse has increased in the past several years many
issues have been raised. However, without a managed approach for addressing
these issues, software engineers and managers will have difficulty in
devising appropriate reuse strategies for their organizations, thereby
increasing their risk of stalled, misguided, or failed reuse programs.
The Reuse Adoption Process, Domain Assessment Guidelines, and Reuse Capability
Model provide a managed approach to help
engineers and managers address the many technical and nontechnical issues and
implement reuse programs that reduce risk and increase the benefits the
organizations realize from reuse.

The Consortium's key concerns in developing the reuse adoption technologies
are whether these technologies are valid and effective. The Reuse Adoption Case
Study is one step the Consortium is taking to begin to establish and improve
the validity and effectiveness of its reuse adoption technologies.
This paper focuses on the case study results for the RCM and its associated
assessment process. The specific questions addressed here include:
\begin{itemize}
\item Does the RCM capture the factors critical to improving an organization's
reuse practice?

\item Does the RCM assessment process accurately identify an organization's
reuse strengths and improvement opportunities?

\item Is the RCM assessment process cost-effective?
\end{itemize}

The following subsections characterize the case study participants, describe
the case study approach, and present the preliminary case study results.

\subsection{Case Study Participants}

For the case studies, the Consortium sought organizations who have successfully
institutionalized reuse. The motive for seeking
these organizations was to get feedback on the reuse adoption technologies
from people who have ``been there.'' Each of the case study organizations has
been practicing reuse for at least five years in the development and/or
maintenance of customer products. The case studies included organizations that
developed systems for
the Department of Defense (DoD) and organizations that developed commercial
products; they included both small organizations ($<50$ staff) and large
organizations ($>1000$ staff); and they included organizations in the embedded
systems business as well as organizations in the information systems business.

Due to confidentiality agreements, specific attributes of the case study
participants and specific data resulting from an organization's assessment are
not disclosed in this paper.

\subsection{Case Study Approach}

For the case studies, the Consortium took the approach of applying the RCM
assessment process in conducting actual assessments of the organizations' reuse
capabilities. In addition, the Consortium also conducted structured interviews
to understand how the organizations' reuse practices evolved and administered
post-assessment questionnaires to obtain additional feedback.

The assessment process is similar to a focus group format. A group of
individuals from the organization review and discuss the factors in the RCM,
then reach consensus on their strengths and improvement opportunities.
Consortium staff acted as facilitators. The steps in the assessment process
are as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item {\bf Form the Team.} A team of four to eight individuals is formed
representing the major functions of the organization. Team members should be
knowledgeable in the organization's process, policies, procedures, and
products.

\item {\bf Train the Team.} Facilitators provide a half-day training on
the adoption process, models, and assessment for the assessment team.

\item {\bf Develop Organizational Profile.} The organizational profile is a
rough sketch of the organization, its process, products, and business. It
serves as a context for the assessment.

\item {\bf Assess the Critical Success Factors.} The RCM is defined by 21
critical success factors organized into four groups (application development,
asset development, management, and process \& technology). Each factor is
defined in terms of one or more goals (see \cite{spc92} for a complete
description of the factors and goals). The team assesses their organization
against each goal on:
\begin{itemize}
\item The extent the organization meets the specified goal on a scale of
1-not satisfied, 2-partially satisfied, 3-fully satisfied.

\item The expected impact on the organization's reuse capability from fully
satisfying the stated goal on a scale of 1-no positive impact, 2-low positive
impact, 3-moderate positive impact, 4-high positive impact.
\end{itemize}

\item {\bf Develop Findings.} Based on the discussions resulting from the
previous step, the group identifies its strengths and improvement opportunities
through consensus.
\end{itemize}

\subsection{Case Study Results}

The results presented in this section are the statistical averages computed
from the team member assessment responses and post-assessment questionnaires
(25 team members from 3 case studies).

Figure 1 illustrates the computed average per critical success factor for the
expected impact on the organization's reuse capability from fully satisfying
the associated goals. Nearly all of the factors were judged as having a
moderate to high impact on an organizations reuse capability. This result is
one indicator as to whether the RCM captures the factors critical to
improving an organization's reuse capability.

\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\leavevmode\hbox{\epsfysize 7.5in \epsfbox{davis_t-fig1.ps}}
\caption{Critical Success Factor Impact Data}
\label{fig:1}
\end{figure}

In addition, the post-assessment questionnaire asked the participants to rate
the following statements on a scale of 1-strongly disagree, 2-disagree,
3-neutral, 4-agree, 5-strongly agree. The average response is indicated.
\begin{itemize}
\item The Reuse Capability Model covers the process issues most critical to
effective software reuse. $Average \ response = 4.3$

\item The reuse capability assessment accurately identified my organization's
reuse process strengths and improvement opportunities.
$Average \ response = 4.4$

\item The reuse capability assessment is a cost-effective technique for
understanding an organization's reuse process and planning improvements.
$Average \ response = 3.8$
\end{itemize}

Two case study groups had also suggested the addition of a critical success
factor addressing intergroup coordination and communication. Some participants
rated the effectiveness somewhat lower because they believed they already had
a good understanding of their process. However, they indicated the assessment
would be more effective for organizations who are just beginning to implement a
reuse program.

Although the Consortium does not view these results as proof of validity, it
is encouraged that these results indicate its reuse adoption technologies are
a step in the right direction. Further study will be conducted primarily
through reuse adoption pilot projects. The lessons learned from the case
studies and pilot projects will be worked into the next version of the
{\em Reuse Adoption Guidebook}.

\section{Comparison}

Technologies similar to the Consortium's reuse adoption technologies include
the Central Archive for Reusable Defense Software (CARDS) Franchise Plan
\cite{cards93} and the Software Technology for Adaptable, Reliable Systems
(STARS) Reuse Strategy Model (RSM) \cite{stars92}. The CARDS
Franchise Plan includes a series of handbooks designed to support the
implementation of domain specific reuse in DoD software procurements. The
Consortium's reuse adoption technology is designed to support business
organizations in general (DoD and commercial) and it is not tied to a specific
reuse technology. The purpose of the STARS RSM is to identify areas in which
organization objectives, policies, procedures, and process definitions can be
applied in furthering a cost-effective reuse strategy. It is specifically
designed to support the STARS vision of ``doing reuse.'' The RSM is primarily
intended to support project planning for reuse, whereas the RCM is primarily
intended to support capability improvement planning for product-line
organizations.

\bibliography{davis_t}

\section{Biography}

{\bf Ted Davis} is the technical lead for the Software Productivity
Consortium's reuse adoption project and is responsible for developing the
Reuse Capability Model and Reuse Adoption Process. Previously Ted has
supported the development and validation of the Consortium's Evolutionary
Spiral Process for software development and the Synthesis process
for reuse-oriented software production. Prior to that, Ted was an officer in
the U.S. Air Force for eight years where he developed and acquired command
and control systems. Ted has a M.S. in Computer Science from Purdue
University and a M.S. in Systems Management from the University of
Southern California.

\end{document}



