IRJET- Factors Affecting the Delivery of Quality Software and their Relationship in the Software Development Process

International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN: 2395-0056
Volume: 05 Issue: 12 | Dec 2018 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072
© 2018, IRJET | Impact Factor value: 7.211 | ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | Page 13
Factors Affecting the Delivery of Quality Software and their relationship
in the Software Development Process
Muhammad Adeel Mannan1, Afzal Hussain2 and Aamir Hussain3
1,2,3Assistant Professor, CS department (HIET), Hamdard University, Karachi, Pakistan
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Abstract - As the world moves forward to paperless
environment, the need of quality software is the key for
successful business. So, it’s important to understand the fact
and develop quality product. This research is basically
deliver the same idea and focuses on the factors that play an
important role in delivering the quality software or product.
These factors are beneficial for both of your business
perspective and software development including the cost
and time spent on developing quality software and also with
proper testing and system development phase. How these
are important to the business world and relates with each
other is the main idea of this paper.
Keywords: Software Quality, Software Cost, SDLC, Time
Estimation
1. INTRODUCTION
It has been observed that most of the companies’ business
depends on IT, face Software Faults. The managers and
professionals may have varied opinions about software
development principles, but most of them agree on one
thing above all that is the software you deliver must be
accurate and reliable to end user. And successful software
development professionals have recognized that effective
testing methods are essential to meeting this goal. [1]
The delivery of quality software and services has become
one of the most important factors that have an impact on
national and international business. Achieving a high
quality product is now the objective of many
organizations. [2] For this we have to look into following
goals
 Deliver software with the expected functions and
quality
 Within the expected time
 Within the expected cost
 Meet standards of testing
 Must follow proper SDLC phases
The structure of this paper is designed in a manner to first
understand what is meant by software quality? This is
followed by the importance of software quality in section
2. In section 3, all the research and literature review is
done and outcome of this review is notify in next section as
the main statement of research. Later on we identified the
variables for hypothesis; analyze them and finally the
conclusive statement regarding research work.
2. HOW MUCH THE SOFTWARE QUALITY
IMPORTANT?
"Quality is the totality of features and characteristics of a
product or a service that bears on its ability to satisfy the
given needs". [ANSI Standard]
“The degree to which a customer or user perceives that
software meets his or her composite expectations. OR the
composite characteristics of software that determine the
degree to which the software in use will meet the
expectations of the customer".
[IEEE Standard]
The above definitions of well-known standards and
organization notify the importance of quality. Although
there are a lot of factors on which the software or product
quality depends. Some of these are usability, cost,
efficiency, testability. As per business needs and
perception, the role of quality software involve in
marketing strategies, costing and time estimation, also
productivity of that organization.[3]
3. BACKGROUND AND RELATED WORK
Software products mainly exhibit two general kinds of
quality, which affect the software schedules in different
ways. The first kind of quality that people usually think of
when they refer to "software quality" is low defect rate.
Some of the project managers shorten their schedules by
reducing the time spent on several quality-assurance
practices such as process design and code reviews, which
is vulnerable to reduction since it’s the critical-path item at
the end of the schedule.
There are some of the worst decisions a person who wants
to maximize development speed can make. In software,
higher quality (in the form of the lowest defect rates) and
reduced development time go hand in hand. A few
organizations have achieved extremely low defect rates

(shown in the figure below), and when you reach that
point, need of further reducing the number of defects will
tend to increase the amount of development time. [7]
Figure 1: Amount of testing to minimize defects [7]
Software testing is necessary to make sure that the
software product meets its predefined goals. Software
testing can either be done manually or automated, to
Improve Quality, For Verification and Validation, For
Reliability Estimation. [4]
SQA plans are available from several software
manufacturers for an additional fee when purchasing the
rights to use the software.
For time saving, many plans based on SQA are sold as
packaged services and complete with the installation
expertise of available certified software consultant. Many
software manufacturers company will pre-package plans
in one, three, five, seven or even ten day services,
depending on the size of the deployment required. [5]
For money saving, software quality assurance plans is the
ability to spread out payments option. Software
manufacturers will require payment all on up front for the
purchase of software licenses, which can take toll on an
individual's or business' budget. As of 2009, the Microsoft
Corporation charged an additional 25% on top of the cost
of the software or product for server solutions and 29%
for desktop and operating system solutions. Other
software manufacturers may charge as high as 40% or
50% above the cost of the software licenses. [5]
The software development life-cycle depends on a series of
phases that includes testing step as well. The testing phase
of SDLC includes system validation, UAT, test case review
and approval. Design faults comprise the most of bugs
found in software. These bugs move through further
development and testing phases. Defects occur are difficult
to detect; same with software defects. The phases of SDLC
are requirements analysis, design, program development,
implementation, testing, system testing and maintenance.
Thus since defects can be occur at any phase, the defect life
cycle involves quality assurance at every phase. [6]
Figure 2: Steps of SDLC [8]
4. CONCERNED PROBLEMS DURING RESEARCH
The main concern of this research is how can we get
quality software? For this purpose we need to identify the
factors on the basis of which quality of software depends.
Through the literature review it is identified that the
quality of software can be achieved by following the
processes that involve proper testing methods and
techniques, the time required for completion of software
and the actual cost of that software development process.
The steps of SDLC may or may not affect the software
quality will also be the point under research consideration.
5. IDENTIFICATION OF VARIABLES
The variables or quality measures of software are very
important, we identify and will be analyzing following
factors that affect the delivery of quality software.
 Delivery of Quality Software (DOQS)
 Amount of Testing(AOT)
 Cost Involved(CI)
 Time Spent(TS)
 Steps of SDLC(SOS)
6. HYPOTHETICAL OUTCOMES
Ho (Null hypothesis): There is a relation between delivery
of quality software with amount of testing, cost involved,
time consumed, and SDLC.

Ho = ß1 = ß2 = ß3 = ß4 =0
H1 (Alternative Hypothesis): There is no relation
between delivery of quality software with amount of
testing, cost involved, time consumed, and SDLC.
H1 = At least one ß is not zero.
6.1 Questionnaire Design:
The respondents responded to questions under each
variable on five point Likert Scale with “Strongly Agree”
dictating the highest level of satisfaction, “Strongly
Disagree” as the highest level of dissatisfaction. Some
demographic questions were also asked for more
interpretation of responses. The developed questionnaire
has been pre-tested with a few respondents to ensure the
quality of the questions.
6.2 Model:
The researcher has used the Delivery of Quality Software
(DOQS) as the dependent variable and Amount of Testing
(AOT), Cost Involved (CI), Time Spent (TS), and Steps of
SDLC (SOS) as independent variables.
The researcher has run the OLS Regression model to
determine the significance level of the variables under
study. The basic model is as follows:
DOQS = f (Amount of testing, Cost involved, Time
consumed, and Steps of SDLC).
Basically,
DOQS= α + ß1x1 + ß2x2+ ß3x3+ ß4x4 + e
Where,
DOQS= Delivery of Quality Software,
x1= Amount of testing, x2= Cost involved, x3= Time
consumed, and x4 = Steps of SDLC.
There α is constant and βs are coefficients to
estimate, and e is the error term.
6.3 Analysis and Findings
A total of 80 questionnaires were distributed to the
respondents. The researcher discarded incomplete
questionnaires and considered 60 questionnaires
containing all information.
Table No. 1 Descriptive Statistics
Mean Std. Deviation N
SQA 3.93 .551 60
Test 3.77 .444 60
Cost 3.88 .384 60
Time 3.96 .501 60
SDLC 2.84 .463 60
Source: SPSS regression results of the field work
Table No. 1 shows the mean value depicting the overall
importance of “Delivery of Quality Software”. As far as this
descriptive statistics is concerned, DOQS is above
satisfactory level (with a mean value of 3.93 on a 5 point
Liker scale). The table also suggests that the main factors
on which the software house managers are generally
satisfied. As far as the mean values are concerned,
respondents are fairly satisfied on amount of testing
involved, cost involved, time consumed and SDLC steps
involved.
The overall regression model and its ANOVA are
summarized as follows:
Table No. 2 Model Summary
Model R
R
Square
Adjusted R
Square
Std. Error of the
Estimate
1 .626a .392 .385 .59705
a. Predictors: (Constant), SDLC, Time, Cost, Test
Table No. 3 ANOVAb
Model
Sum of
Squares
df
Mean
Square
F Sig.
1
Regression 90.299 4 15.050 42.219 .000
Residual 140.094 55 .356
Total 26.183 59

Table No. 3 ANOVAb
Model
Sum of
Squares
df
Mean
Square
F Sig.
1
Regression 90.299 4 15.050 42.219 .000
Residual 140.094 55 .356
Total 26.183 59
a. Predictors: (Constant), SDLC, Time, Cost,
Test
b. Dependent Variable: SQA
From the ANOVA Test it shows the table Sig. value 0.05 is
greater than the calculated Sig. value 0.000. It reflects the
null hypothesis at 5% level of significance. It means there
was a significant correlation between dependent variable
and independent variables. Therefore software quality
assurance level depends on quality dimension in different
private software houses in Karachi, Pakistan. But it does
not mean that all factors of service quality have significant
correlation with software quality assurance level. The
overall predictability of the model is shown in Table No. 2
above. The adjusted R square value of .385 indicates that
the model explains roughly about 38% of the factors
responsible for software quality assurance level.
The ANOVA table shown under Table No. 3 depicting
significant F values implies that the model and data are
well fit in explaining software quality assurance level.
Based on the data found in Table No. 4 below, it can be
interpreted that the independent variables such as
Amount of testing, Cost involved and Time consumed have
strong impact on software quality assurance level; hence,
the other variable Steps of SDLC involved has been
dropped from the final analysis based on (99% level of
significance).
6.4 The Regression Model
From the above findings we can develop the following
regression model:
DOQS= -0.185 + 0.254x1 + 0.402x2+ 0.266x3
Standard Error: (.263) (.060) (.071) (.056)
T values (4.259) ** (5.684) ** (4.735) **
R square (Adj.) = .385, F = 42.219 **, significant at 99%
level
Where,
DOQS = Delivery of Quality Software,
x1 = Amount of testing involved, x2 = Cost
involved, and x3 = Time spent.
Coefficient analysis shows the relationship between
dependent variable and each independent variable.
According to Sig. value amount of testing involved, Cost
involved, and time spent has significant correlation with
the dependent variable.
Table Sig. value is 0.05 which is greater than calculated Sig.
value 0.000, 0.002 respectively. But the calculated Sig.
value of amount of testing involved, cost involved, and
time spent are greater than the table Sig. value. So, these
factors have some impact on dependent variable but it is
not significant.
Here, x1 = 0.186 i.e. 100% change in amount of testing
involved leads to 18.6% change in delivery of quality
software.
Next, x2 = 0.280 i.e. 100% change in cost involved leads to
28% change in dependent variable.
Model
Un-standardized
Coefficients
Standardized
Coefficients
t Sig.
B Std. Error Beta
1
(Constant) -.185 .263 -.703 .482
Test .254 .060 .186 4.259 .002
Cost .402 .071 .280 5.684 .000
Time .266 .056 .248 4.735 .000
SDLC .064 .193 .054 .332 .742
a. Dependent
Variable: SQA
Table No. 4 Coefficients a

Lastly, x3 =0.248 i.e. 100% change in time spent leads to
24.8% change in the dependent variable.
7. CONCLUDING REMARKS
From the statistical analysis it is observed that there is a
relation between delivery of quality software and amount
of testing involved, cost involved, time spent, and steps of
SDLC used as such null hypothesis is accepted and
alternative hypothesis is rejected.
A number of private software houses are operating their
activities in Karachi, Pakistan. Many software houses can
perform their activities by incorporating a permanent
division of Software Quality Assurance (SQA).
The research conducted on the empirical analysis of the
importance of software quality assurance procedure to be
performed during the development of custom based
software for customers showed significant relationships
with the variables discussed in this study.
Further work may be conducted to analyze more factors
which may affect the overall importance of software
quality assurance, which eventually leads to more satisfied
customers, and hence improve the goodwill and reputation
of the software houses.
REFERENCES
[1] Ioan Mihnea IACOB and Radu CONSTANTINESCU
“Testing: First Step Towards Software Quality”,
Journal of Applied Quantitative Method
[2] Sommerville I, Software Engineering, Addison
Wesley, 2001
[3] Ronan Fitzpatrick “Software Quality: Definitions
and Strategic Issues”, Staffordshire University,
School of Computing Report
[4] In 2004, Author Layna Uaha disused “Importance
of Software testing” in book “The Art of Software
Testing, Second Edition”
[5] In 2006, Jerry Mobbs Senior SQA Manager at UK
Based software house he discussed about
“Software Quality Assurance Plan” in “Annual
Software Assurance Plan”.
[6] Frankie Colbert worked at Carnegie Mellon
University as Software Tester he discussed “What
Is Software Testing, Life Cycle & Bug tracking”.
[7] [Weblink]http://www.stevemcconnell.com/articl
es/art04.htm
[8] [Weblink]https://umdrive.memphis.edu/g-
cscm/www/ctr4/ctrinsoftwaretest.pdf
[9] Herb Krasner and Krasner Consulting, “Using the
Cost of Quality Approach for Software”
[10] Manju Lata and Rajendra Kumar, “An Approach to
Optimize the Cost of Software Quality Assurance
Analysis”, International Journal of Computer
Applications
BIOGRAPHIES
Muhammad Adeel Mannan is
currently doing PhD in Computer
Science. He has completed his MS in
Software Engineering from SZABIST
Karachi, and BS in Computer Science
from University of Karachi. His research
Interests are Software Engineering,
Data Science and IT Project
Management. He also holds an ITIL®
foundation and COBIT® Certification.
Afzal Hussain received Masters in
Software Engineering degree from
Faculty of Computer Science &
Information Technology (FSKTM)
University of Malaya Malaysia in 2009,
and Masters in Computer Science from
University of Karachi Pakistan in 1999.
His research Interests are IoT,
Information System Audit, Project
Management and Software Engineering.He also holds an IT
Infrastructure Library (ITIL®) foundation and Control
Objectives for Information and related Technology
(COBIT®) Certification.
Aamir Hussain did Masters in
Computer Science from University of
Karachi in 2001. Later on, he
completed his Masters in Science in
Computer Science with specialization
in Software Engineering. His areas of
interests in research are Requirement
Engineering and Management
Information Systems.

IRJET- Factors Affecting the Delivery of Quality Software and their Relationship in the Software Development Process

More Related Content

What's hot (19)

Similar to IRJET- Factors Affecting the Delivery of Quality Software and their Relationship in the Software Development Process (20)

More from IRJET Journal (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

IRJET- Factors Affecting the Delivery of Quality Software and their Relationship in the Software Development Process