Detalhes bibliográficos
| Ano de defesa: |
2016 |
| Autor(a) principal: |
Costa, Daniella de Oliveira
 |
| Orientador(a): |
Leitão Júnior, Plínio de Sá
|
| Banca de defesa: |
Lucena, Fábio Nogueira de,
Vicenzzi, Auri Marcelo Rizzo |
| Tipo de documento: |
Dissertação
|
| Tipo de acesso: |
Acesso aberto |
| Idioma: |
por |
| Instituição de defesa: |
Universidade Federal de Goiás
|
| Programa de Pós-Graduação: |
Programa de Pós-graduação em Ciência da Computação (INF)
|
| Departamento: |
Instituto de Informática - INF (RG)
|
| País: |
Brasil
|
| Palavras-chave em Português: |
|
| Palavras-chave em Inglês: |
|
| Área do conhecimento CNPq: |
|
| Link de acesso: |
http://repositorio.bc.ufg.br/tede/handle/tede/6100
|
Resumo: |
Background. Test process requires constant follow-ups to evolve their methodologies. To support the improvement of processes, we have the Test Maturity Models such as TMM and TMMi. However, the TMMi model does not provide instruments or framweworks that allows companies to check the adherence about the model, it is necessary the expert advice. For shortage of certifiers in the country, the cost becomes high and hinders to obtainment certification for small businesses. Aim. Propose a methodology of low cost to assess of test process, which shall support in the improvement and quality of testing procedures employed in Small Software Companies Methodology. An exploratory and qualitative research, conducted by: (i) Research instruments or frameworks which are available to assess testing process relative to TMMi levels through Systematic Review; and (ii) abstraction of evidence of the studies, collaborating with test process assessments. From the defined contributions and mandatory guidelines TAMAR define an assessment process with the focus to meet the limitations of small companies. Results. An evaluation process covering Planning activities; Preparation; Application; Analysis of the results; and Closing. The assessment instrument provided a new approach in the presentation of the issues. The questions were given by affinity groups, focusing the respondent to a specific stage of the test process. Conclusion. Perform routine to prepare those involved brought a brief overview of the maturity model and reducing uncertainty for indication of evidence in addition to the new approach to provision of the issues by affinity groups. The validation has shown that the instrument is simple and assistance provided throughout the process enables the evaluation of small business process. |
