This paper presents the quality model of enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems byadapting the ISO9126 standard. This model is used to verify that whether the implementation of ERPsystems will succeed or fail in higher educational institutions.
Iso Wiki
Six quality characteristics are suggested tobe minimum requirements for creating the quality model of ERP systems, including functionality,reliability, usability, efficiency, maintainability, and portability of ERP systems. The qualitycharacteristics could not be measured directly. Thus in this study, they are divided into twenty seven subcharacteristics. Evaluating the Quality of Software in ERP Systems Using the ISO 9126 Model.1.International Journal of Ambient Systems and Applications (IJASA) Vol.1, No.1, March 2013 Evaluating the Quality of Software in ERP Systems Using the ISO 9126 Model Thamer A. Alrawashdeh, Mohammad Muhairat and Ahmad Althunibat Department of software Engineering, Alzaytoonah University of Jordan, Amman, JordanAbstract ــــThis paper presents the quality model of enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems byadapting the ISO9126 standard. This model is used to verify that whether the implementation of ERPsystems will succeed or fail in higher educational institutions. Six quality characteristics are suggested tobe minimum requirements for creating the quality model of ERP systems, including functionality,reliability, usability, efficiency, maintainability, and portability of ERP systems.
The qualitycharacteristics could not be measured directly. Thus in this study, they are divided into twenty seven sub-characteristics.Keyword ــــSoftware Quality models, Software Quality Characteristics and ERP systemsQuality Model.1 INTRODUCTIONThe growth of Information Systems (IS) has an important role in improving the operations ofhigher education institutions. In this respect, ERP (Enterprise Resource Planning) systems haveintegrated information systems, in order to control business functions in an organization. Manystudies on the ERP systems in different domains found that the information that provided by theERP systems have a positive effect on the decision making, since they can provide decisionmakers with valuable information from different functional areas (Madapusi, 2008, Holsappleand Sena, 2005 and Bendoly, 2003). By implementing such system, institutions andorganizations expect to improve quality and productivity of business operations. Therefore,higher education institutions have spent millions of dollars and the time taken for ERP systemsimplementation, sometimes takes more than two years (Swartz and Orgill, 2001).Thus, the institutions have moved to use the ERP systems for better quality. However, manystudies have shown a rather high failure rate in the implementation of ERP systems (Zornadaand Velkavrh, 2005).
In the educational environment, although a number of research activitieshave been conducted on the quality of education institutions’ information systems, most ofthese studies have been conducted to assess the quality of e-learning websites (Abdellatief et al.2011 and Padayachee et al. Therefore, the quality of ERP systems is a complex concept,due the lack of studies in this field. As well as, the ERP systems in the education institutionscompose technological, organizational, administrative, usage and instructional risk.
Hence, howto measure a quality of such systems is still not clear. Therefore, this paper aims to develop aquality model to provide a framework for evaluating the quality of education institutions’ ERPsystems. 1.International Journal of Ambient Systems and Applications (IJASA) Vol.1, No.1, March 20132 LITERATURE REVIEWIn order to propose an appropriate software quality model for ERP systems, this sectionhighlights the most popular software quality models in the literature, their contributions anddisadvantages. These models are McCall’s software quality model, Boehm’s software productquality model, Dromey’s quality model, FURPS quality model and ISOIEC 9126. McCall’s Quality modelMcCall’s model is one of the most commonly used software quality models (Panovski, 2008).This model provides a framework to assess the software quality through three levels. Thehighest level consists eleven quality factors that represent the external view of the software(customers’ view), while the middle level provides twenty three quality criteria for the qualityfactors. Such criteria represent the internal view of the software (developers’ view).
Finally, onthe lowest level, a set of matrices is provided to measure the quality criteria (McCall et al.1977). According to Fahmy et al. (2012) the contribution of the McCall Model is assessing therelationships between external quality factors and product quality criteria. However, thedisadvantages of this model are the functionality of a software product is not present and not allmatrices are objectives, many of them are subjective (Behkamal et al.
Iso 9126 Ppt
Boehm’s Quality ModelIn order to evaluate the quality of software products, Boehm proposed quality model based onthe McCall’s model. The proposed model has presented hierarchical structure similar to theMcCall’s model (Boehm et al. Many advantages are provided by the Boehm’s modelnamely taking the utility of a program into account and extending the McCall model by addingcharacteristics to explain the maintainability factor of software products (Fahmy et al. 2012).However, it does not present an approach to assess its quality characteristics (Panovski, 2008). FURPS Quality ModelThe FURPS model was introduced by Robert Grady in 1992. It’s worth mentioning that, thename of this model comes from five quality characteristics including Functionality, Usability,Reliability, Performance and Supportability. These quality characteristics have beendecomposed into two categories: functional and nonfunctional requirements (Grady, 1992).
Thefunctional requirements defined by inputs and expected outputs (functionality), whilenonfunctional requirement composes reliability, performance, usability and supportability.However, the one disadvantage of this model is the software portability has not been considered(Al-Qutaish, 2010). Dromey’s Quality ModelDromy’s model extends the ISO 9126: 1991 by adding two high-level quality characteristics tointroduce a framework for evaluating the quality of software products. Therefore, this modelcomprehends eight high-level characteristics. Such characteristics are organized into threequality models including requirement quality model, design quality model and implementationquality model (Dromey, 1996). According to Behkamal et al. (2009), the main idea behindDromey’s model reveals that, formulating a quality model that is broad enough for differentsystems and assessing the relationships between characteristics and sub-characteristics ofsoftware product quality.
2.International Journal of Ambient Systems and Applications (IJASA) Vol.1, No.1, March 2013The One disadvantage of Droemy’s model is the reliability and maintainability characteristicscould not be judged before a product actually implemented (Fahmy et al. ISO 9126 ModelISO 9126 is an international standard for software quality evaluation.
Iso 25010:2010
It was originallypresented in 1991; then it had been extended in 2004. The ISO 9126 quality model presentsthree aspects of software quality which address the internal quality, external quality and qualityin use (ISO, 2004). Therefore, this model evaluates the quality of software in term the externaland internal software quality and their connection to quality attributes. In this respect, themodel presents such quality attributes as a hierarchical structure of characteristics and sub-characteristics. The highest level composes six characteristics that are further divided intotwenty one sub-characteristics on the lowest level. The main advantage of this model is themodel could be applied to the quality of any software product (Fahmy et al.
2012).As a summary of this section, Table 1 compares the quality characteristics of different qualitymodels. It is visible that some characteristics are not much considered (have less effect on thesoftware product quality) namely, correctness, human engineering, process maturity,performance, supportability and changeability. Therefore, this paper will not pay attention forsuch characteristics. On the other hand, two reasons to adapt the ISO 9126 quality model, inorder to develop ERP systems quality model. These reasons include generality of the ISO 9126model, since it could be applied to measure the quality of various systems; and it has taken thecommon quality characteristics into consideration.