Scientia et Technica Año XXVIII, Vol. 28, No. 01, enero-marzo de 2023. Universidad Tecnológica de Pereira. ISSN 0122-1701 y ISSN: 2344-7214
31
A
A viability analysis of the ISO/IEC 29110
project management process: a case study in an
automotive ecuadorian company
Un análisis de viabilidad del proceso de gestión de proyectos del estándar ISO/IEC
29110: un estudio de caso en una compañía automotora ecuatoriana
A. F. Vera-Delgado ; C. M. Zapata-Jaramillo
DOI: https://doi.org/10.22517/23447214.24544
Scientific and technological research paper
Abstract— Software process standards such as the ISO/IEC 29110
have been implemented by Very Small Entities (VSE) in order to
develop quality software and achieve improvements in terms of
time, budget, documentation, and other subjects. The generic
profile group established in such a standard includes a set of
profiles with situational factors of occurrence applicable to some
VSEs. However, documented case studies of the ISO/IEC 29110
implementation in Latin America companies are limited, causing
uncertainty about the viability of such a standard in VSEs
established in the region. Different conditions of each
environment—company type, size, country, etc.—can influence
the implementation of a software project. Such a fact can affect the
possibility of quality improvement by using the standard. In this
paper we implement the project management process included in
the basic profile of the ISO/IEC 29110 in an automotive
Ecuadorian company. We identified extra effort—17.30%—and
overruns—17.06%—triggered by implementing the project
management process in this exercise are within the parameters
defined and evaluated in previous literature. Besides, we
summarize a set of lessons learned acquired during such an
implementation. Finally, the findings of this study will allow VSEs
to decide whether is convenient to implement this standard in such
an environment.
Index Terms—ISO Standards; ISO/IEC 29110; Software
Engineering; Very Small Entities.
Resumen—Los estándares de procesos de software tales como
ISO/ IEC 29110 se implementan en organizaciones pequeñas (en
inglés, Very Small Entities, VSE) con el fin de desarrollar software
de calidad y lograr mejoras en términos de tiempo, presupuesto,
documentación y otros campos. El grupo de perfiles genéricos
establecido en dicha norma incluye un conjunto de perfiles con
factores situacionales de ocurrencia aplicables a algunas VSEs. Sin
embargo, los casos de estudio documentados sobre la
implementación de ISO/IEC 29110 en empresas de América
Latina son limitados, generando incertidumbre sobre la viabilidad
de tal estándar en VSEs establecidas en la región. Las diferentes
condiciones de cada entorno—tipo de empresa, tamaño, país,
etc.—pueden influir en la implementación de un proyecto de
software. Este hecho puede afectar la posibilidad de mejora de la
calidad mediante el uso de la norma. En este estudio se implementa
This manuscript was submitted on October 28, 2020, accepted on March
09, 2023 and published on March 31, 2023.
There is no support from any institution or organization in terms of
operational, financial or any other kind in the research. Non-profit consulting
was provided to the case study company.
el proceso de gestión de proyectos incluido en el perfil básico de la
norma ISO/IEC 29110 en una empresa automotriz ecuatoriana. Se
identifica que el esfuerzo adicional—17,30%—y los sobrecostos—
17,06%—provocados por la implementación del proceso de
gestión de proyectos en este ejercicio se encuentran dentro de los
parámetros definidos y evaluados en la literatura. Además, se
resume un conjunto de lecciones aprendidas durante dicha
implementación. Finalmente, los hallazgos de este estudio
permitirán a las VSEs decidir si es conveniente implementar este
estándar en dicho entorno.
Palabras claves—Estándares ISO, ISO/IEC 29110; Ingeniería de
Software; PYME.
I.
INTRODUCTION
DAPTABILITY, competitiveness, and even survival of an
organization depend even more on software efficiency.
The role of traditional software developers in companies—
especially in VSEs—has been evolving and growing in terms
of methods, documentation, structure, and more [1]. The
ISO/IEC 29110 Systems and Software Life Cycle Profiles and
Guidelines for Very Small Entities was developed in order to
fulfill this emerging need. Since the release of the ISO/IEC
29110, organizations have adopted such a standard in order to
find balance for allowing documentation and standardization of
processes [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7]. Even though the initial effort
for implementing the standard is larger—10 % to 18 % of
rework—, some improvement in several implementation
aspects can be achieved in medium term [8].
The generic profile group defined in the management and
engineering guide of the systems engineering part of the
ISO/IEC 29110 contains a collection of profiles including
processes, activities, tasks, and roles. Laporte et al. [1] define a
profile as “a kind of matrix that identifies which elements
should be taken from existing standards.” The basic profile is
suitable for developing a single noncritical system at a time
operating in conjunction with any development lifecycle. The
basic profile includes two main processes: project management
A. F. Vera-Delgado, and C. M. Zapata-Jaramillo, are with the Computer and
Decision Sciences Department, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Medellín,
Colombia (e-mail: {avera, cmzapata} @unal.edu.co).
Scientia et Technica Año XXVIII, Vol. 28, No. 01, enero-marzo de 2023. Universidad Tecnológica de Pereira
32
and software implementation.
Some case studies related to VSEs have been documented in
some countries—especially in North America, Asia, and
Europe—since the appearance and formalization of the
ISO/IEC 29110 [2], [3], [5], [7], [8]. [9]. However, considering
the large number of VSEs, the amount of previous studies
developed in Latin America is minimal compared to other
regions. Therefore, an opportunity for evaluating and
implementing the standard in different environments is viable
[9]. Some companies are unaware of the ISO/IEC 29110 due to
lack of knowledge and resources for implementing such a
standard [10], [11], [12]. Likewise, some organizations are
unable to find trustable data in order to verify whether the
standard can be applied to a specific scenario. The actual
diversity of companies around the world—infrastructure,
geographical location, service or product types, number of
employees, and market targets— generates different impact of
the standard on each organization [13]. Such heterogeneity
plays a crucial role in the success rate a standard
implementation could have.
In this paper, we implement the part 5-6-2: management and
engineering guide by using the project management process
included in the basic profile of the ISO/IEC 29110 in an
automotive Ecuadorian company. We perform each activity
concerning the process—planning, execution, evaluation,
control, and closure. We also evaluate the process in terms of
cost and time in order to determine the impact of a first-time
implementation of the project management process. Finally, we
summarize a set of lessons learned acquired during the
implementation.
We intend to determine the viability of the project
management process included in the basic profile in a singular
Ecuadorian VSE. Conclusions of this study are intended to
reach a starting point for VSEs interested in applying the
ISO/IEC 29110 in the Latin America region.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. Structure and
concepts of the ISO/IEC 29110 standard are introduced in
Section 2. The required background and related studies are
described in Section 3. In Section 4 we propose the
implementation of the project management process in an
automotive Ecuadorian company, and the results obtained are
then defined in Section 5. The main discussion is described in
Section 6, and the conclusions along with possible lines of
future work are presented in Section 7.
II.
ISO/IEC 29110 STANDARD
The ISO/IEC 29110 standard “Lifecycle profiles for Very
Small Entities” [14] is developed to meet the VSEs emerging
need for creating quality software and improving the process in
terms of time, efficiency, economic benefits, and
documentation. The management and engineering guide
includes a four-profile set—entry, basic, intermediate, and
advanced. Each profile includes additional progressive
activities and elements [1]:
1)
Entry profile. For start-up VSEs.
2)
Basic profile. For the development of a single application.
3)
Intermediate profile. For the development of multiple
projects together with multiple development teams.
4)
Advanced profile. For independent software development
businesses.
In addition, the basic profile is based on two processes:
Project Management (PM) and System Definition and
Realization (SR) as shown in Fig 1 [14]. Each process includes
activities and roles involved in a specific order. However, VSEs
have freedom for choosing the method in order to implement
the standard. According to ISO [14], the ISO/IEC 29110 lacks
the inclusion of a specific procedure for executing such an
implementation; also, it can be applied to any life cycle
model—agile, incremental, waterfall, iterative, etc. Therefore,
the resulting effect among organizations using the standard may
Fig. 1. Basic profile guide processes [7].
vary.
A set of roles is defined for each process in order to
accomplish the tasks of each activity. The project manager
elaborates a project plan which is established as a guide in the
operation and it has to be followed by the team in order to
develop the project in the SR process.
According to Sanchez et al. [11], the number of VSEs
adopting the standard has grown. Besides, results obtained from
the literature review of case studies related to the ISO/IEC
29110 implementation point to a positive impact on the final
product and other surrounding factors [9], [8], [10].
III.
BACKGROUND AND RELATED STUDIES
The Organization for Economic Co-operation and
Development (OECD) performs a study for evaluating the
amount of SME (small and medium-sized enterprises) around
the world. According to OECD [15], "SMEs constitute the
dominant form of business organisation in all countries world-
wide, accounting for over 95% and up to 99% of the business
population depending on country." 85% of the information
technology (IT) organizations in Europe have up to 10
employees [1]. In Brazil, 95% of the companies have up to 19
people working on it [1]. In Peru, 96% of IT organizations can
be considered as VSEs [16]. According to Salazar et al. [17],
around 160 IT companies in Ecuador, composed 93% of VSEs.
However, in 2012, ProChile together with Universidad Casa
Grande [18], elaborated a statistical study about the
development of software in Ecuador, showing 651 companies
registered as IT organizations, with a growing market share of
Scientia et Technica Año XXVIII, Vol. 28, No. 01, enero-marzo de 2023. Universidad Tecnológica de Pereira
33
33
33
12% per year. Nevertheless, as shown in Fig. 2, only 24.6% of
software companies have adopted quality standards
internationally recognized, leaving a tremendous opportunity
Fig. 2. Ecuadorian Companies with Quality Standards internationally
recognized.
and vast unexplored fields in the country [18].
Some VSEs are unfamiliar to the ISO/IEC 29110 standard
due to circumstances such as lack of support and resources, time
constraints, and other [19]. Likewise, documented studies about
the standard implementation are limited, diminishing the
capacity of companies for making decisions in terms of the
ISO/IEC 29110 implementation.
Previous work comprises case studies focused mostly in
North America and Canada. Laporte [9] resumes nine of such
case study implementations. According to Laporte [9] “A one-
person VSE can learn from ISO 29110 to better organize work
and produce quality software.” A case study documented by
Laporte [10] on a Canadian division of a large American
engineering company was intended to determine the economic
benefits of a 3-year projection, obtaining as result almost 4% of
net profits per year. In Peru, Romero [16] documented a case
study developed in a relatively short time. The result led to an
improvement in the work process, solid documentation
methods, and the implementation of the ISO/IEC 29110 basic
profile. A case study of two VSEs in Peru was presented by
Diaz et al. [20]. According to the authors, the implementation
in VSEs requires the company CEO support for the standard
fulfillment success. Vera [21] implements a method for eliciting
requirements based in pre-conceptual schemas by using the
basic profile of the ISO/IEC 29110. Such a method was
validated in two case studies involving a research project
financed by a Colombian governmental institution and a
ceramic manufacturing company [21], [22]. Sanchez et al. [11]
try to identify issues regarding the adoption of the ISO/IEC
29110 in Ecuador. The authors interview employees from three
VSEs concluding the lack of the ISO/IEC 29110
implementation in the country is due to certain factors such as
length and difficult procedures, lack of resources, lack of
experts in the field, and low acceptance of quality standards in
the region.
Even though the ISO/IEC 29110 is unrelated to any lifecycle,
it was associated with Agile Software Development
Methodologies (ASDM). According to Chow et al. [23],
ASDMs are primarily targeted at small and very small
organizations or teams. Galvan et al. [24] assess a compliance
level of three main agile software development methodologies
with the ISO/IEC 29110 project management process by using
the entry profile. The authors conclude UPEDU (Unified
Process for Education) has the highest compliance level,
followed by SCRUM, and finally XP (Extreme Programming)
with some lacks.
The ISO/IEC 29110 standard has been also used for teaching
purpose. Bougaa et al. [25] proposed a teaching method for
system engineering fundamental knowledge. Such an adaptive
new path is focused on undergraduate students who are new to
the discipline.
Although case studies developed in companies have been
isolated, common variables of the previously performed
research have been identified. In most cases, enterprises have
considerable improvement in many aspects—time, expenses,
documentation, etc. Likewise, as part of the lessons learned
from previous work, one of the most common
recommendations is the early implementation of just one
process of the ISO 29110. Consequently, we aim to implement
the project management process in our case study.
IV.
PROJECT MANAGEMENT PROCESS IMPLEMENTATION
The implementation includes the standard review and the
creation of a unique document including all activities and
results obtained during the management process. In addition, in
the exercise we use the waterfall lifecycle model when
developing the project.
A.
Study Company
Orange Software&Solutions Cia. Ltda. is a three-year
company established in the south of Ecuador aimed to improve
organizational processes by developing software applications.
The company has four employees for software development
purposes. The organization is attempting to implement the
ISO/IEC 29110 in a software project for an automotive
dealership. For confidentiality reasons, we will call AVD to the
customer company.
B.
Problem background
The company AVD needs a repair-process-automation
system in the after-sales department. Administrative personnel
want to supervise the complete workflow of the process,
starting with the client arrival, and ending with the vehicle
delivery. The implementation is coordinated along with the IT
department and the after-sales staff.
C.
Project planning
The project management process involves a set of four
activities—project planning, project plan execution, project
assessment and control, and project closure—in order to
accomplish the construction and monitoring of the project plan.
The first activity is called “project planning” and it includes a
set of steps developed to manage the project. The steps
conducted by the team in the project plan activity involving this
case study are described as follows:
Scientia et Technica Año XXVIII, Vol. 28, No. 01, enero-marzo de 2023. Universidad Tecnológica de Pereira
34
Drive
Version 1.0
Compiled
Ajax
JQuery
Code Version 1.1
Images
Version 1.n
Email
Main Project
Forms
Documents
Class
Videos
CSS
1)
Previous evaluation
Review of each activity and task description in order
to establish its viability.
Creation of a work breakdown structure of the main
project management process containing all activities to
be followed. Such a structure includes the resulting
work products, the flow of information between
activities, and a visual map of the whole process as
illustrated in Fig. 3.
TABLE I
PROJECT MANAGEMENT ROLES INVOLVED IN THE PROJECT
Role
Abbreviation
Job
Customer
CUS
After-sales manager, Workshop
Manager, IT Manager
Project Manager
PM
Country Manager
Work Team
WT
Analyst, Developer
5)
Statement of work
Elaboration of the statement of work according to the
first meeting with the customer.
Definition of the project requirements, scope, delivery
dates, responsible, purpose, and objectives.
6)
Repository
Creation of the repository structure with the work team
in order to standardize the development process and
version control.
Establishment of the repository to be stored in a cloud.
The structure used for the project is shown in Fig. 4.
7)
Initial schedule
Fig. 3. Project Management Processes diagram of the ISO 29110 systems
engineering.
2)
Work products
Review of the resulting work products, both inbound
and outbound.
Elaboration of structure templates for each work
product. Templates created are described as follows:
Statement of Work
Project plan
Product delivery
Verification Results
Validation Results
Meeting records
Project Repository
Project Repository Backup
Progress Status Record
Change Request
Correction Register
Acceptance Record.
3)
Client documentation
Creation of documents relative to the client in order to
settle all agreements reached in the meetings:
Documents
Meeting records
Fig. 4. Repository Tree diagram.
Definition of the software development lifecycle. The
summary of planned activities is shown in Fig. 5.
Several sub-activities can be developed
simultaneously and have been detailed in the main
resulting document.
4)
Roles
Identification of roles established in the standard
including responsible involved in all activities. As
shown in Table I, the technical leader role was omitted.
The decision was made due to the small size of the
project. Therefore, the project manager accomplishes
the activities of the technical leader.
Fig. 5. Gantt diagram of the initial project schedule.
Meeting
records
Project
plan
Acceptance
Record
Correction
Register
Statement
of Work
Project
Planning
Start
Project
Repository
Project Project
Plan Assessment
Execution and Control
Project
validity
Project
Closure
End
Verification
Results
Project
Repository
Backup
Progress
Status Record
Product
delivery
Validation
Results
Change
Request
Client
Project Management Profile
Technical leader
Project Management
Scientia et Technica Año XXVIII, Vol. 28, No. 01, enero-marzo de 2023. Universidad Tecnológica de Pereira
35
35
35
D.
Project plan execution
The project plan execution includes the following steps
performed by the team:
Development of the deliverable.
Conduction of constant meetings with both client and
work team for attending issues—either problem-
solving or regularly planned meetings—by following
the standard recommendations.
Deployment of the deliverable.
Sharing of the final document created with the client
in order to be validated.
V.
RESULTS
A.
Project assessment and control
After implementing the project plan execution, we develop
a progress status record which contain the results obtained
from
planned
versus
real
metrics
in
terms
of
tasks,
TABLE II
PLANNED VERSUS REAL METRICS IN TERMS OF TASKS FULFILLMENT
PERCENT (TIME MEASURED IN DAYS)
Task
Plan
Real
Gap
Accomplish
Statement of work
2
4
+2
100%
Project planning
14
21
+7
100%
Project plan execution
60
69
+9
100%
Project assessment and control
23
23
0
100%
Project closure
5
5
0
100%
TABLE III
OBJECTIVES ACCOMPLISHED PERCENT
Objective
Accomplish
Minimize the delivery time of damaged vehicles
N/A
Comply with the estimated date for delivering vehicles
N/A
Define sub-processes and states
100%
Quantify time spent on each process
100%
Identify the responsible roles of each process
100%
Generate a historical record of future decisions and plans
100%
Identify delay problems in real time
100%
Improve the relationship with the client
N/A
TABLE IV
PLANNED VERSUS REAL METRICS IN TERMS OF RESOURCES
USED PERCENT
TABLE V
PLANNED VS. ACTUAL METRICS IN TERMS OF BUDGET
Variable
Plan
Real
Gap
%
Project cost (usd)
1,950,00
2,288.72
+338.72
17.06
Working days
104
122
+18
17.30
Daily work hours
4
4
0
0
Cost per hour (usd)
4.68
4.69
0
0
TABLE VI
PLANNED VERSUS REAL METRICS IN TERMS OF RISKS
Risk
Plan
Real
Gap
Delay in response from the after-sales
department
10%
5%
-5%
Delay in response from IT Manager
100%
100%
0%
Identification of serious errors in final
stages of development
5%
5%
0%
Survey of new requirements in final
stages of development
10%
20%
+10%
Dropout of employees in final stages
10%
0%
0%
Restrictions of deliverable installation
by the IT department
50%
70%
+40%
Delayed meetings with the client
10%
30%
20%
objectives, resources, budget, and risks as illustrated in
Tables II to VI.
B.
Cost overruns
According to the Standish Group “CHAOS Report,” [26] the
probabilities of a software project resolution are divided into
three categories called “Standish Resolutions:” type 1 for
complete success corresponding to 29%, type 2 for significant
schedule delays over budget corresponding to 53%, and type 3
for canceled failed projects corresponding to 18%. However, a
56% average budget overrun is linked to Standish Resolutions
type 2 and type 3.
Matiscola [27] provides a method used to cost-justify
software project effectiveness. The variables used in this
method are:
1)
E
E
= Expected expenditure on software development,
estimated at $1,950.00
2)
P
f
= Project probability to have a Standish Resolutions type
2 or type 3 termination, estimated at 71%
3)
R
o
= Average budget overrun for Standish Resolutions type
2 and type 3, estimated at 56%
4)
R
f
= Ratio of the cost of projects with Standish Resolutions
type 2 and type 3
5)
B = Initial budget
6) E
o
= Budget overruns.
�
�
Thus, R
f
will be 156%.
= 1 + �
(1)
𝐵 = 𝐸
𝐸
/(𝑃
𝑓
(𝑅
𝑓
− 1) + 1) (2)
Thus, B is estimated at about $1,395.25.
𝐸
𝑜
= 𝐸
𝐸
− 𝐵 (3)
Resource
Plan
Real
Gap
Accomplis
Human
Project Manager
1
1
0
100%
Technical Leader
1
0
-1
0%
Developer
3
3
0
100%
Equipment
Laptop
4
4
0
100%
Printer
1
1
0
100%
Router
1
1
0
100%
Property
Office
1
1
0
100%
Supply
Toner
1
1
0
100%
Paper sheets
50
50
0
100%
Folders
10
10
0
100%
Furniture
Desks
4
4
0
100%
Chairs
4
4
0
100%
Digital
ISO/IEC 29110
1
1
0
100%
Scientia et Technica Año XXVIII, Vol. 28, No. 01, enero-marzo de 2023. Universidad Tecnológica de Pereira
36
The budget overruns limit for Standish Resolutions type 2
and type 3 is estimated at $554.75 (1), (2), (3)
VI.
DISCUSSION
According to Laporte et al. [8] between 10 % and 18 % of
rework is done in a first-time implementation of the ISO/IEC
29110. The current results showed a gap of 18 days in the task
fulfillment schedule, resulting in a 17.30% delay, leaving the
estimated time delay within the parameters defined and
evaluated in previous case studies.
In order to have an acceptable software project result in terms
of budget, according to Matiscola [27] the cost overruns should
be under the limit for Standish Resolutions type 2 and type 3.
Such a limit is estimated at $554.75 in this case study. However,
the real budget overruns for the project were $338.72, leaving
the cost overruns within the estimated range described in the
method.
Regarding the results obtained from the progress status
record, we can conclude in terms of activities delay, the project
took over 17.30% more implementation time. Such a fact meant
almost 4 weeks over the initial schedule. In terms of objectives
accomplished, 7 out of 10 objectives were accomplished at a
100% rate. However, the remaining objectives lack dependency
on the software implementation. In terms of resources used, we
lack the inclusion of a technical leader in the project, being the
only missing resource. In terms of budget, we expend $2,288.72
as project cost, being $338.72 more expensive than initially
planned budget. Such an expense represents a 17.06% over
budget. In terms of risks, we assure the bigger problem was the
lack of regularity from stakeholders, generating delays for
meetings and new requirements in final stages of the
development.
A.
Lessons learned
During the process implementation, some issues appeared.
The employee transition between working in improvised
environments to a framework where the process is previously
defined—documents, activities, work products, roles, tasks,
schedule, etc.—resulted in some difficulties at the beginning of
the exercise. The lack of communication between the client and
the VSE resulted in time delays because some stakeholders
reject to plan the meetings. Such stakeholders were careless in
the way they execute and organize their activities and schedule.
A different working method has to be instilled in order to
accomplish a regular, planned, and consistent way for
developing the project. An anticipated negative perception of
the customer alleging the implementation of ISO standards is a
waste of economic resources and staff time. Some issues found
in the standard included lack of information for implementing
methods and lifecycles.
On the other hand, the advantages found in the process
included:
1)
Improvement in work organization
2)
Use of measures such as task fulfillment, delay time,
objectives, resources, budget, risks
3)
Definition of roles
4)
Creation of standardized document templates
5)
Clear initial statement of work
6)
Definition of the project scope
7)
Elaboration of the schedule including tasks, activities,
dates, and duration
8)
Elaboration of a project plan as a map to be followed along
the process
9)
Definition of a change request process in order to attend
and solve requests from the customer
10)
Creation of the progress status record containing all the
resulting data, offering the possibility of comparing
planned results versus real results.
Finally, general recommendations VSEs should consider
when implementing the ISO/IEC 29110 are:
1)
Unconditional support from the CEO
2)
Sufficient resources such as human, equipment, supplies,
budget, time, infrastructure
3)
Initial evaluation of the current company processes
4)
Availability for training
5)
Defined objectives
6)
Knowledge of the ISO/IEC 29110 and the implementation
method to be used
7)
Defined lifecycle
8)
Schedule meeting organization
VII.
CONCLUSION
In this paper, we studied the development and implementation
of the project management process by using the basic profile of
the ISO/IEC 29110 in an automotive Ecuadorian company. We
also studied the process and activities developed by the work
team along the lifecycle. Likewise, we feature the progress
status record for evaluating the planned scenario vs the real
scenario. With the compiled information, we summarized a set
of lessons learned involving positive and negative statements.
Finally, we qualified the gap in terms of time and cost when
developing a first-time implementation of the standard. The
findings of this study validate the possibility to properly plan
and execute projects by using the ISO/IEC 29110 in VSEs
located in the region. Benefits found in this research far
outweigh the problems encountered in the process.
Finally, we propose for future research to expand the number of
case studies in Latin America companies which are
implementing the standard. Future case studies should include
project management and software implementation process
along with other lifecycle models and different profiles of the
management and engineering guide.
REFERENCES
[1] C. Y. Laporte, N. Séguin, G. V. Boas and S. Buasung, “Small tech firms
Seizing the benefts of software and systems engineering standards,” Rev.
ISO Focus+, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 32-36, Feb. 2013.
[2] A. Buchalcevova, “Methodology for ISO/IEC 29110 Profle
Implementation in EPF Composer,” International Journal of Information
Technologies and Systems Approach, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 61-74, 2017. DOI:
10.4018/IJITSA.2017010104
[3] R. Eito, “Ontology-based Tailoring of Software Process Models,”
Terminology and Knowledge Engineering 2014. Berlin, pp. 1-10, Jun.
2014.
Scientia et Technica Año XXVIII, Vol. 28, No. 01, enero-marzo de 2023. Universidad Tecnológica de Pereira
37
35
35
[4] L. García, C. Y. Laporte, Y. Arteaga and M. Bruggmann,
“Implementation and Certification of ISO/IEC 29110 in an IT Startup in
Peru,” Software Quality Professional, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 16-29, Mar. 2015.
[5] R. V. O’Connor, “Early Stage Adoption of ISO/IEC 29110 Software
Project Management Practices: A Case Study. Software Process
Improvement and Capability Determination,” 14th International
Conference, SPICE 2014 Vilnius. Communications in Computer and
Information Science. Lithuania, A. Mitasiunas, T. Rout, R. O’Connor and
A. Dorling, eds., Springer-Cham, vol. 477, pp. 226-237, 2014. DOI:
10.1007/978-3-319-13036-1_20
[6] P. Rodríguez-Dapena and M. F. Buitrago-Botero, “How to Certify the
Very Small Entity Software Processes Using ISO/IEC 29110,”
Communications in Computer and Information Science 526 - Software
Process Improvement and Capability Determination - 15th International
Conference, SPICE 2015. Gothenburg, pp 245-252, Jun. 2015. DOI:
10.1007/978-3-319-19860-6_20
[7] V. Siddoo, N. Wongsai and R. Wetprasit, “An Implementation Approach
of ISO/IEC 29110 for Government Organizations,” Lecture Notes in
Computer Science, vol. 7983, pp. 5-19, 2013.
[8] C. Y. Laporte, N. Tremblay, J. Menaceur and D. Poliquin, “Implementing
the New ISO/IEC 29110 Systems Engineering Process Standard in a
Small Public Transportation Company,” Systems, Software and Services
Process Improvement EuroSPI 2016, C. Kreiner, R. V. O'Connor, A. Poth
and R. Messnarz, eds., Springer-Cham, Graz, pp. 15-29, Sep. 2016. DOI:
10.1007/978-3-319-44817-6_2
[9] C. Y. Laporte and R. V. O’Connor, “Implementing Process Improvement
in Very Small Enterprises with ISO/IEC 29110 A Multiple Case Study
Analysis,”2016 10th International Conference on the Quality of
Information and Communications Technology, Lisbon, pp. 125-130, Sep.
2016. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-44817-6_2
[10] C. Y. Laporte and F. Chevalier, “Economic benefits of ISO/IEC 29110
Standard: a Case Study,” Substance Scientific News and Innovation from
ÉTS, Sep. 2015.
[11] M. L. Sanchez-Gordon, R. V. O’Connor and R. Colomo-Palacios,
“Evaluating VSEs Viewpoint and Sentiment towards the ISO/IEC 29110
Standard: A two Country Grounded Theory Study,” Software Process
Improvement and Capability Determination SPICE 2015, T. Rout, R. V.
O’Connor and A. Dorling, eds., Springer-Verlag, Gothenburg, pp. 114-
127, Jun. 2015. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-19860-6_10
[12] N. Wongsai, V. Siddoo and R. Wetprasit, “Factors of Influence in
Software Process Improvement: An ISO/IEC 29110 for Very-Small
Entities,”2015 7th International Conference on Information Technology
and Electrical Engineering, Chiang Mai, pp. 12-17, Oct. 2015. DOI:
10.1109/ICITEED.2015.7408904
[13] M. L. Sánchez-Gordón and R. V. O’Connor, “Understanding the gap
between software process practices and actual practice in very small
companies,” Software Quality Journal, vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 549-570, Sep.
2016. DOI: 10.1007/s11219-015-9282-6
[14] ISO, “ISO/IEC TR 29110-5-6-2: 2011 - Software Engineering - Lifecycle
profiles for Very Small Entities (VSES) - Part 5-6-2: Systems engineering
— Management and engineering guide: Generic profile group: Basic
profile,” Geneva, 2014.
[15] Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, “OECD
SME and Entrepreneurship Outlook - 2005 Edition,” Paris, 2005.
[16] M. Abarca-Romero, R. Arisaca-Mamani and A. Dávila-Ramón,
“Implementación del perfil básico de la ISO/IEC 29110 de una pequeña
empresa desarrolladora de software: Lecciones aprendidas," Industrial
(INDUSTRIAL 2015) en XVIII Congreso Ibero Americano de Ingeniería
de Software (CIB-SE 2015), Lima, Apr. 2015.
[17] D.R. Salazar, M. K. Villavicencio, M.V. Macias and M. Snoeck, “Estudio
estadístico exploratorio de las empresas desarrolladoras de software asen-
tadas en Guayaquil, Quito y Cuenca,” ESPOL – VLIR Componente 8
Ingenie-ría de Software, pp. 1-15, Oct. 2003.
[18] Oficina Comercial de ProChile en Ecuador, Universidad Casa Grande, C.
Andrade, J. S. Proaño, D. Ricaurte, J. Sáenz, “Estudio de mercado servicio
desarrollo de software en ecuador,” 2012. [Online]. Available:
http://www.prochile.gob.cl/wp-content/files_mf/documento
_11_19_12112936.pdf.
[19] C. Y. Laporte, “The Development and Experimentation of an
International Standard for Very Small Entities Involved in Software
Development,” Inter-national Council on Systems Engineering
(INCOSE) Workshop, Phoenix, AZ, Jan. 2011.
[20] A. Díaz, C. de Jesús, K. Melendez and A. Dávila, “ISO/IEC 29110
Implementation on two Very Small Software Development Companies in
Lima. Lessons Learned,” IEEE Latin America Transactions, vol. 14, no.
5, pp. 2504-2510, May. 2016. DOI: 10.1109/TLA.2016.7530452
[21] A. Vera. “A Pre-conceptual-schema-based method for eliciting
requirements in the context of ISO/IEC 29110,” M.Sc. thesis, Universidad
Nacional de Colombia, Medellín, Feb, 2019.
[22] A.Vera, C. M. Zapata, “Implementación de la ISO/IEC 29110 en la etapa
de educción de requisitos usando esquemas preconceptuales en una
corporación multinacional,” Transformación Digital en las
Organizaciones, Centro de Investigación y Desarrollo Profesional,
CIDEPRO Editorial , pp. 23-54 , Nov 2019. DOI: 10.29018/978-9942-
823-15-1
[23] T. Chow and D. B. Cao, “A survey study of critical success factors in agile
software projects,” Rev. Journal of Systems and Software, vol. 8, no. 6,
pp. 961-971, Jun. 2008. DOI: 10.1016/j.jss.2007.08.020
[24] S. Galvan, M. Mora, R. V. O’Connor, F. Acosta and F. Alvarez, “A
Compliance Analysis of Agile Methodologies with the ISO/IEC 29110
Project Management Process,” Procedia Computer Science, vol. 64, pp.
188-195, Oct. 2015. DOI: 10.1016/j.procs.2015.08.480
[25] M. Bougaa, R. V. O’Connor, S. Bornhofen and A. Rivière, “A Standard
Based Adaptive Path to Teach Systems Engineering: 15288 and 29110
Standards Use Cases,” 11th Annual IEEE International Systems
Conference, Montréal, Apr. 2017. DOI:
10.1109/SYSCON.2017.7934712
[26] J. Johnson, “My Life Is Failure: 100 Things You Should Know to be a
Successful Project Leader,” Standish Group International, West
Yarmouth, MA, 2006.
[27] S. P. Masticola, “A Simple Estimate of the Cost of Software Project
Failures and the Breakeven Effectiveness of Project Risk Management,”
First International Workshop on the Economics of Software and
Computation (ESC'07), Minneapolis, MN, May. 2007. DOI:
10.1109/ESC.2007.1
Antonio Fernando Vera Delgado
received the M.S. and Ph.D. degrees in
systems and software engineering from the
Universidad Nacional de Colombia. Since
2004, he has worked in the software
engineering field managing projects in
multinational companies such as
Continental Tire, General Motors, and
Algar
Tech.
His
research
is
based
in
business process improvement, the ISO/IEC 29110
management process, and pre-conceptual schemas.
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5581-8008
Carlos Mario Zapata Jaramillo received
the M.S. and Ph.D. degrees in systems and
software engineering from the Universidad
Nacional de Colombia and he is currently
serving as full Professor in the Computing
and Decision Science Department at the
Medellin Headquarters of the same
institution. He is also president of the
Executive Committee of the Latin
American Chapter of Semat and also is one of the official
translators of the book “The Essence of Software
Engineering—Applying the SEMAT Kernel".
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0628-4097