Software
Evaluation Glossary
(QMS-ISPL-G-SEF)
|
Version No |
V20 |
Prepared by |
|
|
Date |
30-01-2015 |
Name |
Sai
Prasad Koneru |
|
Signature |
|
||
|
Date |
30-01-2015 |
||
|
Copy No |
|
Approved by |
|
|
Issued to |
|
Name |
Thomas
Glass |
|
Signature |
|
||
|
Date |
30-01-2015 |
||
Document
Amendment Record
A-
A-
Added,
M- Modified, D- Deleted
|
Sl.No |
Date |
Version
No |
Page
No |
Change
Mode(A/M/D) |
Brief
description of change |
|
1 |
|
V01 |
N/A |
A |
Initial Release |
|
2 |
06-06-2012 |
V01 |
N/A |
D |
The Company address information is
removed from the Footer |
|
3 |
30-01-2015 |
V20 |
N/A |
N/A |
Reviewed and base lined |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Table of
Contents
1
Introduction
The purpose and scope of this
glossary are to explain the software evaluation process to the members of the
software evaluation committee.
2
Purpose
The purpose of this glossary is to assist
the evaluator in evaluation of the software.
2.1 Scope
All software
work products, which are not standardized for e.g. as i.e. Microsoft Office.
2.2 Terms and definitions
|
Abbreviations/Terms |
Description |
|
QMS |
Quality Management System |
|
ISPL |
Inooga Solutions Pvt.Ltd. |
|
SEC |
Software Evaluation Committee |
|
SEF |
Software Evaluation Form |
3
Overview
The software evaluation committee headed
by CTO/CEO and the assigned evaluator are responsible for evaluating the
software.
This is done in three steps:
1.
Requisition for the evaluation of a
specific software(QMS-ISPL-F-SER)
2.
Evaluating a single software using
Software Evaluation Form(QMS-ISPL-F-SEF)
3.
Evaluation based on the comparative
analysis of similar softwarefs with the current software using Software
Evaluation Matrix (QMS-ISPL-F-SWM) respectively.
Any employee may request that software
be evaluated. A software evaluation requisition form is filled and sent to the
software evaluation committee for evaluating the software. Based on the request
from the employee, the SEC or the assigned evaluator evaluates the software in
two steps. First single software as per the request is evaluated using software
evaluation form and is compared with the other similar softwares
using software evaluation matrix.
This glossary is used for assisting
the assigned evaluator in evaluating the software in terms of functionality,
reliability, usability, ease of use, maintainability, portability,
documentation, quality and cost as mentioned in detail below.
3.1 Functionality
A set of
attributes that bear on the existence of a set of functions and their specified
properties.
The functions are those that satisfy stated or implied needs as defined in the
organizations requirements.
The functionality of the software is
evaluated based on the following:
General Comment: All descriptions
here are high level description of the meaning of the mentioned expressions,
but there is no explanation of the criteria to be used for the evaluation. In
this case we should call the document not guideline, but glossary.
Package
integrity-
The software is evaluated based on the integrity of the components.
Content/Interface – The content and interface of the
software is evaluated.
Design
features
– The software is evaluated based on the design techniques that it uses for e.g.
Database design, Screen design etc.
Management
- The overall
content and functionality management of the software is evaluated.
Risks – The software is evaluated based
on various risks.
3.2 Reliability
The set of attributes that bear on
the capability of software to maintain its level of performance under stated
conditions for a stated period of time
The reliability of the software is
evaluated based on the following:
Performance- The software is evaluated based on
the overall performance which includes the stress testing, volume testing etc.
Frequency
of failures
– The software is evaluated based on the frequency of failures while performing
various tests.
User
3.3 Usability
The set of attributes that bear on
the effort needed for use and on the individual assessment of such use, by a
stated or implied set of users
The usability of the software is
evaluated based on the following:
Assessment- The software is evaluated based on
assessment.
Response
Time
– The software is evaluated based on the response time taken while executing a
specific task.
3.4 Ease of use
The software is evaluated based on
the user-friendliness, relationship between the level of performance of the
software and the amount of resources used, under stated conditions.
3.5 Maintainability
The set of attributes that bear on
the effort needed to make specified modifications
Warranty
Effort
for changes
– The software is evaluated based on the duration of the effort spent for
changes if any.
3.6 Portability
The set of
attributes that bear on the ability of the software to be transferred from one
environment to another one.
The software is evaluated based on
the possible operating systems as well as databases it is compatible with.
3.7 Documentation
The software evaluation is done
based on the quality of the documentation provided by the software like the
user manuals, help desk etc.
3.8 Quality
The software is evaluated based on
the overall quality which includes all the above mentioned sections for e.g. Maintainablilitywise, documentationwise,
ease of use, functionality etc.
3.9 Cost
The software is evaluated based on
the cost.
The overall rating is computed based
on the ratings provided above.
If the rating
for each attribute or the overall rating is less than or equal to 2 (two), then
the root cause for that specific section like functionality, quality etc.
should be mentioned.
Evaluation criteria- If the rating
for each attribute or the overall rating is less than or equal to 2 (two), then
the software is either rejected otherwise the action plan is prepared to
enhance the performance of the software.
4
Conclusion
Upon evaluation of single software
using the software evaluation form, the inputs from the same are taken for comparison
of the current software with that of the similar other softwares
in the market. Comparison is done using the software evaluation matrix and a
decision is taken by the software evaluation committee based on the comparison
of the total evaluation score with other identical softwares
as obtained in the software evaluation matrix.
5
Quality records
|
Sl. No |
Required Record |
Custodian |
Retention Period |
Record ID |
|
1. |
Software
Evaluation Requisition |
Software
Evaluation Committee / Any Employee |
1
Year or till next 2 releases of the software |
|
|
2. |
Software
Evaluation Form |
Software
Evaluation Committee member |
1
Year or till the next 2 releases of the software |
|
|
3. |
Software
Evaluation Matrix |
Software
Evaluation Committee member |
1
Year or till the next 2 releases of the software |