Knowledge acquisition in information technology and software engineering towards excellence of information systems based on the standardisation platform

    Knowledge acquisition in information technology and software engineering towards excellence of information systems based on the standardisation platform ˇ Zivadin Mici´c, Marija Blagojevi´c PII: DOI: Reference:

S0920-5489(15)00102-6 doi: 10.1016/j.csi.2015.09.005 CSI 3063

To appear in:

Computer Standards & Interfaces

Received date: Revised date: Accepted date:

26 January 2014 17 July 2015 9 September 2015

ˇ Please cite this article as: Zivadin Mici´c, Marija Blagojevi´c, Knowledge acquisition in information technology and software engineering towards excellence of information systems based on the standardisation platform, Computer Standards & Interfaces (2015), doi: 10.1016/j.csi.2015.09.005

This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT - Title: KNOWLEDGE ACQUISITION IN INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND SOFTWARE ENGINEERING TOWARDS EXCELLENCE OF INFORMATION SYSTEMS BASED ON THE STANDARDISATION PLATFORM

T

- Full names of all authors:

Department of Information Technology, Faculty of Technical Sciences Cacak - University of

NU

Kragujevac, Svetog Save 65, 32000 Cacak, Serbia

SC

1

RI P

Živadin Micić1 and Marija Blagojević1

- Corresponding author's name:

MA

Živadin Micić

Department of Information Technology, Faculty of Technical Sciences Cacak - University of

ED

Kragujevac, Svetog Save 65, 32000 Cacak, Serbia • Telephone: +381 64 8526170 • Fax: +381 32 342101

PT

• Email: [email protected]

AC CE

- Suggestion for a short running title: KNOWLEDGE ACQUISITION IN IT AND SE TOWARDS EXCELLENCE OF IS - Acknowledgements:

The work presented here was supported by Ministry of Education and Science of the Republic of Serbia (Project III 44006, http://www.mi.sanu.ac.rs/projects/projects.htm#interdisciplinary)

- Article type: Research article

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT KNOWLEDGE ACQUISITION IN INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND SOFTWARE ENGINEERING TOWARDS EXCELLENCE OF INFORMATION SYSTEMS BASED ON THE STANDARDISATION PLATFORM

SC

RI P

T

Abstract: This paper presents a study of the collective knowledge in information technology (IT) and the isolated segment of the comparative analyses of innovative trends in the global and local standardisation of the roads of knowledge in the subfields of software engineering (SE): software development, documentation, internet applications (35.080), and languages used in IT (35.060). From statistical samples, documents (parallel roads in ISO/IEC and SRPS knowledge acquisition) in IT and the isolated areas in SE were analysed. (ISO/IEC is global standardisation platform and SRPS is local standards). The focus is on the amount of required innovation that will be necessary during the early twenties of the 21st century in the examples database of standardised units in IT and SE for the improvement of the knowledge base to the level of excellence of the information systems (IS). The goal of the study is to determine how to obtain appropriate knowledge in IT and SE to model the excellence of IS and expert systems. The contribution to the modelling of IS excellence in PDCA (Plan-Do-Check-Act) is presented in this paper. Keywords: IT; SE; knowledge acquisition; IS excellence; standardisation

AC CE

PT

ED

MA

NU

1 Introduction The paper investigates standardised collective knowledge in information technology (IT), especially in the subfields of software enginerring (SE) and (information systems) IS. IS is “An information processing system, together with associated organisational resources such as human, technical, and financial resources, that provides and distributes information” [1] (terms noted in italics are standardised). The term “collective knowledge” is defined by standardised term “knowledge source” – a source of information from which a knowledge base has been created for a specific kind of problem [2]. Sources of information for collective knowledge are the ISO/IEC standards (International Organization for Standardization (ISO) and the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC)) [3], SRPS standards (SRPS – designation of standards in Serbia) and sources of information for local knowledge [4]. Knowledge base (or K-base or KB) is abbreviated in the vocabulary [1] (01.06.18) and in [2] (28.04.06) – in IT Vocabulary – part 28th, Section 4, term 6. In the present century in IT, we have witnessed the growing problem of continuous improvement in individual knowledge in relation to evolved and standardised knowledge (partly public and collective). One aspect of the problem is knowledge acquisition, continuous improvement of the quality of the product (education services), a second is based on knowledge representation [1, 5], and a third refers to the quantity and value of the required knowledge engineering. On a more practical level, according to the International Classification of Standards (ICS) from a population of standards in all areas for ICS-1 (from 1 up to 99), they may include sub/fields such as: - The evolutions of IT standardisation to E-learning (ICS-3 = 35.240.99), that had not been published previously, - The evolution of studies of the SE discipline (ICS-2 = 35.080), to IS excellence, - The future trends defined in boundaries and subfields of IT, SE to IS, as a product. Today it is not a “problem” to develop IS. Manipulation of information in some integrated IS and creation of “our own” public opinion (including standardisation of design and implementation [6]) is more improtant. The research presented in this paper relates to the trend analyses of the innovation intensity of knowledge sources (KSs) [2] and the required individual knowledge. Decision-making “problems” based on IS and/or expert systems (ESs) is not completely new. An ES, is “a Knowledge-Based System – KBS, that provides solving problems in a particular domain or application area by drawing inferences from a knowledge base developed from human expertise” [2, 1] (Domain Knowledge – DK is “knowledge accumulated in a particular domain” [2]). Comparing collective with individual decision making, the first involves expert knowledge kept in store as the knowledge base to solve the “problem” in the domain of the broader collective knowledge. Expanding the applications of SE constantly extends the gap between collective and individual knowledge. The implementation of IS and SE, will make the distance between collective and individual knowledge smaller. The possibilities of applying the excellence model in making management decisions in educational institutions were demonstrated by an implemented information system (in this case, education, as an example). Historically and evolutionarily, the Japanese interpretation of the “Deming wheel” in Deming’s lectures of 1950 and 1951, led to the Plan-Do-Check-Action (PDCA) cyclic quality. This paper

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

MA

NU

SC

RI P

T

presents particularly important and significant aspects of knowledge and experience acquired by the standardised application of SE on the time dimension “t”: PtDtCtAt or (PDCA)t quality improvement spiral. The first results presented in this work, refer to top-down (ICS-2 = 35.080) and the bottom-up (ICS-2 = 35.060) analysis of collective and local knowledge and knowledge acquisition in the IT and SE sub/fields. The results are primarily based on ISO/IEC standardisation, as well as on SRPS standards for the implementation, promotion and integration of IS, and they were researched and analysed in parallel. Classification of the sub-areas of SE applications within IT and related knowledge have exceptional importance, not only for learning and knowledge management, but also for the creation of IS and ES for business decisions. According to the ICS, IT is classified in field 35, with 12 segments. The focus in this work is on the development and SE applications, according to the “collective” (international or global) ISO/IEC [3] in parallel with local SRPS standards, [4] of the ICS-2 = 35.060 and ICS-2 = 35.080 sub-areas: 35.080 – Software, Including software development, documentation, Internet applications and use, 35.060 – Languages used in information technology etc. SE (including software development, system documentation and program languages in IT) is important in modelling IS excellence in several dimensions of the software, i.e. strategic, dynamic, temporal, institutional and resource size, as the final product is based on previous design (the product in the form of service).

PT

ED

1.1. To the initial hypotheses and goals of IS excellence through the PDCA The possibility of reaching the level of collective knowledge is supposed in the starting hypothesis (by support from IT, SE and IS). The ultimate goals of this paper are the creation and continual improvement of knowledge based on standardised units of the knowledge base in SE, in order to model IS excellence. The goals are presented using important evolutionary trends in SE applications from the key results of IS improvement and with given answers to relevant questions, along with the hypothesis (assumption) that there is constant knowledge and IS acquisition in the PiDiCiAi (explanation i = ICS&ISO±SRPS/t, with time dimension “t”, where “t” represents year, month, week or day).

AC CE

Hypothesis 1. Plan(i)-phase H1 - P(i) or P(IT/t) In planning the acquisition of knowledge in IT we need significant resources. The resources plan affecting comparative criteria starts from the goals and standardised knowledge, i.e. collective, national, individual or for professional work, to the evolution of the IT profession and then to IS excellence in the improvement of the quality of SE services and solving some practical problems with developed IS. Then, further, with answers to the questions such as, who will (or can they) and how will they plan the resources on the roads of knowledge acquisition in the areas of IT/SE (standardised collective – ISO, as a part of the “social” or civilisation domain for some planned results in the local SRPS) in time dimension “t”. Hypothesis 2. Do(i)-phase H2 – D(i) or D(SE/t) Paths of knowledge acquisition in SE fields are based on global (ISO) and local (SRPS) KS: – through development activities (from learning, development of standards, knowledge acquisition – in the field of SE and IS development), – to IS modelling excellence using the standardised KB in the time (PtDtCtAt),and – the size of quantity indices (collective/ISO – local/SRPS) of publications (Iqp/i), new projects under development (Iqu/i), innovations (Iqi/i), for professional work, for improving the quality of IS. Hypothesis 3. Check(i)-phase H3 – C(i) or C(KB/t) Determining the intensity of KS innovation provides new benefits: – the possibilities of innovation intensity checking of the KB in the time dimension – analysis of the results (realised global activities in the Do(i)-phase, with innovation of standardised units of

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT the KB and concrete actions on the continuous improvement of IS and ES), building on the determinants of the critical aspects of knowledge and – the possibility of anticipating the clusters and necessary resources for updating the KB according to the trends of innovations in the subfields or segments of SE according to the obtained results (quantity indices of innovations – Iqi/i, Iqu/i, price indices, innovation value indices – Ivi/i or Ivu/i) in the PiDiCiAi methodology.

SC

RI P

T

Hypothesis 4. Act(i)-phase H4 – A(i) or A(IS±ES/t) The possibility of improving the model IS±ES&PiDiCiAi&QMk exists producting IS excellence, quality and the results of IS applications, starting from the KS, an innovated data base, to a new KB (from standardised IT to operational improvement of the integrated IS and ES used in decision making at the university) towards knowledge quality management (QMk). Index “k” refers to the QM key criteria for knowledge acquisition (where k = 1 to 12).

ED

MA

NU

Goals The aim and purpose of this work is to be of use to higher education institutions, students, faculties, management, and teachers. In addition, since user participation in the standardisation process is becoming more important [6]; the article may be useful to participants who want to develop new standards (innovations) and new degree programmes in SE applications for IS and ES excellence. The significance of this study lies in determining the period necessary for updating the knowledge base in PDCA (for SE), as well as explicitly defining the criteria which show the limiting possibilities of knowledge innovation, that require appropriate solutions – implicitly. In short, the significance of the research and the study is presented in the “highlights”.

AC CE

PT

2. Related works The aim of this section is to identify possible related works and to determine the relation between them and research, modelling, development and continuous improvement in their implementation – as shown in this paper. This is achieved through two thematic aspects: “The standardisation of knowledge acquisition in IT” (Section 2.1) and “Improving the quality of IS” (Section 2.2). Some partially related research, which does not analyse the development of the software product models (IS) and the methodology of quality improvement – PDCA – and the target path to excellence etc., gives only a partial basis for comparing the importance of some of the previously mentioned aspects of excellence (modelling of IS excellence). In practice, the vast number of papers in some way affect this work. 2.1. Standardisation of knowledge acquisition in IT Many surveys have accumulated an enormous amount of information on IT in previous years: over 1012 books per year, which is about one Exabyte of information or about 1.1 × 1012 MB (or 1.15 × 1018 bytes) [7]. This paper predominantly relies on ISO/IEC and SRPS standardisation as the academic material for reliable and objective analyses of IT innovations in the relevant period, the 21st century. According to [1], “knowledge (in artificial intelligence) [is] a collection of facts, events, beliefs, and rules, organized for systematic use”. According to [8], knowledge is a mixture of experience, values, contextual information and provides a framework to assess and contain new information and experiences. In [9] it is concluded that knowledge is often identified with the data or the information to be collected, stored and transmitted. Although boundaries between individual and collective knowledge in IT are clearly separated, it is necessary to bear in mind that, according to [10], the knowledge called “individual” is often obtained by working in groups, through collective work with the research related to standardised collective knowledge acquisition in IT (according to ISO), with reference to the growing problem of continuous improvement in individual knowledge in relation to the before-mentioned collective. The authors have seen standardisation of knowledge represented [1] in some previous works: for example in [5], [11], in the broadest sense, the term “Standardisation in history”, can be found in some works, and it is defined as a process of systematisation and implementation of technical knowledge [12]. In this paper, research standards in the areas of IT are based on the

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

NU

SC

RI P

T

data taken from the ISO/IEC [3] and SRPS websites [4]. The ISO/IEC and the SRPS aim to create valid and binding standards that can facilitate the international exchange of goods and services to promote technical cooperation between different nations. The importance and necessity of standardisation have been researched by many authors (for example, [13, 14, 15]). In this paper, the importance is reflected in the results obtained in prolonged research, as well as in the development and continuous improvement of products in the areas of SE for IS and ES. Similar research as presented in [16] established the possibility of using information technology in knowledge transfer. Unlike conducted research, where knowledge transfer occurs on a general level, in this study the knowledge relates to the quality of the information system. Simultaneously with the transfer of knowledge, the work includes the management of knowledge, as in [17] where it was determined that “knowledge management is a critical organizational capability through which IT influences firm performance”. According to [18], knowledge management is implemented through different strategies depending on the context of the use of knowledge. In accordance with [19], knowledge is seen as the basis for competitive advantage and analyses the key factors influencing knowledge transfer. In the case study presented in [20] we can see the importance of sharing knowledge and its influence on job satisfaction in the IT industry.

AC CE

PT

ED

MA

2.2. Improving the quality of IS According to [21], only a few works deal with the relationship between software flexibility and standardisation of the software development process. In [22] it is concluded that standardisation of the software development process inevitably leads to the increased quality and flexibility of the software. The importance of their work is thus confirmed. In the field of IS, the standards provide that individual elements of the system fulfil their tasks: processing, storing and transmitting the information to other elements [23]. In this paper, the standards in the areas of IT, SE and IS are the basis for knowledge acquisition, as well as for the improvements towards IS excellence. A large number of studies relate to the quality of information systems, of which numerous studies relate to information systems applied in the health, education and industrial sectors, as shown in [24, 25, 26]. A quality information system, according to [27] is measured by products and the service, and develops tools and methodologies for measuring effectiveness. The quality of the information system, in addition to the technical characteristics, significantly impacts organisational and human differences, according to [28, 29]. The authors of [28] emphasise the importance of the control and measurement of parameters relating to the quality of the information system and propose a tool for measuring quality. According to [30], each of the tools used to measure the quality of the information system requires examination by a professional information system. Bearing in mind that the quality of the information system directly affects the individual’s perceived benefits and user satisfaction, according to [31] continuous quality assurance is defined as “user’s continuance intention to consume and to provide information”. Given the increasing level of use of IS in organisations in the past two decades [32], it is necessary to continuously improve its quality. In this paper, improvement of IS is presented through an original ICS/PiDiCiAi model (Section 4.4 – Modelling of IS excellence). According to [33, 34, 35, 36, 37], PDCA is a good technique for continuous improvement, but also for solving problems and obtaining positive results in the long term. 2.2.1 Software life cycle evolutionary model in the (PDCA)1 According to the software life cycle evolutionary model (ISO / IEC TR 15271: 2007, [38]), in the time “t” or (PDCA)t (or (PDCA)1, according to Figure 1, Section 3), the current requirements for quality IS are the relevant standards published before 2010 (in PDCA)2010-before. – Plan-phase-1/ P2010-before for the application of ISO to computer software 39–44; Requirements – phase (R), from modelling and requirements 39, to risk management 43 and planning and management 44; – Do-phase-1/ D2010-before software and systems life cycle processes 45–48; Development – phase (D), from system life-cycle processes 45, software life-cycle processes 46, system and software integrity levels 47, to Systems and software Quality Requirements and Evaluation (SQuaRE) 48; – Check-phase-1/ C2010-before software product evaluation 49–53, process assessment 54– 60, and conformity assessment 61–63; Coding/Testing – phase (C/T), for software product

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

SC

RI P

T

evaluation, process assessment and conformity assessment, from software product evaluation, general 49, for developers 50, for acquirers 51, for evaluators 52, and documentation of evaluation modules 53; to process assessment: concepts 54; performing an assessment, 55; guidance on performing an assessment, 56; guidance on use for process improvement and process capability determination, 57; an exemplar process assessment model, 58; an exemplar system life-cycle process assessment model, 59; assessment of organisational maturity, 60; to supplier’s declaration of conformity: general requirements, 61, supporting documentation, 62, and quality requirements and testing, 63; – Act-phase-1/ A2010-before product quality 64–68 and software user documentation 69–71; Install and Accepting Support (I/AS) – phase, quality software engineering model and metrics (external metrics, internal metrics, quality in use metrics), includes knowledge sources in standards for: product quality 64, quality model 65, external metrics, 66, internal metrics, 67, quality in use metrics, 68; software user documentation process 69, requirements for testers and reviewers of user documentation 70, requirements for designers and developers of user documentation 71.

AC CE

PT

ED

MA

NU

2.2.2 Software life cycle model (R – D – T/C – I/AS) 2 in the (PDCA)2 Figure 1 (Section 3) presents the key stages (R – D – T/C – I/AS or Requirements – Development –Coding/Testing – Install and Accepting Support) in correlation with the PDCA methodology and concept of this work. With regard to software development (improving the quality of IS according to the model: Rt – D – C/T – I/AS), the study relies on the global (ISO) and local (SRPS) standards in PDCA. At the time “t + 1” or (PDCA) t + 1 (or (PDCA)2, in Figure 1, Section 3), the current quality requirements are according to the global IS (ISO) and local (SRPS) standards published after 2010 (in PDCA)2010-after: – Plan-phase-2/ P2010-after or R2 for Top-Down-stage_2 for SQuaRE – Quality Management division (ISO/IEC 2500n [72,73), Quality Model division (ISO/IEC 2501n [74–76]), Quality Requirements division (ISO/IEC 2503n [77]), systems and software engineering 78; planning of software includes knowledge sources in standards for SQuaRE: Guide to SQuaRE 72, planning and management 73, system and software quality models 74, IT service quality model 75, data quality model 76, quality requirements 77 and life-cycle management: software development planning 78. – Do-phase-2/ D2010-after or D2–phase_2, Metamodel for development methodologies 79, Quality Measurement division (ISO/IEC 2502n, Systems and software assurance [80–83], SQuaRE for quality measurement 84–86), software and systems engineering – reference model for product line 87–89; systems and software engineering includes knowledge sources in standards for: metamodel for development methodologies 79, systems and software assurance: concepts and vocabulary 80, assurance case 81, system integrity levels 82, assurance in the life cycle 83, reference model for product line engineering and management 84, tools and methods for product line requirements engineering 85, tools and methods for product line technical management, 86, SQuaRE for quality measurement: quality measure elements 87, measurement of system and software product quality 88, measurement of data quality 89. – Check-phase-2/ C2010-after or (C/T)2–phase_2, Software and systems engineering – Quality Evaluation division (ISO/IEC 2504n [90–92]), software testing [93–97]; systems and software engineering (quality evaluation and software testing), includes knowledge sources in standards for: SQuaRE, evaluation process 90, evaluation guide for developers; acquirers and independent evaluators 91, evaluation module for recoverability 92, software testing: concepts and definitions 93, test processes 94; test documentation 95; test techniques 96; keyword-driven testing 97. – Act-phase-2/ A2010-after or (I/AS)2–phase_2, Extension division (ISO/IEC 25050 – ISO/IEC 25099 [98–103]), ISO/IEC/IEEE 265xn for systems and software engineering – requirements for managers of user documentation [104–107], software engineering and applications [108]; extension division, includes knowledge sources in standards for: SQuaRE – requirements for quality of ready to use software product (RUSP) and instructions for testing 98, common industry format (CIF) for usability: general framework for usability-related information 99, CIF for usability test reports 100, CIF for usability: context of use description 101, CIF for usability: user needs

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

RI P

T

report 102; CIF for usability – evaluation report 103, requirements for managers of user documentation 104, requirements for acquirers and suppliers of user documentation 105, developing user documentation in an agile environment 106, content management for product life cycle; user and service management documentation 107, guidelines for the application of ISO 9001 to computer software 108. In [9] it was concluded that practical knowledge is very important in achieving quality software as a product. Since practical knowledge can be subsumed under the category of individual and collective knowledge, knowledge as a category has been introduced as one of the key factors in achieving IS excellence. As with [9], it can be concluded that the quality of IS, as well as the software, is a complex issue with particular emphasis on knowledge, which is a prerequisite for improvement towards excellence.

SC

3. Methodology and framework

NU

The study applied the PDCA methodology, statistical methodology, and deductive–inductive methods of deduction to predict events and resource needs in the future, within IS studies, and inductive reasoning methods were used to predict the future development of and innovation in the pragmatic framework.

3.1. PDCA and framework

AC CE

PT

ED

MA

Methodologically, statistical indices were formed for the comparison of the ISO and SRPS relations in the field of IT (ICS-1 = 35) and the subfields of SE (ICS-2 = 35.080 and ICS-2 = 35.060) with other fields of human endeavour, including: quantity indices (Iq) and value index (Iv). Quantity indices (Iq), defined and determined for both ISO and SRPS, refer to KS for the whole previous calendar year: samples (Iqs or KS), published standards (Iqp), standards under development (Iqu), standards withdrawn from use (Iqw), deleted projects (Iqd), innovations in various stages of development Iit (Iid, Iiw, Iim, Iiy, where “iy” is related to the quantity year innovation index ≈ Iqi/year and with index ≈ Iqu/year [7]). Value indices (Iv) follow quantity indices with results that are aggregated by trend for most of the subfields. Graphs consist of two parts, (a) and (b): (a) time aspects for the whole research period by year of publication, ΣIv/year; (b) regression trend lines (exponential, linear, logarithmic and polynomial), according to the data from the previous years (including 2013 for new Plan/2014) and defined regression equations yi/ICS, Ivi/year/P (P being the Plan-phases in PDCA – general: P1, P2, P3 to Pn, or exactly: P11, P12, P13, P14 where P signifies the year, and year = 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, or exactly, through the research period: year, month, week or day). Value indices of innovated standards, for IT, Ivin/35/year/P(Iit) are expressed in CHF (Swiss currency), whereby 1 CHF = 1.11 U.S. dollars and 1 CHF ≈ 100 RSD (Serbian currency, SRPS). Periodic studies have been repeated in previous years of the 21st century: for the beginning/end of the year, and 31st December / 1st January. Knowledge acquisition pathways and statistical analyses of the samples (Iqs/ICS/ISO±SRPS/year, [3] and [4]), which were separated in January (during prior years of the century), are presented in the SE subfields: – “Top Down” is the flow of statistical sampling in IT from ISO/IEC and SRPS documents, for IS projects (Fig. 1 – terminology for design), as well as research; the initial statistical sample comprised Iqs/ICS/ISO±SRPS/year documents on 1st January 20xy (xy = 01, 02 to 14),

*** “Top” (or the Plan-phase, relationship with Hypothesis 1) the flow of statistical sampling in IT (Iqs for ICS-1 = 35), from ISO/IEC and SRPS documents, as well as research; the initial statistical sample comprised Iqs/35/ISO±SRPS/year, *** “Down” (or the Do-phase, relationship with Hypothesis 2) research from Iqs/35.080/ISO±SRPS documents (for ICS-2 = 35.080), and Iqs/35.060/ISO±SRPS documents (for ICS-2 = 35.060), – The terms “pathways knowledge acquisition” or KB or KBS show the alternative paths to the process for system innovation and trends of knowledge: ISO (global) or SRPS (local), – “Bottom” (or the C-phase, relationship with Hypothesis 3) part of the IS/ES project realisation. For modelling, development and implementation of IS (for example higher education institutions – the student services subsystem [109]) the standardised PDCA methodology is applied. This was followed by continuous improvements in the PDCA spiral of quality (ISO/IEC 20000-1:2011), towards the excellence of IS or ES or IES (IS + ES ≈ Data Base + KB, creating models KBS for IS/ES or informational–expert system). Standardisation and specific ISO/IEC and SRPS standards were used in all phases of the system life cycle (of IS, [110]), in the areas of design, implementation and maintenance. For example (Fig. 1, in PiDiCiAi) and according to [111]: 1. General concepts, requirements, 2. Study and analysis, 3. System design, 4. Software implementation (SI) process, 5. Quality assurance, 6. System documentation, 7. Project management (PM) process. The start position is

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT standardisation of the terminology [112], which tended to improve the PDCA maintenance and re-engineering phase, Figure 1.

Fig. 1. PiDiCiAi – through standardised terminology of software development and systems (IS) to ES

NU

SC

RI P

T

Based on the standardisation platform of IT terminology ([1], ISO/IEC 2382-1 to ISO/IEC 2382-37 vocabulary, [110]) in the PiDiCiAi methodology (Fig. 1), the original modelling of IS excellence is presented (Section 4.4, relationship with the proof of Hypothesis 4. Act(i)-phase) and this model (Fig. 1) may be displayed through the 12 aspects, in the same way as in [113], where SE tools and methods is one of the 12 parts of the body of knowledge (or SWEBOK - Software Engineering Body of Knowledge): 1) Introduction, 2) Software requirements, 3) Software design, 4) Software construction, 5) Software testing, 6) Software maintenance, 7) Software configuration management, 8) Software engineering management, 9) Software engineering process, 10) Software engineering tools and methods, 11) Software quality, 12) Related disciplines of software engineering.

3.2. Data collection – knowledge sources

AC CE

PT

ED

MA

Our own Java software was used for the research, analysis, processing and presentation of the results [114]. Without this software it would be almost impossible to undertake the research again. With this software, all source data are available on-line, in every area and subfield of creativity. Experience shows that the best time for a comparative study is the end/beginning of the year. Significant results have been singled out by analyses for many years (for IT, every year of the 21st century), as well as in the studies carried out at the beginnings of the years 2011, 2012, 2013 and 2014. Java software (used for data collection) is a web crawler specifically written to parse the HTML responses with the ISO and SRPS websites [3, 4], given in the paper “Innovation and knowledge trends through standardisation of IT applications” for each KS (for ISO and SRPS standardisation platforms) collecting data. These data are available for analysis as well as statistical analysis of KS in one DK. Java software is designed for two subsystems, the global (ISO/IEC) and the local (SRPS). The initial function and software architecture are presented in [114]. Web applications allow the collection of data to verify the above hypothesis. Data are collected according to domain knowledge (DK) or areas of analysis (ICS). Data checks shall be made at the sub-group level appropriate for testing (for example, with a smaller volume of data, usually DK3 – ICS-3, rarely DK2 – ICS-2, the rarest DK1 – ICS1). In any case, the quantitative indices (each volume of research DKn – ICS-n) and the relation to the sum of all sources of knowledge, Iqs (KS) = Iqp + Iqw + Iqd + Iqu, are checked. The first web application browses and analyses the ISO standardised unit database or KS (Iqs/1-99/ISO/2012.01/P1 ≈ 42000 and Iqs/1-99/ISO/2013.01/P2 ≈ 44000 collective-global innovations in the standards examples) and a sample of Iqs/35/ISO/2014.01/P3 = 6445 units (Table 1, the last row). The second web application gathers and analyses data on the local SRPS standardisation or KS (or local “innovation”: Iqs/1-99/SRPS/2012.01/P1 ≈ 34000 and Iqs/1-99/SRPS/2013.01/P2 ≈ 30000) and the sample of Iqs/35/SRPS/2014.01/P3 = 1463 units (Table 2). The results are presented graphically and by summary trends: a) including time and “historical” aspects, for the entire period of the research – according to the year of publication, and b) financial trend lines in the first/second decade of the 21st century. In addition, Iqs/SRPS standards (in Serbia [4]) were analysed at the same time and in the same SE subfields. At the beginning of every year, the results achieved up to that moment, were enabled and evaluated by multicriteria analyses (phases P1 for dates 01-01-2011 and P4 and 01-01-2014, respectively; Table 1). The methodology enables further comparison with cluster analysis (Ward’s method, [115]), as well as comparison with the results achieved in other areas of human endeavour – according to [7], [116].

3.3. Methodology for clustering of innovation trends on standardisation platform Based on PDCA and defined values of the quantity indices of projects under development (Iqu), i.e. the quantity indices of innovation (Iqi, phase Do), the index (or degree) of innovation in the time dimension (Iit or ∆KS/t, for example Iiy or Ii/year – per year) was determined. The criterion of clustering is the defined increment of innovation ∆KS/t = Iqu/t + Iqi/t, in time “t”. The period for checking the innovations (Check) in certain fields or subfields is dependent on the time index of innovation Iit. The index Iit was used for defining the groups or classes/clusters of innovation. The values of the periodic checks (Check) of the research for Iit in practice (1 – year, 2 – month, 3 – week or 4 – day) were assigned to this index [7], [116].

The innovation checking period (Check) in the fields/subfields depends on a criterion index that indicates the degree/intensity of innovation (Iqu referring to ISO, and Iqp/year in this case Iqp/2012 referring to SRPS). Ii serves as the unique criterion of timeline innovation, i.e. it designates

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

MA

NU

SC

RI P

T

innovation groups or classes/clusters and periodic checks (Check: C1, C2,... C4) of studies important for practice on: - Ii = 1 – yearly (Iiy = 01, 02,... up to 99), - Ii = 2 – monthly (Iim = 01, 02,... up to 12), - Ii = 3 – weekly (Iiw = 01, 02,... up to 52, for 50 working weeks) and - Ii = 4 – daily (Iid = 01, 02,... up to 365, for 250working days) bases. Low innovation levels (for long-term periods in the near past, long-year) introduces another group, so called “zero”’ inovation – (Ii = 0). The results of the presented analyses [5], [7], [11], [116], [114] enable the development of an original methodology for the clustering, checking and comparison of innovation trends in all standardised technologies (for example, [117] – ICS-1 = 25, [118] – ICS-1 = 77). This is achieved by means of the defined Iit, Iqu and Iqp/year indices that represent the criteria for the clustering of particular subfields and/or the fields of human endeavour by levels of innovation intensity. This clustering methodology in PDCA allows practical checks that complement the theoretical results of software application [115]. Earlier results point to significant issues in terms of the development and comparison of methodologies for clustering in standardised subfields. All of them are grouped into clusters that have their own PDCA spiral innovation cycle. Checking the methodology enables comparisons of planned targets (in phase P3 – Fig. 1 for 2013, or P14 for 2014) with the innovation results in the current year and at the end of 2014 (Doing-Checking or D14-C14). More detailed analyses of individual clusters or subfields include the elaboration of Iit (Iiy, Iiw, Iim and Iid) innovation indices (see Section 5.3) with the elements applied methodology. 4. Results

ED

More specifically, the results of the analysis of standardisation and knowledge acquisition in the SE subfields are presented in the charts for both IT subfields (“Top down” – deductively, from general to specific and vice versa, the more usual “Bottom up” - induction). Graphic presentations consist of two parts:

AC CE

PT

a) The first part includes summary analyses of all current standards (Std), corrections (Cor), amendments (Amd) and new projects of development (NP), for all previous years (from 1973 to 0101-2015), b) The second part includes the financial trend line diagrams for Std only, excluding any time before the year 2005, due to innovation and rendering older documents obsolete – withdrawn category. In order to achieve clear graphical displays of the results (in the first part, part a) only the number of characteristic values are shown. Since corrections (Cor) are free of charge and the prices of amendments (Amd) are considerably lower than the prices of standards (Std), the Cor and Amd numbers have not been presented. In the 21st century, although studies of the standardisation of IT and SE have been repeated periodically at least once a year, Table 1 presents only the results obtained during the previous period (31-12-2011 or 01-01-2012/ P11D11C11A11, 01-01-2013/ P12D12C12A12, 01-01-2014/ P13D13C13A13 and 01-01-2015/ P14D14C14A14). Table 1 Samples of ISO/IEC standardisation of IT research / comparison of IT – SE (two segments). Annotations for delineating the abbreviations used in Table 1 (in the field of IT, ICS-1 = 35 and ICS 2 = 35.080), on ISO platforms: – An index of the amount of local novelty sources of knowledge (KS) declines, but each year is higher than the daily innovation (250 working days a year), Iqi/year = Iqi/35/ISO/2013 = 251, – Index values of local (annual) KS innovations for Iqi/year, is considerably high, Iqi/35/ISO/2013 = 29094 CHF, is important for its managerial implications. In Table 1, ∑Iv refers to the sum of existing Iv values from previous years ∑Iv/yy.mm, were yy = year and mm = month when Iv values existed.

A part of the analysis of the previous years of the 21st century is presented in Table 1. Some of the analyses are given in prior comparative publications [114]). In short, we can distinguish the most characteristic data from the aspects of the quantity indices and index values Iv (given in

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

T

Section 3). The quantity indices for 2011, 2012 and 2013 are given in Table 1 (columns 3 to 8). From the point of view of research in recent years, the continuation of the trends is obvious. For example, the trend in the annual innovation index values is decreasing (Iv/year – column 10, Table 1). But the trend of total value of documentation on the platform of ISO standardisation is increasing (ΣIv – column 11), as is the trend in the indices of statistical samples (Iqs – column 3), including the analysis of the previous 2010th: Iqs/35.080/2010 = 235, Iqs/35.060/2010 = 340, Iqs/35/2010 = 5516 etc.

RI P

4.1. Resource planning and IT on standardisation platform – Top (Plan or Requirementsphase) The IT (ICS-1 = 35) field belongs to the cluster with the highest level of innovation (according to the criteria Iqu and Iqi/year, Table 1 and Table 2, Ii = 4 – daily, for example, criteria ∆KS/t = ∆KS/year = Iqu/year + Iqi/year ≥ 250).

NU

SC

Table 2 Samples of SRPS standardisation of IT research/comparison of IT–SE (segment 35.080) 31-122014.

MA

Annotations for delineating the abbreviations used in Table 2 (in the field of IT, ICS-1 = 35 and ICS 2 = 35.080), on SRPS platforms: – An index of the amount of local novelty sources of knowledge (KS), just in 2014, close to the daily innovation, Iqi/year = Iqi/35/SRPS/2014 = 239, close to the index of global ISO novelties of KS, – Index values of local (annual) KS innovations for Iqi/2014, Iv/year = Iqi/35/SRPS/2014 = 9927 CHF, which is three times lower than the value of global KS, is important for its managerial implications. 4.1.1. IT on ISO/IEC platform

AC CE

PT

ED

IT – statistical sample (from the beginning of 2014) of Iqs/35/ISO/2013 = 6445 ISO documents, consists of: Iqp/35/ISO/2013 = 3273 published, Iqu/35/ISO/2013 = 816 projects under development, Iqw/35/ISO/2013 = 2277 withdrawn and Iqd/35/ISO/2013 = 79 deleted, Table 1. The results of the standardisation and knowledge acquisition analysis for IT (for ICS-1 = 35) are shown in Fig. 2. a) With cumulative analyses, including the applicable documents published from 1973 to 2014 (Std + Amd + Iqu, where is Iqu/ISO/2014 = 696, Fig. 2a). Figure 2a) shows the typical examples of obligatory publications. The highest values of the annual index quantities are presented, for example, a maximum of Iqp/ISO/2012 = 237. Obviously, the maximum prevailing value index, published ISO “innovation”, for the year is Iv/ISO/2008/2014.01 > 35000 CHF (for Iqp/ISO/2012/2014.01 = 237) at the date 01-01-2014.

Fig. 2. a) for all previous years, b) in the first decade of the 21st century Summary analysis results for ICS-1 = 35 – IT for all the subfields (ISO, 01-01-2014) Figure 2b) shows the trend of planned (annual) needs of more than 30000 CHF (for 2014), whereby the planned values have been obtained using logarithmic or linear relations (Fig. 2b), or polynomial relations Iv/y35/ISO/2005-2012 = – 282.6 x2 + 5050 x + 9504 [114], or according to relation (1): Iv/y35/ISO/2005-2013 = – 385.4 x2 + 5912 x + 7255 This trend line excludes the previous years’ standards which were rendered obsolete (and does not include any adjustments – Cor), so it represents the minimum quantitative trend of innovation. Example for ICS-1 = 35 (ISO) in Fig. 2: – index of innovation projects in development – Iqu (Iqu/35/ISO/2014/all = 816, including: Iqu/35/ISO/2014/Std = 696, Iqu/35/ISO/2014/Amd = 88 and Iqu/35/ISO/2014/Cor = 32), is important for the managerial implications presented by QMk (where k = 1 to 12, and k = 4 for development, Fig. 7), according Fig. 2a,

(1)

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

T

– indices of values per year, are important for the managerial implications QMk (where k = 9 for resources, Fig. 7), Iv/35/ISO/2008/Std = 35442 CHF (max, for standards Iqp/35/ISO/2008/Std = 274, Fig. 2a), or all publications Iqp/35/ISO/2008/all = 329, including: Iqp/35/ISO/2008/Std, Iqp/35/ISO/2008/Cor = 25, Iqp/35/ISO/2008/Amd = 30 and Iv/35/ISO/2008/Amd = 1014 CHF), – independent variable (Iv/y/35/ISO/2005-2013) takes control variable values (according to actual year Ix = 2005, 2006, to 2013, respectively) so that the values of the function are expressed in CHF, Fig. 2b.

RI P

4.1.2. IT on SRPS platform

MA

NU

SC

For comparative analysis purposes, with regard to the relations of ISO/IEC–SRPS, nationalcollective knowledge acquisition with SRPS standards in IT, as well as in SE, was researched and evaluated. According to [119] domestic standards are globally successfully introduced and national interests are becoming more significant. A statistical sample of Iqs/SRPS/2013 = 1463 (for ICS-1 = 35, at the beginning of 2014 [4]), consists of: Iqp/SRPS/2013 = 1308 that are published, Iqu/SRPS/2013 = 5 that are in development, and Iqw/SRPS/2013 = 149 that were withdrawn, Fig. 3. Based on the trends of “local” standardisation and knowledge acquisition in IT (SRPS standards), it is particularly important to mention innovations in the year 2012 where Iqi/SRPS/2012 = 349. In the last two years, there have been more Std than ISO/IEC. Fig. 3. The innovation of knowledge according to the SRPS standards for ICS-1 = 35 – IT (ISS, 01-01-2014)

AC CE

PT

ED

The trend leads to a mathematical relation (2): Iv/y/35/SRPS/2007-2013 = 5893 ln(x) – 1141 Example for ICS-1 = 35 (SRPS) in Fig. 3: – index of value per year Iv/35/SRPS/2012 = 12474 CHF (max), is important for the managerial implications QMk (where k = resources for SRPS, or k = 9, Fig. 7) and increased value index Iv/35/SRPS/2013 > Iv/35/SRPS/2011, in those years, – publications maximum per year Iqp/35/SRPS/2012 = 349, reduced innovation (Iqp/35/SRPS/2013 = 260) < (Iqp/35/SRPS/2011 = 293) according to Fig. 3a, Iqp/35/SRPS/2014 = 239, including new research and results for KS in 2014 (01-01-2015), [4], – in Fig. 3b, independent variable (Iv/y/35/SRPS/2007-2013) takes control variable values (according to actual year Ix = 2007, 2008, to 2013, respectively) so that the values of the function are expressed in CHF. The results of the research show that standardisation and knowledge acquisition in IT and SE, at the local level (SRPS standards, according to [4]), were not in keeping with ISO/IEC improvements, until 2008. This is especially true for the “Bottom Up” direction (35.060) and for the entire period of research. It is obvious that the percentage of currently valid KB units was very small for the period up to 2007 (≈ 5%). 4.2. Software and systems design – Down (Do or Development-phase) The subfield software development, documentation, internet applications (ICS-2 = 35.080) belongs to the cluster with the higher innovation intensity – per week (according to the criteria Iqu and Iqi/year, Table 1, Ii = 3, see Section 5.3). 4.2.1. Software development and system documentation according to ISO/IEC

In early 2014, a statistical sample of the Iqs/35.080/ISO/2013 = 288 ISO/IEC documents, consisted of: Iqp/35.080/ISO/2013 = 173 published projects, Iqu/35.080/ISO/2013 = 51 projects under development, Iqw/35.080/ISO/2013 = 64 withdrawn etc. The results of the analysis of ISO standardisation for project development (software in IT) are shown in Fig. 4: a) with summary analysis from 1977 to 2014 (all = Std + Amd + Iqu, Fig. 4a), Fig. 4. Analysis results for ICS-2 = 35.080/ ISO – software development etc. (01/01/2014)

(2)

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

(3)

NU

SC

RI P

T

b) with the (21st century) trend of (annual) planning needs of more than Iv/35.080/2014 = 2444 CHF according to the relation Iv/y35.080/ISO/2000-2011 = 156.9 x + 404, or according to the logarithmic function (3), Fig. 4b, for 2014: Iv/y/35.080/ISO/2005-2013 = 489.8 ln(x) + 1166 Example for ICS-2 = 35.080 (ISO) in Fig. 4: – index of values per year Iv/35.080/ISO/2011 = 3498 CHF (max), is important for the QMk managerial implications (where k = leadership/innovations/resources for ISO, or k = 1/7/9 respectively, Fig. 7), – maximum publications per year Iqp/35.080/ISO/2011 = 33, with an increase in the index of innovation projects in development – Iqu (Iqu/35.080/ISO/2014 = 51) < (Iqu/35.080/ISO/2015 = 58), is important for the QMk managerial implications (where k = development/ innovations for ISO, or k = 4/7, Fig. 7), but thre is a reduction in the publications index – Iqp, Iqp/35.080/ISO/2014 = 7, according Fig. 4a, including new research and results for KS in (year + 1), 01-01-2015, [4], – in Fig. 4b, independent variable (Iv/y/35.080/ISO/2005-2013) takes control variable values (according to actual year Ix = 2005, 2006, to 2013, respectively) so that the values of the function are expressed in CHF. 4.2.2. Comparative Analysis (ICS-2 = 35.080) according to SRPS

MA

The statistical patterns in this area consist of the Iqs/SRPS/2013 = 50 standards: a) with the summary analysis for the entire period (from 1997 to 2013), but, at the price of 1608 CHF, four withdrawn standards are excluded, b) with the trend of (annual) plan needs of Iv/35.080/SRPS/P2014 ≈ 400 CHF (Fig. 5b, for 2014) SRPS expected “innovation” from the 21st century is according to the increasing curve (4):

ED

Fig. 5. Results analysis of ICS-2 = 35.080/ SRPS – software development (01-01-2014)

AC CE

PT

Iv/y35.080/SRPS/2007-2013 = 155.8 ln(x) + 71.32 Example for ICS-1 = 35.080 (SRPS) in Fig. 5: – index of values per year Iv/35.080/SRPS/2012 = 483 CHF, SRPS of minor importance compared to ISO, for the QMk managerial implications (where k = 1 to 12, Fig. 7), – publications maximum per year Iqp/35.080/SRPS/2012 = 15, without innovation throughout 2013 (Iqp/35.080/SRPS/2013 = 0), according to Fig. 5a (and including new research and results for KS at 3105-2015: Iqp/35.080/SRPS/2014 = 1, Iqp/35.080/SRPS/2015 = 16 – max, Iqw/35.080/SRPS/2015 = 17, Iv/35.080/SRPS/2015 = 604 CHF – max), – independent variable (Iv/y/35.080/SRPS/2007-2013) takes control variable values (according to actual year Ix = 2007, 2008, to 2013, respectively) so that the values of the function are expressed in CHF, Fig. 5b. During each of the past calendar years, comparative analyses of the ISO – SRPS (∑Iv/35.080/ISO±SRPS) were made with regard to the standards/projects (Fig. 4 and Fig. 5). The last among the seven mentioned commitments for design based on “local” standardised terminology and knowledge acquisition, according to the SRPS standards, is particularly important (according to Fig. 1): – Evaluation of the process, according to the latest SRPS ISO/IEC 15504-1:2011 [54] as well as the previous series of standards SRPS ISO/IEC 15504-2/-3/-4/-5/-6/-7:2009, [54–59], etc. – Evaluation of software products, and product quality: the only SRPS standard ISO/IEC 9126:1997, [64], that had been withdrawn earlier, was “replaced” by new ISO/IEC 9126-1:2011, [65], – Guidelines for documentation of computer application systems, according to ISO/IEC 6592:2004, and the process of completing software documentation for users, according to SRPS ISO/IEC 15910:2010, [69]. 4.3. Knowledge base and languages used in IT – Bottom (Check or C/T-phase) The statistical sample (ISO/IEC, in early 2014) consisted of Iqs/35.060/ISO/2013 = 380 documents: actually, Iqp/35.060/ISO/2013 = 155 published, Iqu/35.060/ISO/2013 = 26 under development, Iqw/35.060/ISO/2013 = 198 withdrawn and Iqd/35.060/ISO/2013 = 1 deleted (Table 1).

(4)

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT The results of standardisation and knowledge acquisition (for ICS-2 = 35.060/ISO) analyses are shown in Fig. 6: a) With summary analyses for the period 1979 up to the end of 2013, Fig. 6a (Iqu/ISO/35.060/2013 = 25 Std + 1 Cor = 26 KS),

T

Fig. 6. Analysis of results for ICS-2 = 35.060/ISO – languages used in IT (01-01-2014)

(5)

AC CE

PT

ED

MA

NU

SC

RI P

b) According to the data from the 21st century, with the trend of (annual) planned needs at Iv/35.060/2012 = 2056 CHF, according to the relation Iv/y35.060/ISO/2000-2011 = 142.3 x + 2006, or according to function (5), Fig. 6b, for 2014: Iv/y35.060/ISO/2005-2013 = 607.8 ln(x) + 428.9 Example for ICS-2 = 35.060 (ISO) in Fig. 6: – Index values of learning resources per year Iv/35.060/ISO/2011 = 2902 CHF (max), is important for the QMk managerial implications (where k = leadership/innovations/resources for ISO, or k = 1/7/9 respectively, Fig. 7), – maximum publications per year Iqp/35.060/ISO/2011 = 15, with an increase in the index of innovation projects in development – Iqu (Iqu/35.060/ISO/2014/Std = 25) < (Iqu/35.060/ISO/2015/Std = 29), (Iqu/35.060/ISO/2014/Cor = 1) < (Iqu/35.060/ISO/2015/Cor = 7) is important for the QMk managerial implications (where k = development/innovations for ISO, or k = 4/7, Fig. 7), but the reduction in publications index – Iqp, Iqp/35.060/ISO/2012/Std = 12, according to Fig. 4a (and including new research and results for KS in (year + 1), 01-01-2015, [4]: Iqp/35.060/ISO/2013/Std = 4, Iqp/35.060/ISO/2013/Cor = 7, Iqp/35.060/ISO/2014/Std = 3, Iqp/35.060/ISO/2014/Cor = 1), – the independent variable (Iv/y/35.060/ISO/2005-2013) takes control variable values (according to the actual year Ix = 2005, 2006, to 2013, respectively) so that the values of the function are expressed in CHF, Fig. 6b. Unfortunately, there is nothing new in the SRPS standards in the 21st century (2001–2013) in the field of local (or national) standardisation and knowledge acquisition (for ICS -2 = 35.060). From the subfields of innovation listed above, only the subfield (35.060) “languages used in IT” has a lower level of KS for SRPS. Including new research and the results for KS at 31-05-2015 (Iqp/35.060/SRPS/2014 = 1, Iqp/35.060/SRPS/2015 = 3), stems relation (6), different from the only possible presentation in previous years (Iv/y35.060/SRPS/2000-2013 = 0 x + 0): Iv/y35.060/SRPS/2014-2015 = 173.7 ln(x) + 44.97 4.4. Modelling of IS excellence – Up (Act or I/AS-phase) Several dimensions (four analysed, Fig. 7) are covered by the newly created IS excellence model in phase A(IS±ES/t) on the ISO and SRPS standardisation platforms. The QMk dimension (Quality Management – QM of knowledge), or QM with 12 elements, is based on the EFQM (2011, European Foundation for Quality Management) [120], and EFQM model – adapted for the use of the university, and has been defined by 12 key elements of IS excellence QMk (k = 1 to 12): 1) project tasks 2) teamwork, 3) methodology, 4) design, 5) OLAP (OnLine Analytical Processing), 6) network aspects, 7) innovation, 8) processes, 9) resources, 10) configuration and interfaces, 11) maintenance and 12) the results of IS application (the labels, QM1 to QM12, Fig. 7). Fig. 7. PDCA & QMk to IS/ES excellence (k = 1 to 12) On the basis of previous work, according to [109] the correlations PDCA&QMk for IS are derived from the intersection of the two states (points) of the PDCA spiral (PtDtCtAt to Pt+1Dt+1Ct+1At+1 were is t = 2011...). 4.4.1. Dimensions of IT products in the global and local relations (ISO-SRPS) IS/ES as products with 12 standardised elements and IT systems, are studied and specifically analysed for two of them (for ICS-2 = 35.060 and ICS-2 = 35.080 the label SE) in the global and local relations (ISO – SRPS). The system is modelled in the phase A(IS±ES&ISO±SRPS): IT/SE/IS&ISO±SRPS.

The twelve macro-elements of the system (IT), in accordance with the 12 standardised segments of IT (or ∑IT), according to [3], [4] are in the second dimension: 1. Information technology (IT) in general (35.020), 2. Character sets and information coding (including coding of audio, picture, multimedia and hypermedia information, IT security techniques, encryption, bar

(6)

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT coding, electronic signatures, 35.040), 3. Languages used in information technology (35.060), 4. Software (including software development, documentation, internet applications and use, 35.080), 5. Open systems interconnection (OSI, 35.100), 6. Networking (35.110), 7. Computer graphics (35.140), 8. Microprocessor systems (35.160), 9. IT terminal and other peripheral equipment (35.180), 10. Interface and interconnection equipment (35.200), 11. Data storage devices (35.220), 12. Applications of information technology (35.240).

MA

NU

SC

RI P

T

4.4.2. The four stages of knowledge quality management for software engineering The dimension, quality level (QL) of the quality improvement PDCA spiral IS, includes: – “P” – plan, precedence or preferences, the planned objectives, starting with the intersection of state, the benefits, accompanying activities (to remedy the shortcomings), – “D” – do, defect, deficiency, then, with the appropriate test results, – “C” – check, to the continuous improvement of KB and KBS, – “A” – action, advancement, activity, for the next “round” of the spiral etc. According to the current quality level in the PDCA spiral of IS quality (through: objectives, activities, results and improvement), marking and modelling of IS excellence in PDCA on the standardisation platform (ISO±SRPS) is shown in Fig. 7: o P(IT) or R – planning or requirements is the initial phase, with significant impacts for at least three of the 12 elements (k = 1 to 12): leadership (k = 1) environment (6) and resources (9) that are planned, o D(SE) – actual (do or design) is the next phase, with significant impacts for at least three of the 12 elements: organisation (k = 2) of team support (3) for development of the process (4) towards IT products, o C(KB) or C/T – checking and coding/testing the next phase, with significant impacts for at least three of the 12 elements: process (k = 8) results with their performances (12) and knowledge (11) in IT, o A(IS±ES) or I/AS – improvement activities (act) and install and accepting support are the “final” stage of the PDCA, with significant impacts for at least three of the 12 elements: the Internet (k = 5), networking, including LAN/MAN/WAN (7) with interface and interconnection equipment (10) in IT, for quality management.

PT

ED

4.4.3. Intensity of KB innovation in the time dimension The new dimension includes time or time-phased increments of the realisation KB in P1D1C1A1 to P2D2C2A2, or in general: PtDtCtAt to Pt+1Dt+1Ct+1At+1 to excellence. The user himself defines the terms, the time or time increments, which makes the model open. Some recommendations for the users refer to: – frequency, intensity or level of innovation in this area (Iit or ∆KS/ICS/t,for example ∆KS/IT/t and ∆KS/SE/t, see Section 5.3),

AC CE

– calendar year (for standardised data-base units), – school year (when the question is about the education system) referring to learning materials for e-learning, – months/weeks (when it comes to employment, motivation of the employees in the working week), – respect for excellence goals (the smaller the PDCA increments, the closer it is to excellence) etc. – towards the target level of excellence of IS/ES (excellence level – PtDtCtAt to Pt+1Dt+1Ct+1At+1) including the time dimension of the life cycle and increment improvement of ∆KS/ICS/t for KB/t for IS and ES.

5. Discussion of the results in PiDiCiAi The planned objectives have been achieved, and the analysis can be extended to all standardised fields of work (ICS-1 = 01 to 99). All initial Hypotheses (Hypotheses 1 to Hypotheses 4 in PiDiCiAi) have been proven.

Over the past 20 years some previous studies have demonstrated an enormous amount of information on IT [121]. In this paper, in order to get reliable and objective analyses, primarily academic literature and ISO and SRPS standards were used, with the analysis of results until the year 2000 and trend lines since 2000. The basis of the pragmatic side of the development and implementation of IS, with the use of standards and adapted models, is given in [109]. Since 1990, IT has been involved in solving the problems of how scarce resources are used to generate more wealth and capitalist priorities, with the subordination of social interests in favour of the ruthless race for profit [122] or the “The New Economics” [123]. Very few studies have been carried out with the aim of understanding investment in IT [124], and there are also few articles on knowledge acquisition on the standardisation platform. In this regard, this paper is based on previous analyses, for example [125]. The trend of knowledge management was formed in the mid 1990s [126], and modelling with 12 aspects was created recently and first presented in [11].

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT 5.1. Planning of IT resources (Pi – Ri) Based on the results presented above, one can predict future resources and financial needs for each of the subfields as well as the entirety. Hypothesis 1 has been proven. This is ensured by the established originality of the mathematical functions (1) – (6), theoretically represented by the trend lines. Practically, the defined Iv/year value indices, as well as the information on the stages of development of new projects, are criteria (along with Iqu).

SC

RI P

T

These trend lines (1) – (6) exclude the previous years’ standards which were rendered obsolete (representing innovativity quantitatively, and does not include any adjustments – Cor – because Iv/Cor = 0 CHF), so it represents a minimal trend of innovations. The original mathematical relationships (in Fig. 2b to Fig. 6b – right), which predict expectations and resource planning in the area of SE, were derived from the previous results and comparative analyses of standardisation and knowledge acquisition, and similarly for the other areas and sub-areas of creativity. We defined the standardisation of collective knowledge acquisition methods according to the presented analyses and the graphical presentations of trends. ISO/IEC platform

ED

MA

NU

The results of the analyses (for ICS-2 = 35.060 and ICS-2 = 35.080) show that the trend of average needs of Iqi/SE/2011-2013 = 37 new ISO documents is decreasing, annually updating the knowledge (for example, Iqi/SE/2010 (27): Std (11) + Amd (4) + Cor (12)). More than Iv/SE/ISO/2012 = 5876 CHF is needed for the procurement of these new standards, as standardised units of knowledge (Fig. 4b and Fig. 6b). However, if we involve all the changes (Amd + Cor) and ongoing development projects according to the qualitative aspectsl (Iqu/SE/ISO/2011-2013 = 71, Table 1), we will need substantially more innovations, knowledge and money. In contrast to the declining trends of the range innovations index (Iqi) and the index values (Iv/year), total index values (ΣIv) are growing every year. Financial, organisational and other approaches to knowledge acquisition by creating standards are indispensable. Collectively, the indicated ISO/IEC standardised collective knowledge (in the area of SE according to the previous study) was evaluated at ∑Ivp/SE/ISO/2013 = 48184 CHF.

PT

SRPS platform

AC CE

Obtaining collective-national knowledge in all Serbian standards (SRPS) in the area of SE will cost approximately Ivp/SE/SRPS = Ivp/35.080/SRPS/2014.01 = 1608 CHF for Iqp/35.080/SRPS/2014.01 = 46 documents. The total value of all SRPS standards in IT is ∑Iv/IT/SRPS/2014.01 ≈ 44282 CHF. Comparative analysis and the financially valued knowledge innovations (Iv in IT) according to the Serbian standards (SRPS) with respect to ICS-1 = 35 are presented for the same period 2007– 2013 (Fig. 3 and Equation 2). Although the field of IT has had extensive innovation in SRPS standards in recent years (due to Serbia’s preparations for EU accession), it does not mean that the same trend will continue in future years. On the other hand, the development trend of ISO standards is continuously supported by various technical subcommittees (see Section 5.3). ISO – SRPS relations

At the same time, IT in collective relations (national–international), or SRPS–ISO/IEC, are compared, together with quantitative aspects Iq (Iqs/IT/SRPS/2013 ≈ Iqp/35.080/SRPS/2013 = 1463 compared to Iqp/IT/ISO/2013 = 6445 or ≈ 22%) and the financial value ∑Iv (∑Iv/35/SRPS/2013 = 44282 CHF compared to ∑Iv/35/ISO/2013 = 378340 CHF, or only 22%). In both cases, the percentage of the roads of local knowledge acquisition or standardised “state obligations” is considerably smaller when compared to the ISO/IEC (see Section 4.1, Table 1 and Table 2). 5.2. Development and innovation tracking in the SE subfields (software and system) – Do (Di) SE in ISO – SRPS relations

At the same time, the collective relations (national–international), or SRPS–ISO/IEC knowledge sources, are compared, together with the quantitative aspects Iq (Iqp/SE/SRPS/2013 ≈ Iqp/35.080/SRPS/2013 = 46 to Iqp/SE/ISO/2013 = 328 or ≈ 14%) and the financial value ∑Iv (∑Iv/SE/SRPS ≈ ∑Iv/35.080/SRPS/2014.01 = 1608 CHF to ∑Iv/SE/ISO/2014.01 = 48184 CHF, or only ≈ 3.33%). In both cases,

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

NU

SC

RI P

T

the percentage of the roads of local knowledge acquisition or standardised “state obligations” is considerably smaller when compared to the ISO/IEC. Many aspects relate to the attractiveness of the local knowledge acquisition of IT and to the strategy of the firms in the country [127]. This paper analyses the local knowledge and the SRPS standards. The paths of knowledge towards international collective knowledge goes beyond national knowledge and that of creative individuals or professional individuals in teams and they take part in creating national SRPS standards. According to national/local SRPS standards, the paths are narrowing. For example, in the SE area of standardisation, “local” improvements are reduced to a single digit percentage of collective ISO/IEC “excellence” (Table 1, compare Fig. 2 – 3 and Fig. 3 – 4 and relations (1) – (2), (3) – (4) and (5) – (6)). The correlation of the phases of development is shown as SE as opposed to IT (as well as the ISO/IEC compared to SRPS): – ISO/IEC: 1 to 10.6 (Iqu/SE/ISO/2013 = 77 to Iqu/IT/ISO/2013 = 816 innovations per year, Table 1), respectively – SRPS: 0 to 5 (Iqu/SE/SRPS/2013 = 0 to Iqu/SE/SRPS/2013 = 5 innovations per year, Table 2). The annual pattern of ISO/IEC new projects or innovations in the areas of SE is Iqu/SE/ISO/20112013 = 71, which is about 8% of Iqu/35/ISO = 867 new projects in all other areas of IT (12 segments of the IT).

ED

MA

5.2.1. Development of ISO/IEC innovations in SE subfields The roads of standardisation and knowledge acquisition, from development to the application of SE, IS and vice versa (in PDCA) lead through technical committees (JTC 1) and their subcommittees (JTC 1/SC 6/7/22/24/32/34/35), as participants in the development of numerous standards and new projects, Fig. 8. Fig. 8. Participants in the development of ISO/IEC documents in the SE application subfields (01-01-2014)

AC CE

PT

 Example for ICS-2 = 35.080 (“Top Dowdn” phase according to Fig. 1 and Fig. 7) in Fig. 8: o Iqp/35.080/2014.01 = 173 publications, developed by subcommittee: JTC 1 (18), JTC 1/SC 6 (2 – last development 2011), JTC 1/SC 7 (145) and JTC 1/SC 22 (8 – last development 2006), o Iqu/35.080/2014.01 = 51 projects under development have been entrusted to: JTC 1 (1), JTC 1/SC 40 (9) and JTC 1/SC 7 (41).  Example for ICS-2 = 35.060 (“Bottom Up” phase according to Fig. 1 and Fig. 7) in Fig. 8: o Iqp/35.060/2014.01 = 155 publications, developed by subcommittee: JTC 1 (2 – last development 1999), JTC 1/SC 22 (94), JTC 1/SC 24 (24 – last development 2004), JTC 1/SC 7 (6 – last development 2012), (8), JTC 1/SC 32 (40), JTC 1/SC 34 (14) and JTC 1/SC 35 (2 – last development 2013), o Iqu/35.060/2014.01 = 26 projects under development have been entrusted to: JTC 1/SC 22 (8), JTC 1/SC 32 (15), and JTC 1/SC 34 (3).  For Iqu/SE/2014.01 = 77 projects under development (new projects ISO/IEC, according to Fig. 8), around Ivu/SE/2014.01 ≈ 665 CHF total needs per year (or ≈ 15% compared to publications planned for 2014 – Ivp/IT/2014.01 ≈ 4000 CHF, according to the appropriate mathematical relations and the collective trend line of SE for ICS-2 = 35.080 – Fig. 4 and ICS-2 = 35.060 – Fig. 6). 5.2.2. Local SRPS standardisation in IT/SE The importance of the ongoing SRPS standardisation development projects (Iqu/SE/SRPS = 0 current projects in the SE, when compared to Iqu/35/SRPS = 5) is relative. According to [128], This is important for both IS activities towards excellence in general and for the excellence of IS subsystems, such as the process of adaptive e-learning (on certain Moodle courses: “Introduction to IS”, “IS analysis”, “IS” etc. IT studies), for the purpose of managing educational projects using the Moodle e-learning system (www.ftn.kg.ac.rs/Moodle/).

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

SC

RI P

T

Comparative analysis and the financial innovation of knowledge valued (Iv in SE) by Serbian standards (SRPS) with respect to ICS-2 = 35.080 is presented for the same period 2007–2013 (Fig. 5 and Equation 3). Local standardisation and knowledge acquisition (SRPS standards [4]), defined and innovated the obligations arising from them. Examples of the SRPS ISO/IEC standards software and systems life-cycle process are: – 15288:2012 – Software and systems engineering, [45], – 12207:2012 – Software life-cycle processes, [46], – 14764:2008 – Maintenance, [129], – 16085:2010 – Risk management, [43], – TR 15271:2007 – Guide for ISO/IEC 12207, [38], – 15504-5:2009 – Process assessment – Part 5: An exemplar software life-cycle process assessment model, [58] etc.

5.3. The intensity of KB (knowledge base) innovation, for example IT, SE and IS – Check (Ci)

AC CE

PT

ED

MA

NU

The results show relevant details of the analyses in SE, with the subfields in SE and with the possibility of the comparison of the concept of “the gap between individual and collective knowledge acquisition” [7], with new concepts of study and learning (according to [128] for IT, [130] for SE, [131] for IS, [132]), and this was carried out together with the appropriate integration of IT into the education system, with learning and knowledge of other systems. In the phase of checking the results, the most authoritative persons to do so are the users: individuals, corporations, society, the State, Unions. Excellence in the base of knowledge (system – expert system, IS – ES), and on KB and KBS, is dependent on experts, the innovated knowledge of professionals and available resources (including the amount of money – since knowledge innovation is based on it). Based on index values Iit for IT and SE, groups or classes/clusters of innovation (or Checkphase) with values Ii = 0 – perennially, Ii = 1 – yearly, Ii = 2 – monthly, Ii = 3 – weekly or Ii = 4 – dail (Section 4, Table 1) have been determined. In terms of application in practice, the applied methodology for the clustering of subfields of IT (SE) has the advantage over the same theoretical methods of hierarchical clustering analysis in mathematical taxonomy [118]: centroid linkage method, Ward minimum variance method and others. Simplifying the proof of Hypothesis 3 (Section 1.1, including criteria (9.1) to (9.5)) with the approximate equality: KBti ≈ Iqu + Iqi/year Clarification of the criteria can include the relation of population growth in the form of KS. ∆KS/t for example of SE: ∆KS/SE/t = Iqu/SE/t + Iqi/SE/t. Also, from the aspect of knowledge acquisition in the time dimension, the innovation knowledge base (KBti), according to (7), can be further developed in the form of relations of time updating KB/t (8). KB/t = KB/t-1 + KBti Innovations in the time dimension define criteria of analysis (9.1) to (9.5). Low innovation intensity SE subfields For subfields with “zero” innovation intensity (KBti = 0, the “zero level” or class innovation) it is not necessary to monitor innovation platform standardisation. Planned annual checks are presented below, e.g. for Iqu/35.060/SRPS. Ii = 0, for ∆KS/t = 0, annual check, planned annual audits/checks – or KBti/35.060/SRPS/2001-2013 = 0. Subfields with “annual” innovation intensity (for 0 < KBti ≤ 10, the second “degree” or innovation class) necessitate continuous all-through-the-year monitoring of innovation (Iiy). Planned annual checks are presented below, e.g. for Iqu/35.060/SRPS. Ii = 1, for 1 ≤ ∆KS/t < 10, annual check – planned annual audits/checks “Monthly” innovation intensity SE subfields The subfields of monthly innovation checks require continuous monthly monitoring of innovations (Iim). Correlation between Iim and Iqu indices is within the limits of 10 < KBti ≤ 50 (monthly check), which applies to ICS-2 = 35.060 based on the ISO platform. Ii = 2, for 10 ≤ ∆KS/t ≤ 50, monthly check – or KBti (Table 1, column 7 and 8)

(7)

(8)

(9.1)

(9.2)

(9.3)

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

T

Subfields with the higher intensity of innovation – weekly The results of the study point to the main IT subfields being within the class of “weekly” innovation checks (Iiw). Iiw is correlated with quantity indices, primarily Iqu, ranging between 50 < KBti ≤ 250 (Table 1, column 7 and 8 referring to Iqu/35.080/ISO/2011). The professional work in these subfields requires all-through-the-week monitoring of innovation (weekly checks), which applies to ICS-2 = 35.080 based on the ISO platform. Ii = 3, for 50 < ∆KS/t ≤ 250, weekly check – or KBti (Table 1, column 7 and 8)

NU

SC

RI P

Field IT with the highest intensity of innovation – daily The results of the study point to IT subfields within the class of “daily” innovation checks (Iid). Iiw is correlated with quantity indices, primarily Iqu and Iqi/year. Ii = 4, when KBti > 250 (Table 1, column 7 and 8 referring to Iqu/35/ISO/2011 = 790, Iqu/35/ISO/2012 = 994, Iqu/35/ISO/2013 = 816). Ii = 4, for ∆KS/t > 250, daily checks, – or KBti (Table 1 and Table 2, column 7 and column 8) This requires the continuous highest intensity monitoring of innovations – KBti/35/SRPS/2013 = 266 (Table 2, column 7 and column 8), KBti/35/ISO/2013 = 1067 (Table 1, column 7 and column 8).

AC CE

PT

ED

MA

5.4. Results of the modelling: IS excellence (and future directions)? Advancement (Ai) Act (Ai), Advancement (Ai) or Improvement (relationship with proof of Hypothesis 4): the correlation among all indices as criteria for product promotions (IS/ES), as well as the need for continuous KB innovation regarding both global (ISO) and local (SRPS) standardisation is obvious (see Section 4.4, model and the related possibilities). Besides theoretical, practical and research innovation approaches, the financial aspect had great importance in this work. But many other aspects of planning, such as “historical”, futuristic, qualitative, quantitative and spatial (SRPS and ISO), were included: time (PDCA), hardware (less) – software (more), professional (more) – the user (less), the research – pedagogical, deductive – inductive, collective – individual and so on. If the financial, time, professional and qualitative criteria were analysed, planned inclusion in new projects would be found to be the most appropriate. The financial needs for inclusion in the ISO stages of development are presented and they are minimal, but require significant commitment of well-educated researchers. The contribution of this work to the academic community is in the practical monitoring of collective knowledge trends in IT SE with the goal of better organisation of the educational system, i.e. schools, universities, individuals (with individual knowledge, the wider community, and all in the standardisation platform. The specific contribution of this study (the author’s location being Serbia) has resulted in the creation of new modules in the study programme “IT – software engineering” (undergraduate and master studies). The newly created module “IT – software engineering” (with 240 ECTS, European Credit Transfer and Accumulation System (ECTS) framework by the European Commission) entered the accreditation procedure in 2013 and will run for five years. The first generation enrolled for these advanced studies in 2014, the fifth will enroll in 2019; therefore, this study will be run until 2023. For the education of IT teachers in the future (ICS-1 = 35), the study programme module “IT in Education” (300 ECTS) has been created. The expected long-term contribution in this area is reflected in the application of IT and SE, so that the first generation of IT teachers will complete their studies in 2019. After that period of time, they will educate younger generations on the platform of innovation and standardisation of IT and SE trends. Future work relates to the additional specificity of each of the elements of the model matrix (SE&PiDiCiAi&QMk) x n, where n = Iit (number of stages of innovation increments in time “t”) in the PtnDtnCtnAtn spiral, and is based on the examples of improving the university’s integrated IS (including the system for adaptive e-learning and all universities’ and faculties’ IS subsystems). In correlation with the initial Hypothesis, this would be referred to as “Bottom Up” implementation (H3 & H4) with innovation of the mentioned study programmes over the next 10 years at least, for example, advancement of the IS Student Services (ISSS) “road” towards creating excellence in an educational institution [109]. 6. Conclusions We can draw conclusions in several directions, for example, pragmatically, futuristically or theoretically (the mathematical relationships), or according to originality: KS, KB, KBS, the KB

(9.4)

(9.5)

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

T

innovation trends in the PiDiCiAi methodology and the ICS&PDCA&QMk model; or on the routes: the pre-planned objectives of the work, the activities that accompany the work, the results and potential improvements. Open models approach the real situation with the possibility of innovation and knowledge acquisition, integrated improvement and the pursuit of IS integrated excellence. The answers to relevant issues (through the presentation of evidence of preliminary Hypotheses H1 to H4 through the PiDiCiAi), can be found in the correlation between different time stages, based on the presented results and the outlined analyses of the examples of SE and IS.

NU

SC

RI P

6.1. Elimination of limited resources (for IT financial planning) for more frequent knowledge innovations According to the trends in collective ISO/IEC knowledge acquisition, the original mathematical relationships (presented trend lines, theoretically speaking), and individual knowledge of the stages of development of new projects on the practical side, that have already been formed, can be predicted for future resources, the financial needs of each of the segments/sub-areas and the whole resources. The difference between the discontinuous and continuous improvement of the quality and level of individual knowledge is important (valued ratio of 1 to 17.5). For this area of SE in IT, the needs are Iv/35.080/ISO/2013 + Iv/35.060/ISO/2013 = 2760 CHF a year to maintain continuity of knowledge. Cumulatively, without continuous or discontinuous innovation, we need 17.5 times more money (ΣIv/35.080/ISO/2014.01 + ΣIv/35.060/ISO/2014.01 = 48184 CHF) for all the ISO methods of knowledge acquisition on SE in IT.

MA

At the same time, parallel roads of knowledge acquisition on the standardisation platform in IT and isolated areas in SE were analysed (ISO/IEC and SRPS). It is also concluded that continuous innovation and knowledge of individual development projects (ISO) are financially justified.

ED

Based on these results (Sections 4 and Sections 4.1 to Section 4.4), implicit conclusions can be drawn for IT resource planning (see Section 5.1).

AC CE

PT

6.2. Future directions in SE More precise determination of the quantitative (Iq) and financial (Iv) “gap” between the individual and collective – global (ISO) and local (or national SRPS) – through social knowledge of SE was enabled with the presented results of the original analyses (for two of the 12 areas of IT). On the other hand, the development trend of ISO standards is continuously supported by various technical committees (see Section 5.2). The results of the analyses and practices show that the standards of knowledge can be used for the formation of a local/national knowledge base which is more accessible than the present one. Therefore, the results of individual work would have been supported from “social”, public or civilisation and strategy-orientated results and also from the scope of knowledge acquisition, which is obviously the way to improve the quality, the education and the higher level of social (collective) knowledge. The acquisition of local knowledge in the area of software and system design (ICS-2 = 35.080) is more dominant than the segment of program languages in IT (ICS-2 = 35.060). The original mathematical relations (1)–(8) were derived and the trend lines have been presented, according to the trends and dynamic developments. These provide an important theoretical aspect of the solution of practical “problems”. It is undisputed that the “Paths of knowledge acquisition in SE fields are based on ISO/IEC standards” – Hypothesis 2 has been proven. The growing problem is how to access standards in certain areas of IT, according to the future directions in SE. In the present work, it is easier to solve SE problems at a state rather than at an individual level (no matter if it is work with professionals, teachers, designers or programmers etc.).

Some, significant difficulties were shown by the results of the analyses (for ICS-1 = 35, ICS-2 = 35.080 and ICS-2 = 25.060, see Section 5.4), and also the future directions for limiting the summary criterion of value ΣIv/35/ISO/2014.01 = 378340 CHF. The solution to the problem is hidden in the access of updated standards for the advancement of knowledge and the new ISO–SRPS documents under development. In recent years, although the field of IT (for ICS-1 = 35) has been extensively imbued with SRPS standards (because of Serbia’s preparations for EU accession), this study shows that the same trend of innovation will not be continued in the future. 6.3. Continuous checking of KB innovation – the need for future comparisons with the best The results of the original SE analyses were correlated with IT, enabling closer determination of the financial “gap” between individual and collective, national (SRPS) and global (ISO)

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT knowledge acquisition, opening up new possibilities for further research, and innovation of KB of the SE, towards IS excellence. The creation of an original methodology for checking the KB innovation trend in the time dimension and comparison of the intensity of innovation in all technologies on the standardisation platform were allowed by the results of these analyses (see Section 5.3).

NU

SC

RI P

T

6.4. Future directions for improving knowledge and focus on modelling IS excellence It is necessary to continuously improve standardised knowledge. Improvements in IS (in companies) often depend on management, leadership, and all the capacities of the macro processes designed to achieve better results. This research work (developmental, pragmatic, futuristic) will be followed by a more detailed analysis of IS modelling (IS±ES&PDCA&QMk towards excellence) for decision making in an integrated universities’ IS. Future directions (the product is software), the application of the SE part of the work, deals with modelling excellence and analysing the developed IS for student services, according to aspects of the customised models of excellence as well as continuous improvement of IS in the temporal dimension of the PDCA spiral. The upcoming new degree programmes can be used for other future directions (when products are the services of higher education), see Section 5.4. References

MA

[1] ISO/IEC 2382-1:1993 Information technology - Vocabulary – Part 1: Fundamental terms (32 pages), Switzerland, Geneva. [2] ISO/IEC 2382-28:1995 Information technology - Vocabulary – Part 28: Artificial intelligence – Basic concepts and expert Systems (25 pages), Switzerland, Geneva.

PT

ED

[3] ISO, ISO Store, Standards catalogue, 35: Information Technology, Available Internet: http://www.iso.org/iso/home/store/catalogue_ics/catalogue_ics_browse.htm?ICS1=35 (accessed: 1st January 2015). [4] ISS - Institute for Standardization of Serbia, Advanced search: http://www.iss.rs/standard/advance_search.php (accessed: 31st May 2015). [5] Ž. Micić, M. Blagojević, Standardization of representation knowledge in IT, Technology, Informatics and Education for Learning and Knowledge Society, 6th International Symposium, Čačak, Serbia: 3–5th June 2011, pp. 726–731. [6] V. Fomin, T. Keil, Standardization: Bridging the gap between economic and social theory, Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Information Systems, Brisbane, QLD, Australia: (2000).

AC CE

[7] Ž. Micić, M. Blagojević, M. Micić, Innovation and knowledge trends through standardisation of IT applications, Computer Standards & Interfaces, 36(2) (2014), pp. 423–434. [8] R. Baskerville, A. Dulipovici, The theoretical foundations of knowledge management, Knowledge Management Research & Practice, (2006), pp. 83–105. [9] O. Steen, Practical knowledge and its importance for software product quality, Information and Software technology, 49(6) (2007), pp. 625–636. [10] J.S. Brown, P. Duguid, Organizing Knowledge, California Management Review, 40 (3) (1998), pp. 90–111. [11] Ž. Micić, M. Tufegdžić, Knowledge management modeling to E-learning excellence, TTEM, 6 (4) (2011), pp. 1333–1344. [12] A.L. Russell, Standardization in history: A review essay with an eye to the future, The Standards Edge: Future Generations, (2005), pp. 247–260. [WWW document] http://www.arussell.org/papers/futuregeneration-russell.pdf (accessed 15th January 2011). [13] S. Sirkemaa, IT infrastructure management and standards. Proceedings of the International Conference on Information Technology: Coding and Computing (ITCC ’02), IEEE. [14] F. Noth, C. Slotty, A. Hackethal, Does IT standardization help to boost cost and profit efficiency? Empirical evidence from German savings banks, 2000. [WWW document] http://www.finance.uni-frankfurt.de//wp/1871.pdf (accessed 19th January 2011). [15] K. Wüllenweber, D. Beimborn, T. Weitzel, W. König, The impact of process standardization on business process outsourcing success, Information Systems Frontiers, 10 (2) (2008), pp. 211–224.

[16]

J.Roberts, From know-how to show-how? Questioning the role of information and communication technologies in knowledge transfer, Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 12 (4), (2000), pp. 429–443. [17] H.Traniverdi, Information technology relatedness, knowledge management capability, and performance of multibusiness firms, Special Issue on Information Technologies and Knowledge Management, 29 (2), (2005), pp. 311–334.

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

RI P

T

[18] T. Hun Kima, J.N. Leeb, J.U. Chunb, I. Benbasatc, Understanding the effect of knowledge management strategies on knowledge management performance: A contingency perspective, Information & Management, 51 (4), 2014, pp. 398–416. [19] S. C. Goh, Managing effective knowledge transfer: an integrative framework and some practice implications, Journal of Knowledge Management, 6 (1), 2002, pp. 23–30. [20] C. Tong, W. Tak, A. Wong, The impact of knowledge sharing on the relationship between organizational culture and job satisfaction: The Perception of Information Communication and Technology (ICT) Practitioners in Hong Kong, 5 (1), 2015. Vol 5, No 1 (2015), retrieved from: http://macrothink.org/journal/index.php/ijhrs/article/view/6895

MA

NU

SC

[21] J.J. Jiang, G. Klein, H.G. Hwang, J. Huang, S.Y. Hung, An exploration of the relationship between software development process maturity and project performance, Information and Management, 41(3) (2004), pp. 279–288. [22] J.Y. Liu, V.J. Chen, C.L. Chan, T. Lie, The impact of software process standardization on software flexibility and project management performance: Control theory perspective, Information and Software Technology, 50 (9-10) (2008), pp. 889–896. [23] P. Buxmann, T. Weitzel, F.V. Westarp, W. König, The standardisation problem - An economic analysis of standards in information systems, Proceedings of the 1st IEEE Conference on Standardisation and Innovation in IT - SIIT '99 (1999), pp. 157–162. [24] G. Barnett et al, Quality assurance through automated monitoring and concurrent feedback using a computer-based medical information system. Medical Care, 16 (11), (1978), retrieved from: http://journals.lww.com/lwwmedicalcare/Abstract/1978/11000/Quality_Assurance_through_Automated_Monitoring_and.7.asp x, Last access May 31 2015.

AC CE

PT

ED

[25] J. Ash, M. Berg, E. Coiera, Some unintended consequences of information technology in health care: The nature of patient care information system-related errors, Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 11 (2), (2004), pp. 104–112. [26] P. Love, Z. Irani, A project management quality cost information system for the construction industry, Information & Management, 40 (7), (2003), pp. 649–661. [27] L. F. Pitt, R. T. Watson and C. B. Kavan, Service quality: A measure of information systems effectiveness, MIS Quarterly, 19 (2), (1995), pp. 173–187. [28] D. Robey, R. L. Zeller, Factors affecting the success and failure of an information system for product quality, Interfaces, 8 (2), (1978), pp. 70–75. [29] N. Gorla, T. Somers, B.Wong, Organizational impact of system quality, information quality, and service quality, The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 19 (3), (2010), pp. 207–228. [30] J. Jiang, G. Klein, C. Carr, Measuring information system service quality: SERVQUAL from the other side, 26 (2), (2002), pp. 145–166. [31] Y. Zheng , K. Zhao, A. Stylianou, The impacts of information quality and system quality on users' continuance intention in information-exchange virtual communities: An empirical investigation, Decision Support Systems, 56, (2013), pp. 513–524. [32] C. Chen, J.Y. Liu, H.G. Chen, Discriminative effect of user influence and user responsibility on information system development processes and project management, Information and Software Technology, 53 (2) (2011), pp. 149–158. [33] M.N.A. Rahman, The implementation of SPC in Malaysian manufacturing companies, European Journal of Scientific Research, 26 (3) (2009), pp. 453–464.

[34] J. Singh, H. Singh, Continuous improvement philosophy – literature review and directions, Benchmarking: An International Journal, 22 (1), (2015), pp.75–119. [35] V. K. Singh, PDCA cycle: A quality approach, Sciences, 1 (1), (2013) [36] J. Singh, H. Singh, Continuous improvement approach: state‐of‐art review and future implications, International Journal of Lean Six Sigma, 3 (2), (2012), pp. 88–111. [37] N. Jingfeng, H. Ming, Study on software quality improvement based on rayleigh model and PDCA model, Telkomnika Indonesian Journal of Electrical Engineering, retrieved from: http://www.iaesjournal.com/online/index.php/ TELKOMNIKA/article/view/3086, Last access May 30 2015. 38 SRPS ISO/IEC TR 15271:2007, Information technology. Guide for ISO/IEC 12207 (Software life cycle processes), ISS, Belgrade (Identical with ISO/IEC TR 15271:1998, ISO, Switzerland, Geneva).

39 ISO/IEC 2382-20:1990 Information technology – Vocabulary – Part 20: System development, Switzerland, Geneve 40 ISO 9001:2000, Quality management systems – Requirements, Switzerland, Geneva

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

AC CE

PT

ED

MA

NU

SC

RI P

T

41 ISO/IEC 90003:2004, Software engineering – Guidelines for the application of ISO 9001:2000 to computer software, Switzerland, Geneva (Identical with SRPS ISO/IEC 90003:2009, Belgrade) [42] ISO/IEC 26702:2007, Systems engineering – Application and management of the systems engineering process, Switzerland, Geneva [43] ISO/IEC 16085: 2006, Systems and software engineering – Life cycle processes – Risk management (Identical with SRPS ISO/IEC 16085:2010, Belgrade) [44] ISO/IEC 14598-2:2000, Software engineering – Product evaluation – Part 2: Planning and management, Switzerland, Geneva [45] ISO/IEC 15288:2002, Systems engineering – System life cycle processes, Switzerland, Geneva (Identical with SRPS ISO/IEC 15288:2012, Belgrade) [46] ISO/IEC 12207:1995, Information Technology – Software life cycle processes (including ISO/IEC 12207:1995/Amd.1:2002 and ISO/IEC 12207:1995/Amd.2:2003), Switzerland, Geneva (Identical with SRPS ISO/IEC 12207:2012, Belgrade) [47] ISO/IEC 15026:1998, Information Technology – System and software integrity levels, Switzerland, Geneva [48] ISO/IEC 25020:2007, Software engineering – Systems and software Quality Requirements and Evaluation (SQuaRE) – Measurement reference model and guide, Switzerland, Geneva [49] ISO/IEC 14598-1:1999, Information technology – Software product evaluation – Part 1: General overview, Switzerland, Geneva [50] ISO/IEC 14598-3:2000, Software engineering – Product evaluation – Part 3: Process for developers, Switzerland, Geneva [51] ISO/IEC 14598-4:1999, Software engineering – Product evaluation – Part 4: Process for acquirers, Switzerland, Geneva [52] ISO/IEC 14598-5:1998, Information technology – Software product evaluation – Part 5: Process for evaluators, Switzerland, Geneva [53] ISO/IEC 14598-6:2001, Software engineering – Product evaluation – Part 6: Documentation of evaluation modules, Switzerland, Geneva [54] ISO/IEC 15504-1:2004, Information technology – Process assessment – Part 1: Concepts and vocabulary, Switzerland, Geneva (SRPS ISO/IEC 15504-1:2011, Belgrade) [55] ISO/IEC 15504-2:2003 (Including Cor.1:2004), Information technology – Process assessment – Part 2: Performing an assessment, Switzerland, Geneva (Identical with SRPS ISO/IEC 15504-2:2009, Belgrade) [56] ISO/IEC 15504-3:2004 – Information technology – Process assessment – Part 3: Guidance on performing an assessment, Switzerland, Geneva (Identical with SRPS ISO/IEC 15504-3:2009, Belgrade) [57] ISO/IEC 15504-4:2004 – Information technology – Process assessment – Part 4: Guidance on use for process improvement and process capability determination, Switzerland, Geneva (Identical with SRPS ISO/IEC 15504-4:2009, Belgrade) [58] ISO/IEC 15504-5:2006 – Information technology – Process assessment – Part 5: An exemplar process assessment model, Switzerland, Geneva (Identical with SRPS ISO/IEC 155045:2009, Belgrade) [59] ISO/IEC TR 15504-6:2008 – Information technology – Process Assessment – Part 6: An exemplar system life cycle process assessment model, Switzerland, Geneva (Identical with SRPS ISO/IEC TR 15504-6:2009, Belgrade) [60] ISO/IEC TR 15504-7: 2008 – Information technology – Process Assessment – Part 7: Assessment of organizational maturity, Switzerland, Geneva (Identical with SRPS ISO/IEC TR TR 15504-7:2009, Belgrade) [61] ISO/IEC 17050-1:2004, Conformity assessment – Supplier's declaration of conformity – Part 1: General requirements, Switzerland, Geneva [62] ISO/IEC 17050-2:2004, Conformity assessment – Supplier's declaration of conformity – Part 2: Supporting documentation, Switzerland, Geneva [63] ISO/IEC 12119:1994, Information technology – Software packages – Quality requirements and testing, Switzerland, Geneva [64] ISO/IEC 9126:1991, Software enginnering – Product quality, Switzerland, Geneva (SRPS ISO/IEC 9126:1997, Belgrade)

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

AC CE

PT

ED

MA

NU

SC

RI P

T

[65] ISO/IEC 9126-1:2001, Software engineering – Product quality – Part 1: Quality model, Switzerland, Geneva (Identical with SRPS ISO/IEC 9126-1:2011, Belgrade) [66] ISO/IEC TR 9126-2:2003. Software engineering – Product quality – Part 2: External metrics, Switzerland, Geneva (Identical with SRPS ISO/IEC TR 9126-2:2010, Belgrade) [67] ISO/IEC TR 9126-3:2003. Software engineering – Product quality – Part 3: Internal metrics, Switzerland, Geneva (Identical with SRPS ISO/IEC TR 9126-3:2010, Belgrade) [68] ISO/IEC TR 9126-4:2004 Software engineering – Product quality – Part 4: Quality in use metrics, Switzerland, Geneva (Identical with SRPS ISO/IEC TR 9126-4:2010, Belgrade) [69] ISO/IEC 15910:1999, Information technology – Software user documentation process (Identical with SRPS ISO/IEC 15910:2010, Belgrade) [70] ISO/IEC 26513:2009, Systems and software engineering - Requirements for testers and reviewers of user documentation, Switzerland, Geneva (including ISO/IEC CD 26513, 2015) [71] ISO/IEC 26514:2008, Systems and software engineering – Requirements for designers and developers of user documentation, Switzerland, Geneva [72] ISO/IEC 25000: 2014, Systems and software engineering – Systems and software Quality Requirements and Evaluation (SQuaRE) – Guide to SQuaRE, Switzerland, Geneva [73] ISO/IEC 25001:2014, Systems and software engineering – Systems and software Quality Requirements and Evaluation (SQuaRE) – Planning and management, Switzerland, Geneva [74] ISO/IEC 25010:2011, Systems and software engineering – SQuaRE – System and software quality models, Switzerland, Geneva [75] ISO/IEC CD 25011, Software engineering – (SQuaRE) – IT Service Quality Model (2015), Switzerland, Geneva [76] ISO/IEC 25012:2008, Software engineering – (SQuaRE) – Data quality model, Switzerland, Geneva [77] ISO/IEC 25030:2007, Software engineering – SQuaRE – Quality requirements, Switzerland, Geneva [78] ISO/IEC/IEEE CD 24748-5, Systems and software engineering – Life cycle management – Part 5: Software development planning (2015), Switzerland, Geneva [79] ISO/IEC 24744:2014, Software engineering – Metamodel for development methodologies, Switzerland, Geneva [80] ISO/IEC 15026-1:2013, Systems and software engineering – Systems and software assurance – Part 1: Concepts and vocabulary, Switzerland, Geneva [81] ISO/IEC 15026-2:2011, Systems and software engineering – Systems and software assurance – Part 2: Assurance case, Switzerland, Geneva [82] ISO/IEC 15026-3:2011, Systems and software engineering – Systems and software assurance – Part 3: System integrity levels, including ISO/IEC DIS 15026-3 (2015), Switzerland, Geneva [83] ISO/IEC 15026-4:2012, Systems and software engineering – Systems and software assurance – Part 4: Assurance in the life cycle, Switzerland, Geneva [84] ISO/IEC 25021:2012, Systems and software engineering – SQuaRE – Quality measure elements, Switzerland, Geneva [85] ISO/IEC DIS 25023, Systems and software engineering – SQuaRE – Measurement of system and software product quality (2015), Switzerland, Geneva [86] ISO/IEC DIS 25024, Systems and software engineering – SQuaRE – Measurement of data quality (2015), Switzerland, Geneva [87] ISO/IEC 26550:2013, Software and systems engineering – Reference model for product line engineering and management, Switzerland, Geneva [88] ISO/IEC 26551:2012, Software and systems engineering – Tools and methods for product line requirements engineering, Switzerland, Geneva [89] ISO/IEC 26555:2013, Software and systems engineering – Tools and methods for product line technical management, Switzerland, Geneva [90] ISO/IEC 25040:2011, Systems and software engineering – SQuaRE -- Evaluation process, Switzerland, Geneva [91] ISO/IEC 25041:2012, Systems and software engineering – SQuaRE -- Evaluation guide for developers; acquirers and independent evaluators, Switzerland, Geneva [92] ISO/IEC 25045:2010, Systems and software engineering – SQuaRE – Evaluation module for recoverability, Switzerland, Geneva

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

AC CE

PT

ED

MA

NU

SC

RI P

T

[93] ISO/IEC/IEEE 29119-1:2013, Software and systems engineering – Software testing – Part 1: Concepts and definitions, Switzerland, Geneva [94] ISO/IEC/IEEE 29119-2:2013, Software and systems engineering – Software testing – Part 2: Test processes, Switzerland, Geneva [95] ISO/IEC/IEEE 29119-3:2013, Software and systems engineering – Software testing – Part 3: Test documentation, Switzerland, Geneva [96] ISO/IEC/IEEE FDIS 29119-4 (2015), Software and systems engineering – Software testing – Part 4: Test techniques, Switzerland, Geneva [97] ISO/IEC/IEEE DIS 29119-5 (2015), Software and systems engineering – Software testing – Part 5: Keyword-driven testing, Switzerland, Geneva [98] ISO/IEC 25051:2014, Software engineering – SQuaRE – Requirements for quality of Ready to Use Software Product (RUSP) and instructions for testing (including ISO/IEC 25051:2006/Cor 1:2007), Switzerland, Geneva [99] ISO/IEC TR 25060:2010, Systems and software engineering – SQuaRE – Common Industry Format (CIF) for usability: General framework for usability-related information, Switzerland, Geneva [100] ISO/IEC 25062:2006, Software engineering – SQuaRE – Common Industry Format (CIF) for usability test reports, Switzerland, Geneva [101] ISO/IEC 25063:2014, Systems and software engineering – SQuaRE – Common Industry Format (CIF) for usability: Context of use description, Switzerland, Geneva [102] ISO/IEC 25064:2013, Systems and software engineering – SQuaRE – Common Industry Format (CIF) for usability: User needs report, Switzerland, Geneva [103] ISO/IEC DIS 25066, Systems and software engineering – SQuaRE – Common industry Format for Usability -- Evaluation Report, Switzerland, Geneva [104] ISO/IEC/IEEE 26511:2011, Systems and software engineering – Requirements for managers of user documentation, Switzerland, Geneva [105] ISO/IEC/IEEE 26512:2011, Systems and software engineering – Requirements for acquirers and suppliers of user documentation, Switzerland, Geneva [106] ISO/IEC/IEEE 26515:2011, Systems and software engineering – Developing user documentation in an agile environment, Switzerland, Geneva [107] ISO/IEC/IEEE FDIS 26531, Systems and software engineering – Content management for product life-cycle; user and service management documentation, Switzerland, Geneva 108 ISO/IEC 90003:2014, Software engineering – Guidelines for the application of ISO 9001:2008 to computer software, Switzerland, Geneva [109] S. Petrović, Ž. Micić, ISSS - Contribution to the analysis of design and implementation, Technology, Informatics And Education for Learning And Knowledge Society, 5th International Symposium, Novi Sad, Serbia: 19-20. june, 2009. Proceedings, pp. 323–332. [WWW document] http://www.cnti.info/mainportal/index.php?option=com_content&view=section&id=28&Itemid=127&lang=sr (accessed 3rd january 2012).

[110] ISO/IEC TR 24748-1:2010 Systems and software engineering – Life cycle management – Part 1: Guide for life cycle management (76 pages). [111] ISO/IEC TR 29110-5-1:2012 Software engineering – Lifecycle profiles for Very Small Entities (VSEs) – Part 5-1-1: Management and engineering guide: Generic profile group: Entry profile (32 pages). [112] SRPS ISO/IEC 2382-20:1997 Information technology – Vocabulary – Part 20: System development (15 pages). [113] ISO/IEC TR 19759:2005 Software Engineering – Guide to the Software Engineering Body of Knowledge (SWEBOK) (173 pages). [114] Ž. Micić, M. Micić, M. Java-software for ISO/IEC standardisation analisys and knowledge assurance in information technology examples, Technology, Informatics And Education for Learning And Knowledge Society, 5th International Symposium, Novi Sad, Serbia, (2009), pp. 310–322. [115] Cluster Analysis, Ward’s Method, © 2004 The Pennsylvania State University, [WWW document] http://sites.stat.psu.edu/~ajw13/stat505/fa06/19_cluster/09_cluster_wards.html (accessed 3rd january 2012). [116] Ž. Micić, M. Micić, M. Blagojević, ICT innovations at the platform of standardization for knowledge quality in PDCA, Computer Standards & Interfaces, 36 (1) (2013), pp. 231–243.

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT [117] Ž. Micić, M. Tufegdžić, Knowledge trends in the subfields of manufacturing engineering at the platform of ISO/IEC standardization, Metal. Int. XVIII (7) (2013), pp. 45–50. [118] Ž. Micić, N. Stanković, Knowledge and innovations trends in metallurgy subfields within standardization platform, Metal. Int. XVIII (8) (2013), pp. 154–160.

ED

MA

NU

SC

RI P

T

[119] K. Jakobs, Information technology standards, standards setting and standards research: Mapping the universe, Presented at: Stanhope Center's Roundtable on systematic barriers to the inclusion of a public interest voice in the design of Information and Communications, Technologies, 2003. [WWW document] http://wwwi4.informatik.rwth-aachen.de/~jakobs/Papers/stanhope.pdf (accessed 3rd November 2011). [120] EFQM, European Foundation for Quality Management web portal, (2011) [WWW document] http://www.efqm.org (accessed 3rd November 2011). [121] M.C. Lacity, S. Khan, A. Yan, L.P. Willcocks, A review of the IT outsourcing empirical literature and future research directions, Journal of Information Technology 25(4) (2010), pp. 395–433. [122] K. Saravanamuthu, Information technology and ideology, Journal of Information Technology 17 (2) (2002), pp. 79–87. [133] W.E. Deming, The New Economics, MIT Press. Cambridge, MA. (1993), page 135. [124] J. Lee, U. Bose, Operational linkage between diverse dimensions of information technology investments and multifaceted aspects of a firm's economic performance, Journal of Information Technology 17 (3) (2002), pp. 119– 131. [125] Ž. Micić, M. Micić, The analysis of IT standardisation, and knowledge inovation, Journal Technique ISSN 00402176, Section: Quality, standardisation and metrology – ISSN 1450-989X, (4) (2009), pp. 8–14. [126] S. Raub, C.C. Rüling, The knowledge management tussle – speech communities and rhetorical strategies in the development of knowledge management, Journal of Information Technology 16 (2) (2001), pp. 113–130. [127] J. Kotlarsky, I. Oshri, Country attractiveness for off shoring and offshore outsourcing: additional considerations, Journal of Information Technology 23 (4) (2008), pp. 228–231. [128] B.M. Lunt, J.J. Ekstrom, S.Gorka, G. Hislop, R. Kamali, E. Lawson, R. LeBlanc, J. Miller, H. Reichgelt, Information Technology 2008, Curriculum guidelines for undergraduate degree programs in information technology. Association for Computing Machinery (ACM), IEEE Computer Society, (2008), pp. 114. [WWW document] http://www.acm.org//education/curricula/IT2008%20Curriculum.pdf (accessed 23rd November 2012).

AC CE

PT

[129] ISO/IEC 14764:2006; Information technology – Software maintenance – Software Life Cycle Processes – Maintenance, Switzerland, Geneva (SRPS ISO/IEC 14764:2008, Belgrade) [130] Graduate Software Engineering 2009 (GSwE2009), Curriculum guidelines for graduate degree programs in software engineerin, Stevens Institute of Technolog, 30. September 2009, pp. 114. [WWW document] http://www.gswe2009.org/fileadmin/files/GSwE2009_Curriculum_Docs/GSwE2009_version_1. 0.pdf (accessed 1st January 2014). [131] IS 2010, Curriculum guidelines for undergraduate degree programs in information systems, Association for Computing Machinery and Association for Information Systems (2010), page 88. [WWW document] http://www.acm.org/education/curricula/IS%202010%20ACM%20final.pdf (accessed 1st January 2014). [132] Computer Science Curricula 2013, Ironman Draft (Version 1.0), Association for Computing Machinery IEEEComputer Society, February (2013), page 376. [WWW document] http://ai.stanford.edu/users/sahami/CS2013/ironman-draft/cs2013-ironman-v1.0.pdf (accessed 1st January 2014).

MA

NU

SC

RI P

T

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

AC CE

PT

ED

Figure 1

RI P

T

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

AC CE

PT

ED

MA

NU

SC

Figure 2

RI P

T

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

AC CE

PT

ED

MA

NU

SC

Figure 3

RI P

T

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

AC CE

PT

ED

MA

NU

SC

Figure 4

RI P

T

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

AC CE

PT

ED

MA

NU

SC

Figure 5

RI P

T

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

AC CE

PT

ED

MA

NU

SC

Figure 6

NU

SC

RI P

T

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

AC CE

PT

ED

MA

Figure 7

MA

NU

SC

RI P

T

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

AC CE

PT

ED

Figure 8

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Table 1 Samples of ISO/IEC standardisation of IT research / comparison of IT – SE (two segments)

186

3

195 19 8 20 09 21 78 22 77 24 25

7

0

1 7 0 8 4 7 9 4 9

15 8 164 17 3 14 1 147 15 5 29 75 31 18 32 73 34 07

34 18 14 19 15 11 337

Ivp (9) 2045 4 2188 4 2306 0 2385 4 2430 2 2463 0 3392 38 3548 96 3720 90 3785 04

307 251 268

Iv/yea r (10 ) 34 98 31 10 18 98 43 10 27 66 87 0 3806 6 3395 2 2909 4 3078 6

ΣIv (CHF) (11)

PtDtCtAt

T

Iqi/y ear (8)

21538 22212 23554 24230 24302 24630 34698 6 35961 0 37834 0 39230 0

year

(12)

(13)

P11D11C1 1A11 P12D12C1 2A12 P13D13C1 3A13 P11D11C1 1A11 P12D12C1 2A12 P13D13C1 3A13 P11D11C1 1A11 P12D12C1 2A12 P13D13C1 3A13 P14D14C1 4A14

31-122011. 31-122012. 31-122013. 31-122011. 31-122012. 31-122013. 31-122011. 31-122012. 31-122013. 31-122014.

RI P

5

(6)

I qu ( 7) 4 9 4 5 5 1 2 8 1 5 2 6 7 99 7 84 8 16 8 12

SC

59 64

Iqp

NU

35

47

I qd ( 5) 2

MA

2 35.06 0

Iq w (4)

ED

1 35.08 0

I qs ( 3) 2 56 2 73 2 88 3 58 3 64 3 80 585 3 617 4 644 5 679 3

PT

ICS (2)

AC CE

I

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Table 2 Samples of SRPS standardisation of IT research/comparison of IT–SE (segment 35.080) 31-122014.

13 08 15 27

Ivp

0

1608.2 2 44155. 62 53437. 82

5

261

1

239

7

(9)

Iv/yea r (10 ) 0

ΣIv (CHF)

PtDtCtAt

year

(11)

(12)

(13)

P13D13C13A

31-122013. 31-122013. 31-122014.

T

Iqi/y ear (8)

1608.22

9679 9927

44282.2 9 59570.9 5

NU

SC

0

46

I qu ( 7) 0

RI P

1

Iq p (6)

MA

35

I qd ( 5) 0

ED

1 35.08 0 35

I Iq qs w ( (4) 3) 5 4 0 146 14 3 9 172 17 1 7

PT

IC S (2)

AC CE

I

13

P13D13C13A 13

P14D14C14A 14

ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT Highlights: 1) Originality of trend lines resources planning (Pi) for IT/ICS-1=35 field: y35/ISO/2014, and y35/SRPS/2014 trend lines for development SE (ICS-2=35.060 and ICS-2=35.080) segments 2) Paths of knowledge acquisition in SE fields are based on ISO

RI P

T

3) Originality of the topic for Check(i) innovation trend KB in time dimension and PiDiCiAi methodology

AC CE

PT

ED

MA

NU

SC

4) Platform of standardisation for knowledge improvement, model and products IS excellence (Ai) in PiDiCiAi