Selecting case tools: A decision model

被引:0
|
作者
Rojas, T.
Perez, M.
Griman, A.
Ortega, M.
Diaz, A.
机构
来源
Revista de la Facultad de Ingenieria | 2000年 / 15卷 / 02期
关键词
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Given the diversity of factors affecting the adoption of a CASE tool, their complexity, by way of the amount of components offered, the strategic importance for organizations of a timely, correct selection of tools, it is of utmost importance to support said selection process. This paper thus proposes a Decision Model which will increase the efficiency and effectiveness of this process and guarantee its completeness. The evaluation method for CASE tools included a set of activities that can be grouped into three major steps: selection and acquisition of CASE tools. development and application of the Decision Model and Analysis of Results. The algorithm supporting the Decision Model used in this research is formed by six finite sequential steps, by means of which a group of CASE tools meeting the case study requirements is obtained. This algorithm provides a quantitative way of comparing different CASE tools and aids the decision-maker, who in this case is the person requiring the tool to support his software development processes. The Decision Model allows the decision-maker to select CASE tools according to different Technological factors. These factors were grouped into two categories: internal and external, the first referring to factors related to the architecture and internal structure of the tools and concentrating on what the tool (isolated from its context) can offer. These in turn were classified based on two criteria: the scope - what the tool encompasses - and the design - what the tool is like. The external categories refer to supplementary factors in the tool environment. Their criteria being support and the solidity of the developing company.
引用
收藏
页码:117 / 144
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] MARKOV DECISION MODEL FOR SELECTING OPTIMAL CREDIT CONTROL POLICIES
    LIEBMAN, LH
    MANAGEMENT SCIENCE SERIES B-APPLICATION, 1972, 18 (10): : B519 - B525
  • [32] Application of multi-decision model in selecting of manipulative project
    Zhang, YT
    Wang, CH
    Wen, QY
    Ma, GC
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE 3RD WORLD CONGRESS ON INTELLIGENT CONTROL AND AUTOMATION, VOLS 1-5, 2000, : 1980 - 1984
  • [33] The combined decision model for selecting and prioritizing research and development projects
    Conka, T
    Ercan, S
    RAST 2005: Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Recent Advances in Space Technologies, 2005, : 823 - 828
  • [34] A Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Model for Selecting a Maturity Model
    dos Santos-Neto, Joao Batista Sarmento
    Costa, Ana Paula Cabral Seixas
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM TECHNOLOGY, 2023, 15 (01)
  • [35] A model of foreign policy substitutability - Selecting the right tools for the job(s)
    Morgan, TC
    Palmer, G
    JOURNAL OF CONFLICT RESOLUTION, 2000, 44 (01) : 11 - 32
  • [36] A decision model for selecting technology suppliers in the presence of nondiscretionary factors
    Saen, Reza Farzipoor
    APPLIED MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTATION, 2006, 181 (02) : 1609 - 1615
  • [37] DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM FOR SELECTING INPUTS TO A BASIN SCALE MODEL
    ARNOLD, JG
    SAMMONS, NB
    WATER RESOURCES BULLETIN, 1988, 24 (04): : 749 - 759
  • [38] A Structural Equation Model of Student's Priority for Selecting eLearning Tools
    Kalema, Billy
    Olugbara, Oludayo
    Kekwaletswe, Ray
    PROCEEDINGS OF THE 6TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON E-LEARNING, 2011, : 458 - 467
  • [39] SELECTING OPTIMAL STATISTICAL TOOLS
    BIRNBAUM, D
    INFECTION CONTROL AND HOSPITAL EPIDEMIOLOGY, 1993, 14 (12) : 730 - 733
  • [40] Clinical Decision Support Tools for Selecting Interventions for Patients with Disabling Musculoskeletal Disorders: A Scoping Review
    Douglas P. Gross
    Susan Armijo-Olivo
    William S. Shaw
    Kelly Williams-Whitt
    Nicola T. Shaw
    Jan Hartvigsen
    Ziling Qin
    Christine Ha
    Linda J. Woodhouse
    Ivan A. Steenstra
    Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, 2016, 26 : 286 - 318