Software Capability Evaluation, Version 3.0, Method Description.

Evaluation and Measurement of Software Process Improvement—A Systematic Literature Review

“…For example, RQ1 pertains to how the success (or failure) of SPI initiatives is evaluated, that is, to methods which show the impact of the initiative. Note that with "evaluation strategy" we do not refer to SPI appraisals, such as CBA-IPI [32], SCE [21] or SCAMPI [116], where the organizations maturity is assessed by its conformity to a certain industrial standard [47]. We rather aim to identify the evaluation strategies which are used to effectively show the impact of a process change.…”

Standard CMMISM appraisal method for process improvement (SCAMPISM): Improvements and integration

“…The original CBA IPI and SCE [Byrnes & Phillips, 1996] methods did not provide specific guidance on the use of the maturity questionnaire and document reviews and their relationship to each other and the comments made in interviews. While questionnaires are often considered as valid as an interview, they were often ignored.…”

A more rigorous and comprehensive approach to software process assessment

“…The methods considered were: ISO 9000 (ISO-9001 1994, ISO-9000-3 1994, ISO-10011 1993, Schmauch 1995; TickIT (TickIT 1995); SCE (Byrnes and Phillips 1996) and CBA IPI (Dunaway and Masters 1996), based on CMM (Paulk et al 1995, Caputo 1998; Bootstrap (Kuvaja et al 1994, Bicego et al 1998); Trillium (Trillium 1994); STD (Craigmyle and Fletcher 1993);andISO 15504 (ISO-15504 1996, Emam et al 1998). This study is based on the idea that unless all the components of the assessment are explicitly defined and developed, it will be impossible to consider a method of evaluation as rigorous.…”