Skip to main content

ArchCaMO - A Maturity Model for Software Architecture Description Based on ISO/IEC/IEEE 42010:2011

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Computational Science and Its Applications – ICCSA 2019 (ICCSA 2019)

Abstract

Academia and Industry have acknowledged that having a fully described software architecture is a crucial asset for software development and maintenance. The description of a software architecture is read by many stakeholders when developing and maintaining complex software systems which are composed by multiple elements, including software, systems, hardware and processes. The software architecture as a development product is useful for technical activities, such as describing the views and concerns of the future software products, as well as for management activities, including allocating tasks to each team and as an input for project management activities. One main issue when describing the software architecture is knowing what elements must be included in the architecture, and at what level of detail. Therefore, it is not unusual that software architects have to deal with difficulties in terms of how to describe the architecture. This paper brings two main purposes: first is the idea of establishing levels of a maturity model for software architectures, which can help in organizing, describing and communicating the software architecture for multiple stakeholders, and, second, a way to evaluate how mature is the software architecture.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Dijkstra, E.W.: The structure of THE-multiprogramming system. Commun. ACM 26(1), 49–52 (1968)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Parnas, D.L.: On the criteria to be used in decomposing systems into modules. Commun. ACM 15(12), 1053–1058 (1972)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Parnas, D.L.: A technique for software module specification with examples. Commun. ACM 15(5), 330–336 (1972)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Tofan, D., Galster, M., Avgeriou, P., Schuitema, W.: Past and future of software architectural decisions - a systematic mapping study. Inf. Softw. Technol. 56(8), 850–872 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Capilla, R., Jansen, A., Tang, A., Avgeriou, P., Babar, M.A.: 10 years of software architecture knowledge management: practice and future. J. Syst. Softw. 116, 191–205 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Garlan, D.: Software architecture: a roadmap. In: Proceedings of the Conference on The Future of Software Engineering, ICSE 2000, pp. 91–101 (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Kruchten, P., Obbink, H., Stafford, J.: The past, present, and future for software architecture. IEEE Softw. 23(2), 22–30 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Garlan, D.: Software architecture: a travelogue. Proc. Future Softw. Eng. FOSE 2014, 29–39 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Bass, L., Clements, P., Kazman, R.: Software Architecture in Practice, 3rd edn. Addison-Wesley Professional (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Oquendo, F.: Software architecture challenges and emerging research in software-intensive systems-of-systems. In: Tekinerdogan, B., Zdun, U., Babar, A. (eds.) ECSA 2016. LNCS, vol. 9839, pp. 3–21. Springer, Cham (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-48992-6_1

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  11. Booch, G.: The economics of architecture-first. IEEE Softw. 24(5), 18–20 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Buchgeher, G., Weinreich, R., Kriechbaum, T.: Making the case for centralized software architecture management. In: Winkler, D., Biffl, S., Bergsmann, J. (eds.) SWQD 2016. LNBIP, vol. 238, pp. 109–121. Springer, Cham (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-27033-3_8

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  13. Galster, M., Tamburri, D.A., Kazman, R.: Towards understanding the social and organizational dimensions of software architecting. SIGSOFT Softw. Eng. Notes 42(3), 24–25 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Yang, C., Liang, P., Avgeriou, P.: A systematic mapping study on the combination of software architecture and agile development. J. Syst. Softw. 111, 157–184 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Wirfs-Brock, R., Yoder, J., Guerra, E.: Patterns to develop and evolve architecture during an agile software project. In: Proceedings of the 22nd Conference on Pattern Languages of Programs, PLoP 2015, pp. 9:1–9:18 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Waterman, M., Noble, J., Allan, G.: How much up-front? A grounded theory of agile architecture. In: Proceedings of the 37th International Conference on Software Engineering, ICSE 2015, vol. 1, pp. 347–357 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Abrahamsson, P., Babar, M.A., Kruchten, P.: Agility and architecture: can they coexist? IEEE Softw. 27, 16–22 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Ding, W., Liang, P., Tang, A., Vliet, H.V., Shahin, M.: How do open source communities document software architecture: an exploratory survey. In: 2014 19th International Conference on Engineering of Complex Computer Systems, pp. 136–145 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Graaf, K.A., Liang, P., Tang, A., Van Vliet, H.: How organisation of architecture documentation affects architectural knowledge retrieval. Sci. Comput. Program. 121, 75–99 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Díaz-Pace, J.A., Villavicencio, C., Schiaffino, S., Nicoletti, M., Vázquez, H.: Producing just enough documentation: an optimization approach applied to the software architecture domain. J. Data Seman. 5(1), 37–53 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Kruchten, P.B.: The 4+1 view model of architecture. IEEE Softw. 12(6), 42–50 (1995)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. ISO/IEC/IEEE: Systems and Software Engineering - Architecture Description. ISO/IEC/IEEE 42010:2011(E) (Revision of ISO/IEC 42010:2007 and IEEE Std 1471–2000), pp. 1–46 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Paulk, M.C., Weber, C.V., Curtis, B., Chrissis, M.B.: Capability maturity model for software (version 1.1). Technical report CMU/SEI-93-TR-024 ESC-TR-93-177, Software Engineering Institute, Pittsburgh, PA (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Chrissis, M.B., Konrad, M., Shrum, S.: CMMI for Development: Guidelines for Process Integration and Product Improvement, 3rd edn. Addison-Wesley Professional (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  25. Ahmed, F., Capretz, L.F.: An architecture process maturity model of software product line engineering. Innov. Syst. Softw. Eng. 7(3), 191–207 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Ostadzadeh, S.S., Shams, F.: Towards a software architecture maturity model for improving ultra-large-scale systems interoperability. CoRR, abs/1401.5752 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Meyer, M., Helfert, M., O’Brien, C.: An analysis of enterprise architecture maturity frameworks. In: Grabis, J., Kirikova, M. (eds.) BIR 2011. LNBIP, vol. 90, pp. 167–177. Springer, Heidelberg (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-24511-4_13

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  28. França, J.M.S., de Lima, J.S., Soares, M.S.: Development of an electronic health record application using a multiple view service oriented architecture. In: Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems, ICEIS 2017, Porto, Portugal, 26–29 April 2017, vol. 2, pp. 308–315 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Crichton, R., Moodley, D., Pillay, A., Gakuba, R., Seebregts, C.J.: An architecture and reference implementation of an open health information mediator: enabling interoperability in the rwandan health information exchange. In: Weber, J., Perseil, I. (eds.) FHIES 2012. LNCS, vol. 7789, pp. 87–104. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-39088-3_6

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  30. Musil, J., Musil, A., Weyns, D., Biffl, S.: An Architecture framework for collective intelligence systems. In: 2015 12th Working IEEE/IFIP Conference on Software Architecture, pp. 21–30 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Van Heesch, U., Avgeriou, P., Hilliard, R.: A documentation framework for architecture decisions. J. Syst. Softw. 85(4), 795–820 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Karkhanis, P., Brand, M.G., Rajkarnikar, S.: Defining the C-ITS reference architecture. In: 2018 IEEE International Conference on Software Architecture Companion (ICSA-C), vol. 00, pp. 148–151 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  33. Vidoni, M., Vecchietti, A.: Towards a reference architecture for advanced planning systems. In: Hammoudi, S., Maciaszek, L., Missikoff, M.M., Camp, O., Cordeiro, J. (eds.) Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Enterprise Information Systems (ICEIS), vol. 1, pp. 433–440 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  34. Williams, J.L., Stracener, J.T.: First steps in the development of a Program Organizational Architectural Framework (POAF). Syst. Eng. 16(1), 45–70 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Effenberger, F., Hilbert, A.: Towards an energy information system architecture description for industrial manufacturers: decomposition & allocation view. Energy 112, 599–605 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. ISO/IEC/IEEE: Systems and software engineering-System life cycle processes (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  37. Kavakli, E., Buenabad-Chvez, J., Tountopoulos, V., Loucopoulos, P., Sakellariou, R.: WiP: an architecture for disruption management in smart manufacturing. In: 2018 IEEE International Conference on Smart Computing (SMARTCOMP), pp. 279–281 (2018)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgment

This study was financed in part by the Fundação de Apoio a Pesquisa e Inovação Tecnológica do Estado de Sergipe.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ademir A. C. Júnior .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Júnior, A.A.C., Misra, S., Soares, M.S. (2019). ArchCaMO - A Maturity Model for Software Architecture Description Based on ISO/IEC/IEEE 42010:2011. In: Misra, S., et al. Computational Science and Its Applications – ICCSA 2019. ICCSA 2019. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 11623. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-24308-1_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-24308-1_3

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-24307-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-24308-1

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics