IJGM Formatting guidelines
Sample document placed in page 8 for your reference
JOURNAL INFO
Journal information to be placed at the top of the first page with the below
information. Volume Number, Issue number, Year, Article id, Issue link and Pages
will vary depending upon the Volume, Issue and Article. All the information will be
in Times Now Roman 11 pt, Journal name will be in bold
International Journal of Graphics and Multimedia (IJGM)
Volume 6, Issue 6, Jun 2015, pp. 01-08, Article ID: IJGM_06_06_001
Available online at
http://www.iaeme.com/IJGM/issues.asp?JTypeIJGM&VType=6&IType=6
ISSN Print: 0976-6367 and ISSN Online: 0976–6375
© IAEME Publication
_____________________________________________________________________
ARTICLE TITLE
Article title will be placed beneath the journal info, with All caps, Times New Roman
20, before 24 pt with center alignment
ARTICLE TITLE
_____________________________________________________________________
AUTHOR INFORMATION
If the authors has same affiliation, the number of authors should be separated by
comma and their affiliation to be placed beneath the author. If the affiliations are vary,
each other to be captured as separate author information. Aff1 will contain department
and Aff2 to be contained University, City, State and Country. Author has before 12 pt,
Aff1 has 3 pt and Aff2 has 0 pt
Author1
B. J. Agarwal
Aff1
Department of Textile Chemistry
Aff2
Faculty of Technology and Engineering
The Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda, Vadodara
Author2
Aff1
Aff2
Author1, Author2 and Author3 (if two or more authors has same affiliation)
Aff1
Aff2
_____________________________________________________________________
http://www.iaeme.com/IJGM/index.asp
1
editor@iaeme.com
Author Name
ABSTRACT INFORMATION
Abstract head will be captured as All caps Times New Roman 12 pt bold, left and
right indentation will be 0.25 and before 18 pt. Abstract text will be captured as 12 pt
italic (if partial italic that should be captured as roman), right and left indentation 0.25
and first line indentation 0.25 and before 3 pt.
ABSTRACT
Abstract Text Abstract Text Abstract Text Abstract Text Abstract Text
Abstract Text Abstract Text Abstract Text Abstract Text Abstract Text Abstract
Text Abstract Text Abstract Text Abstract Text Abstract Text Abstract Text
Abstract Text Abstract Text Abstract Text Abstract Text Abstract Text Abstract
Text Abstract Text Abstract Text Abstract Text Abstract Text Abstract Text
Abstract Text.
_____________________________________________________________________
KEYWORD INFORMATION
Keyword head to be captured as bold in Times New Roman 12 pt, before 6 pt.
Keyword text to be captured as Times New Roman 12, each keyword to be
separated by comma.
Keyword head: Keyword text, Keyword text, Keyword text and Keyword
text.
_____________________________________________________________________
CITE THIS ARTICLE INFORMATION
Cite This Article head will be in Upper Lower Case (Title Case), bold, Times New
Roman 12 pt, Before 6 pt. Cite this article text will be Times New Roman 12 pt,
Before 6 pt. It describes the current article information.
Cite this Article: Ramana, B. V. and Dr. Narasimha, G. Software Metric
Trends and Evolution. International Journal of Computer Engineering and
Technology, 6(6), 2015, pp. 01-08.
http://www.iaeme.com/IJGM/issues.asp?JTypeIJGM&VType=6&IType=6
_____________________________________________________________________
HEADING INFORMATION
We will call Heading 1 as Ahead, Heading 2 as BHead and Heading 3 as CHead.
Ahead will contains Introduction, Conclusion and first level Headings. Ahead will be
14 point bold, All caps, Times New Roman 14 pt, before 12 pt and after 3 pt.
B head will contains Second level Heading with numbered 1.1. and 2.1. Times
New Roman 13 pt bold, Title case, Before 12 pt and after 3 pt. Bhead1 is the second
level heading which comes immediately after the Ahead. So the top space will be
reduced for this heading. All the properties will be same as Bhead except top space
before 3 pt.
C head will contains Third level Heading with numbered 1.1.1 and 2.1.1 Times
New Roman 12 pt bold italics, Title case, Before 12 pt and after 3 pt. Chead1 is the
third level heading which comes immediately after the Bhead. So the top space will
http://www.iaeme.com/IJGM/index.asp
2
editor@iaeme.com
Article Title
be reduced for this heading. All the properties will be same as Chead except top space
before 3 pt.
A HEAD
1. INTRODUCTION (A HEAD)
B Head
2.1. Materials
B Head1
2. MATERIALS & EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES [AHEAD]
2.1. Materials [Bhead1]
CHead
2.2.2. Preparation of Glycerol-1,3-dichlorohydrin
CHead1
2.2. Methods [B Head]
2.2.1 Polymer preparation [Chead1]
_____________________________________________________________________
PARAGRAPH INFORMATION
The immediate paragraph of the header level will called as paragraph with no indent.
It will be in Times New Roman 12 pt, top space 3 pt, left and right indentation will be
0 pt.
Paragraph indent is the second, third and continuous paragraphs of the particular
header. It will be in Times New Roman 12 pt, top space 3 pt, left and right indentation
will be 0 pt and first line indentation will be 0.25.
Paragraph with no indent
Paranoindent Paranoindent Paranoindent Paranoindent Paranoindent Paranoindent
Paranoindent Paranoindent Paranoindent Paranoindent Paranoindent Paranoindent
Paranoindent
Paragraph indent
Paraind Paraind Paraind Paraind Paraind Paraind Paraind Paraind Paraind Paraind
Paraind Paraind Paraind Paraind Paraind Paraind Paraind Paraind Paraind Paraind
Paraind Paraind Paraind Paraind Paraind Paraind Paraind Paraind Paraind
If the paragraphs will start immediately after the Figures, Tables and Equation the
top space will be increased for this. Before 9 pt and after 3 pt. It will be Paranoindent1
and
Paranoindent1 Paranoindent1
Paranoindent1 Paranoindent1
Paranoindent1 Paranoindent1
Paranoindent1
Paranoindent1
http://www.iaeme.com/IJGM/index.asp
3
Paranoindent1
Paranoindent1
Paranoindent1
Paranoindent1
editor@iaeme.com
Author Name
Paraindent1 Paraindent1 Paraindent1 Paraindent1 Paraindent1 Paraindent1
Paraindent1 Paraindent1 Paraindent1 Paraindent1 Paraindent1 Paraindent1
Paraindent1 Paraindent1 Paraindent1 Paraindent1 Paraindent1 Paraindent1
Paraindent1 Paraindent1
_____________________________________________________________________
EXTRACT INFORMATION
This describes the extract information. Extract will be Times New Roman 11 pt, left
and right indentation will be 0.25. Top will be 6 pt and bottom will be 3 pt. If there
are two or more paragraphs, first paragraph first line will be indented to 0.25.
Extract
Extract Extract Extract Extract Extract Extract Extract Extract Extract Extract Extract
Extract Extract Extract Extract Extract Extract Extract Extract Extract Extract Extract
Extract Extract Extract Extract Extract Extract Extract Extract Extract Extract Extract
Extract
Extract1
Extract1 Extract1 Extract1 Extract1 Extract1 Extract1 Extract1 Extract1 Extract1
Extract1 Extract1 Extract1 Extract1 Extract1 Extract1 Extract1 Extract1 Extract1
Extract1 Extract1 Extract1
_________________________________________________________________
EQUATION INFORMATION
Equation will be keyed in Mathtype or Latest edition of Equation Editor application. Equation
to be 11 pt. Before 6 pt and after 3 pt and flush right. Equation number to be captured in
Math type not as text. Unnumbered equations to be captured as center alignment.
Equation Number
𝒙=
𝟏
𝟐
(𝟏)
Equation Un-number
𝒙=
𝟏
𝟐
___________________________________________________________________________
TABLE INFORMATION
The Table caption to be captured as Times New Roman 11 pt, center alignment, Before 12 pt
and after 6 pt. The text Table and Number to be captured as bold and will be placed before the
table. Table column head to be captured as center alignment, bold, Times New Roman 11 pt,
before and after 2 pt. Table text to be captured in left alignment, Times New Roman 11 pt,
before 2 pt. Table note to be captured beneath the table with left alignment, Times New
Roman 11 pt, before 3pt and after 2 pt.
Table caption
Table Column Head
Table text
Table note
Note: Note text Note text Note text Note text Note text Note text Note text Note text Note
text Note text Note text Note text.
http://www.iaeme.com/IJGM/index.asp
4
editor@iaeme.com
Article Title
Table 1 Reactive dyes used with their reactive systems and Colour Index numbers
Table 1 Historical tsunami that affected the western coast of India
NO
Year
Longitude °E)
Moment
Magnitude
Latitude °N)
/Location
1
326BC
2
1008
67.30
24.00
a
a
60.00
25.00
52.3b
of Loss
of Life
Earthquake
?
Earthquake
1000*
27.7b
3
1524
Gulf of Cambay
4
Rann of Kutch
6
1819
1883
Krakatau
1845
7
1945
63.00
8
2007
9
2013
5
Tsunami Source
Earthquake
7.8
Krakatau
Earthquake
>2000*
Volcanic
Rann of Kutch
7.0
Earthquake
24.50
8.1
Earthquake
101.36
-4.43
8.4
Earthquake
62.26
25.18
7.7
Earthquake
4000*
Volcanic
a
Rastogi and Jaiswal (2006) [41]
Ambraseys and Melville (1982)
___________________________________________________________________________
b
FIGURE INFORMATION
The Figure caption to be captured as Times New Roman 11 pt, center alignment, Before 12 pt
and after 6 pt. The text Table and Number to be captured as bold and will be placed before the
table.
Figure
Figure Caption
Figure 1. Typical induction motor drive
___________________________________________________________________________
http://www.iaeme.com/IJGM/index.asp
5
editor@iaeme.com
Author Name
REFERENCE INFORMATION
Author name to be captured as surname, given name format. Volume number to be captured
as bold, issue number to be captured in brackets, before page number pp. to be added. Journal
title to be captured as italic. For first reference before will be 12 pt and other reference before
will be 3 pt, left 0.25, hanging 0.5 and tab 0.75. Please find below the examples.
REFERENCES
All references to be cited in the text in []. For example [1]
Journal Articles:
[1]
[2]
[3]
Hebeish, A. and El-Rafie, M. H. American Dyestuff Reporter, 79(7), 1990, pp.
34.
Maganioti, A. E., Chrissanthi, H. D., Charalabos, P. C., Andreas, R. D., George,
P.N. and Christos, C. N. Cointegration of Event-Related Potential (ERP) Signals
in Experiments with Different Electromagnetic Field (EMF) Conditions. Health,
2, 2010, pp. 400-406.
Bootorabi, F., Haapasalo, J., Smith, E., Haapasalo, H. and Parkkila, S. Carbonic
Anhydrase VII—A Potential Prognostic Marker in Gliomas. Health, 3, 2011, pp.
6-12.
E-Journal Articles:
[4]
Bharti, V.K. and Srivastava, R.S. Protective Role of Buffalo Pineal Proteins on
Arsenic-Induced Oxidative Stress in Blood and Kidney of Rats. Health, 1, 2009,
pp.
167-172.
http://www.scirp.org/fileOperation/downLoad.aspx?path=Health20090100017_9
7188589.pdf&type=journal
Books:
[5]
Billmeyer, F. W. Jr. and Saltzman M. Principles of Colour Technology, 2nd
Edition. New York : John Wiley & Sons, 1981, pp. 140.
Edited Book:
[6]
Prasad, A. S. Clinical and Biochemical Spectrum of Zinc Deficiency in Human
Subjects. In: Prasad, A. S., ed., Clinical, Biochemical and Nutritional Aspects of
Trace Elements. New York : Alan R. Liss, Inc., 1982 pp. 5-15.
Conference Proceedings:
[7]
Clare, L., Pottie, G. and Agre, J. Self-Organizing Distributed Sensor Networks.
Proceedings SPIE Conference Unattended Ground Sensor Technologies and
Applications, Orlando, 3713, 1999 pp. 229-237.
Thesis:
[8]
Heinzelman, W. Application-Specific Protocol Architectures for Wireless
Networks. Ph.D. Dissertation, Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of
Technology, 2000.
Internet:
[9]
Honeycutt,
L.
Communication
and
http://dcr.rpi.edu/commdesign/class1.html
Design
Course,
1998.
_____________________________________________________________________
http://www.iaeme.com/IJGM/index.asp
6
editor@iaeme.com
Article Title
FOOTER INFORMATION
Times New Roman 11 pt, IJGM web page and editor email and page number. Please
refer the footer.
___________________________________________________
HEADER INFORMATION
Times New Roman 11 pt, Author in the even page and Article title in odd page. No
information needed for first page.
_____________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________
GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS:
1. All the units to be given space before it. For example 12 V.
2. If the Figures and Tables are cross-referred inside the text, then it should be
captured as Figure 1 and Table.
3. All the superscript and subscript text to be captured in superscript and subscript, not
raised and lowered.
4. All the text to be captured in automatic color.
5. All the paragraphs in the Journal to be in single line spacing.
6. Please provide Table caption and Figure caption for all the Figures and Tables.
7. Please use hyphen, ndash and mdash appropriately.
8. If possible capture the equations in Mathtype or Equation Editor. Do not capture it
as image.
9. Please provide space between two initial. For Example V. D. Patel.
http://www.iaeme.com/IJGM/index.asp
7
editor@iaeme.com
Author Name
International Journal of Graphics and Multimedia (IJGM)
Volume 6, Issue 6, Jun 2015, pp. 01-08, Article ID: IJGM_06_06_001
Available online at
http://www.iaeme.com/IJGM/issues.asp?JTypeIJGM&VType=6&IType=6
ISSN Print: 0976-6367 and ISSN Online: 0976–6375
© IAEME Publication
_____________________________________________________________________
SOFTWARE METRIC TRENDS AND
EVOLUTION
B. Venkata Ramana
Research Scholar, Dept. of CSE,
JNTU College of Engineering, Hyderabad, Telangana State.
Dr. G. Narasimha
Department of Computer Science Engineering, JNTUH College of Engineering,
Nachupally, Karimnagar, Telangana State
ABSTRACT
Definition  Software Engineering encompasses a process, methods for
managing and engineering software and tools. The role of software has
undergone significant change over the past half century. From card readers to
scanner, from simple equation to artificial intelligence, kilobytes to terabytes,
CPU performance from 1 MHz to 6 GHz, 8 bit to 128 bit operating systems.
The evolution happened in terms of space, complexity, quality and ease.
Legacy applications are attributed with poor quality later with modern
applications it’s eradicated. In fact the need for the evolution may even
become obvious even before the new system is deployed. With evolving
software, the metrics also evolved to measure the quality, not just in terms of
documentation but in availability, reliability and robustness of the
applications. Process and product measures have been defined to measure the
quality of the engineered/developed product. The quality models and
industrial standards – Six Sigma, SEI CMMI, ITIL, ISO, PMBOK, Prince2 and
other, have changed the estate of software process in the IT world. Each of
these help in improving the software development process. In this paper we
analyze the metric evolution and the impact it has on software industry. Agile
modeling is the current customer sought after model where the metrics are
still evolving to suit the customer and market needs.
Key words: Software Metrics, Software Evolution, Quality Standards, Metrics
Trend, Object Oriented Metrics and Agile process.
Cite this Article: Ramana, B. V. and Dr. Narasimha, G. Software Metric
Trends and Evolution. International Journal of Computer Engineering and
Technology, 6(6), 2015, pp. 01-08.
http://www.iaeme.com/IJGM/issues.asp?JTypeIJGM&VType=6&IType=6
_____________________________________________________________________
http://www.iaeme.com/IJGM/index.asp
8
editor@iaeme.com
Article Title
1. INTRODUCTION
The concept of software quality and the efforts to understand the measurable
quantities and measure them in terms of quality factors and quality criteria. A metric
is a quantitative measure of degree to which a system, component or process
possesses a given attribute. Metrics are useful for cost and schedule future projects, to
establish productivity trend over time, improve software quality, anticipate and reduce
future maintenance needs. Metrics are generally classified under Products, Processes
and resources. Goodman defines software metrics as [1]: “The continuous application
of measurement- based techniques to the software development process and its
products to supply meaningful and timely management information, together with the
use of those techniques to improve that process and its products”. The culture of
Organization also serves as a key differentiator between successful ones and the
laggards. Again when teams are considered more important than individuals then it’s
the system that drive the functions and individuals absence and indispensability is
ruled out. In this paper, the focus is on the metric trends, the process models and the
quality improvements and the quality standards to meet the increasing demand.
2. METRIC TRENDS
Software process is more than a framework of tasks which is needed to build a high
quality products. The process refines itself to software engineering once it starts using
the technical methods and automation tools. IEEE defines, a process as “a sequence of
steps performed for a given purpose” [2]. Software development life cycle SDLC
models, describe the software process structures. Process metrics are defined for
SDLCs, which include the activities, methods, and standards to use. The use of
software process metrics has enabled some organizations to much more effectively
understand and control their software development process [3]. Process metrics can be
categorized based on the stages in SDLC. These metrics include – feasibility metrics,
requirements metrics, design metrics, code related metrics, testing metrics. All these
are used by management to derive new metrics to check the health of the project.
2.1. Feasibility and Requirement Metrics
Feasibility studies are conducted to understand if the project goal can be
accomplished. There can be various feasibility studies - Technical, Economic, Legal,
Operational and Scheduling. Organization do check for these metrics while bidding
for projects. These have become a new set of metric by marketing and finance teams
before they bid for a project. These metrics include



IRR - Internal Rate of Return, > 10%, the higher the better.
NPV –Net Present Value. > 0, the higher the better
ROI – Return on Investment. Generally >12%
Requirement engineering process starts with feasibility study, elicitation and analysis,
validation and management. The cost of fixing an error early is easy than fixing at
later stages in SDLC. The metrics include




Size metrics – LOC of FPP as software evolved, Use Cases are used.
Traceability metrics
Completeness metrics
Volatility metrics
2.2. Design Metrics
http://www.iaeme.com/IJGM/index.asp
9
editor@iaeme.com
Author Name
Design metrics are part of the product metrics, which are collected during the design
phase in the SDLC. With the new software evolving new design metrics are evolving
depending on the processes and tools used to design the software product. These
metrics include [4]



Structural complexity
Data complexity
System complexity
With the advent of Object Oriented modeling, new metrics evolved. Below are few,
which are categorized based on the OO paradigm.




Chidamber & Kemerer [5] – Viewpoints
Information Hiding
Inheritance
Polymorphism
The next trend in evolution is COTS – Commercial-of-the-shelf, resulted in the
next set of metrics as below. Components have been developed for reuse and finally
the COTS.



Cohesion
Coupling
Complexity like cyclomatic complexity.
2.3. Size Related Metrics
The implementation, referred generally as coding, is the next step where the design is
put forth for development. These include conventional size oriented metrics – KLOC –
Kilo Lines Of Code, FP – Function Point. These were the units (KLOC, FP) to measure
the complexity of code. In 1970s KLOC is used to measure the size of the system and
as an anchor to estimate cost and schedule of the application. Typical metrics are below



Errors/KLOC or Man Months/KLOC
Defects/KLOC
Cost/KLOC
Function Pont metric in 1980s was later proposed to effectively measure the
functionality being delivered and used for cost and schedule estimation. The technique
of functional modelling is used to model the relationship between the transactions and
the complete application. The FP is measured using five components – External Inputs,
External Outputs, External Inquiry, Internal Logical Files and External Interface Files.
Understanding the software size is the key to understanding both productivity and
quality. Few FP metrics include FP/work month, Defects per FP.
The Object Oriented related metrics are addressed in the subsequent section IV.A.
There are other metrics that check the program complexity, purity ratio, McCabe’s
Complexity (control flow representation) measures, McClure Complexity and many
more. These measure the control flow of the program/application.
2.4. Testing Metrics
Testing gets compromised due to delay in the initial phases and the duration gets is
reduced to meet marketing needs. Waterfall model symptoms include late shoe-
http://www.iaeme.com/IJGM/index.asp
10
editor@iaeme.com
Article Title
horning of non-optimal fixes, with no time to redesign kind of graph, finally
delivering a very fragile, unmaintainable product with overhead costs [6]. For
improving the product quality and controlling the project, later models and
organizations have come-up with a set of test-related metrics to allow better control
and facilitate consistent improvement. These include




Unit Test cases Planned/executed/Failed
Bugs closure per unit of time
Rate of Defect injection
Defect Removal Efficiency
2.5. Team Behavioural Metrics
People, one among the resources metrics and one of the 4Ps of software management,
are the key drivers of quality. New process models (PSP, TSP) [7] evolved to improve
the quality of products by considering software engineer’s into focus.
PSP – Personal Software process, suggests methods, measures and templates
towards right track of quality (in order to change the ineffective personal process).
Later the lessons learnt in PSP are introduced in TSP – Team Software Process. TSP
being self-directed teams to direct and plan the assigned tasks effectively. In PSP, the
templates are used to measure the efficiently of self individually and improve on error
reductions. Metrics are defined by individual or team based on the model chosen to
track the quality and software development progress.
2.6. Other Metrics
Different kinds of metrics are used by management to measure the growth or change.
For example, to measure the project progress, earned value analysis is used. From
customer perspective there are different metrics like User satisfaction index, volume
of repeated business be a customer, business obtained through referrals, revenue
savings and others. Organizations use their internal metric and industry standards to
monitor the progress and maintain quality of software products.
3. PROCESS MODELS VS SOFTWARE QUALITY
Process models were evolved with the growth of software and demands of customers.
Until 1980s, waterfall model was the prominent model used for software
development. Later feedback loops were added to it, representing a step closure to
improve quality [6]. SDLC added ETVX (Entry-Task-Verification-Exit) as a measure
to improve the software quality. To meet customer needs, software organizations have
come up with a prototype model to show case feasibility and look & feel of the final
product and buy-in customer confidence. Thus resulting reduced rejections at the cost
of increased scrap and time delays. The proto type is iterative and customer centric
model.
Later spiral model [8] project type (software process model) showed a paradigm
shift in the software quality. The approach advocates prevention by taking well
defined scope and completing the task and later taking the next set of functions to be
developed on the just developed product. This model reduced uncertainty resulting
better quality product.
In V Model, testing is suggested in concurrent to the phases of the SDLC, thus
defining the metrics for each phase and improving quality.
http://www.iaeme.com/IJGM/index.asp
11
editor@iaeme.com
Author Name
Unified Process Model revolutionized the thinking of architects and defined
multiple measurable metrics and is still evolving. This model attempts to draw best
features and characteristics of conventional software models. The Object Orient
process resulted as a brainchild of Unified Process Model with defined metrics
measured.
Component Based Development Model defined metrics related to component
cohesion and coupling. Agile Modeling [9] is a practice-based methodology for
effective modeling and documentation of software-based systems. This model was
developed to facilitate the rapid development of operational software. This is the
customer and industry driven model currently. This lead to explore new measurable
metrics which changed the face of software industry and quality.
The impact of process models on various factors is depicted in the Figure 1 [10].
As the Figure indicates, Quality of Customer, Quality of Design factors are increased
and the Delivery Time and Bureaucracy factors is decreased in Agile Model.
Figure 1 Impact of Process Models on Various Factors
These process models are mostly organizations/customer driven and these shown
some improvement in quality, if not significant.
Software Quality can be viewed in five perspectives [11]. These are





Transcendental View
User View
Manufacturing View
Product View
Value Base View
4. OBJECT ORIENTED AND AGILE MODELS
Object oriented methodology and agile methodology are the evolutions of 21st
century. Object oriented methods and analysis gained widespread software
engineering community in early 1990s. These two have changed the face of design
and implementation.
4.1. Object Oriented Metrics
Class is the fundamental unit of an object oriented systems. The OO metrics are
defined at design, analysis and operational level to indicate the quantitative and
qualitative measures for OO systems.
http://www.iaeme.com/IJGM/index.asp
12
editor@iaeme.com
Article Title
Metrics are defined to measure the characteristics of object models. MOOD
Metrics suite [13] is used to measure the inheritance mechanism using the Method
Inheritance Factor (MIF) and Attribute Inheritance Factor (AIF) metrics. The suite
also defines the coupling between the classes by the Coupling Factor (CF). As CF
increases complexity of the system increases and invariably the maintainability will
suffer. Polymorphism Factor (PF) metric from measures the polymorphic behaviour
of classes taken together.
The general metrics [14] is include Number of scenario scripts, number of key
classes, number of support classes, number of subsystems and Average number of
support classes per key class.
Various metrics are proposed to measure the properties of the OO systems. Few
more were proposed to check the complexity and maintainability of the applications.
Adaptability, robustness are the key quality features of maintenance projects [12].
4.2. Agile Metrics
Modern software development is driven by the need to be agile. Agile was first
introduced in 2001, by Agile Alliance [9]. This alliance defined 12 principles to
follow the agile methodology. The overall agile framework is around the iterative and
incremental processes and the Figure 2 depicts the same [15].
Agility implies dynamism, context based changes and growth. This model is
another step bringing designer’s quality closure to customer’s quality view.
Figure 2 The Agile Framework
A number of approaches are defined to quantify agility. Agility Index
Measurements measures on five dimensions (duration, risk, novelty, effort and
interaction). Another study using fuzzy mathematics suggests that project velocity can
be used a metric for agility.
Below are few metrics measures used by project management groups to check the
progress of projects.


Sprint Goal success rate
Defects
http://www.iaeme.com/IJGM/index.asp
13
editor@iaeme.com
Author Name




Total Project Duration
Time to Market
Total project cost
Team members turnover
Most organizations are targeting to understand the key factors and derive new
metrics to suit their needs while their development is traditional centric.
5. INDUSTRIAL QUALITY STANDARDS
In view of the revolutionary changes in software, process should also scale up to suite
the type and size of the project. Different quality and industrial standards notably
CMMI, PMBOK Guide, ITIL and PRINCE2 recommend different guidelines and
standards to enable achieving desired outcome from projects. Software organizations
use process improvement to achieve their goals. One of the objectives is to improve
the quality of the product. This can be achieved by reducing errors, improving good
working environment, adopting best practices and following industrial quality
standards.
6. CONCLUSION
Metrics are key to measure, without measuring, we cannot complete projects
successfully and measure the quality of the deliverable. Metrics are generated by
collecting and assimilating related measures over a period of time across similar
processes or applications. Software metrics evolved with the changing nature of
software. Metrics are used as yardstick to measure progress and quality of the
products developed. This paper analyze various process flows, the conventional, and
evolutionary and object models and also how metrics changes as per industry needs.
As in 1970s and 1980s, the practitioners developed measures to suit the needs and
were able to show successful outcomes. Objected oriented metrics were introduced in
the recent past to assist the development and monitor the SDLC of a software product.
Practitioners are still using conventional metrics for Agile Methodology processes.
Extreme Programming (XP) Development and Scrum Development follow the Agile
Methodologies. New metrics are evolving to suit Agile Model, but the practitioners
are still using the conventional metrics in measuring the progress and quality, thus
resulting a gap to fill.
REFERENCES
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
Goodman, P. Practical Implementation of Software Metrics. London: McGraw
Hill, 1993.
IEEE Std 610.12-1990: IEEE standard glossary of software engineering
terminology, 1990
Pfleeger, S. L. and McGowan, C. L. Software Metrics in a Process Maturity
Framework. Journal of Systems and Software, July, 1990, pp. 255–261.
Card, D. N. and Glass, R. L. Measuring Software Design Quality. Prentice Hall,
1990.
Chidamber, S. R. and Kemerer, C. F. A Metrics suite for Object Oriented design.
M. I. T. Sloan School of Management, 1993 pp. E53–315.
Royce, W. Software Project Management, A Unified Framework. Addison
Wesley. Chap 1 – Conventional Software Management, 1998.
http://www.iaeme.com/IJGM/index.asp
14
editor@iaeme.com
Article Title
[7]
[8]
[9]
[10]
[11]
[12]
[13]
[14]
[15]
Humphrey, W. Introduction to Personal Software Process. Addison-Wesley,
1997.
Boehm, B. A Spiral Model for Software Development and Enhancement.
Computer, 21(5), May 1988, pp. 61–72.
Ambler,
S.
“What
is
Agile
Modeling?”
2002,
http://www.agilemodeling.com/index.htm.
Malik, K. and Choudhary, P. Software Quality Practitioner’s Approach. Tata
McGraw-Hill, 2008, pp. 32.
Kitchenham, B. and Pfleeger, S. L. Software Quality: The Elusive Target. IEEE
Software, January 1996, pp. 12–21.
Mr. Manivannan, S. and Dr. Balasubramanian, S. Software Metric Analysis
Methods for Product Development / Maintenance Projects. International Journal
of Graphics and Multimedia (IJGM), 1(1), 2010, pp. 18–33.
Harrison, R., Counsell, S. J. and Nithi, R. V. An Evolution of the MOOD Set of
Oject Oriented Software Metrics. IEEE Trans. Software Engineering, SE-24(6),
June 1998, pp. 491–496.
Lorenz, M. and Kidd, J. Object Oriented Software Metrics. Prentice-Hall, 1994.
http://www.pathfindersolns.com/resources/industry-glossary/agile-softwaredevelopment/
http://www.iaeme.com/IJGM/index.asp
15
editor@iaeme.com