An evaluation of case tools for function-oriented analysis and object-oriented design

To read the full-text of this research, you can request a copy directly from the authors.


The project described in this paper was to establish a repeatable evaluation process and evaluation criteria for a software development environment that conducted requirements analysis using the IDEF0/IDEF1 function-oriented methodology and software design using an object-oriented methodology. A set of criteria was established and a procedure for weighting the criteria was defined. Then the process for evaluating CASE tools (or tool sets) to support analysis and design was outlined and validated using test cases. It is clear from this study and others cited in this paper that the factors to be used in evaluation of CASE tools are relatively common, but the weights will vary significantly depending upon the particular environment in which the tools will be used. In an environment where different tools and methodologies exist, criteria that address that storage and representation of models (in the repository) and those that address interface standards become exceedingly important. Of course, correct methodological support is still the most important criteria. After developing the evaluation criteria, validating the adequacy of the criteria to evaluate all the features of a CASE tool is very important. Using evaluators during the validation stage who were not involved with the criteria development helps to better identify inconsistencies and ambiguities in the criteria. An organization wishing to acquire CASE tools can begin by reviewing the substantial set of evaluation factors and criteria identified in the literature and assessing the importance of each to the organization's software development environment. Usually there will be multiple alternatives which will satisfy the organization's needs, with little risk involved in choosing between the top two or three alternatives. Following proven procedures and processes, such as those outlined by IEEE (7) and SEI (10), along with a careful assessment of organizational needs and directions should guide an organization to select CASE tools that maximize return on the substantial involvement of human and financial resources.

No full-text available

Request Full-text Paper PDF

To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.

A national survey was conducted to evaluate the impact which networks have on systems development. The survey addressed how the process of systems development may be enhanced by networks, how networks are addressed as part of the product of systems development, and who is making decisions regarding network development, implementation, and maintenance. The results provide a picture of the current role of networks in systems development and suggestions are made concerning how this role could be changed.
The past few years has seen a growing list of products appear on the market that are aimed at assisting in the design and development of computer information systems. These computer-aided software engineering (CASE) tools automate parts of the software life-cycle. A detailed critical analysis of these tools is presented, using three of the most popular products as the basis for discussion. The tools are assessed and compared not only in relation to the different facilities that they offer, but also with regard to how well they reflect recent developments in the fields of data modelling, systems analysis, and software engineering. It is concluded that the tools offer such different approaches to the analysis and design process that the prospective user should decide on his requirements and underlying philosophy, before determining the best match between these and the wide range of available tools.
An epistomology for CASE that defines the current CASE technologies is presented. Its influence on traditional software process models is considered, and its support throughout a typical software development life cycle is identified. A four stage software process model is used as a basis for classifying CASE technology. A method for evaluating CASE products that follows a procedural framework is presented. Five evaluation criteria sets are used when applying the method to determine the CASE requirements for an organization.
An organizational framework for integrated CASE development and research that is based on the reference model for integrated software-engineering environments being developed by the NIST and the European Computer Manufacturers Association is proposed. Services defined in the reference model permit three forms of integration: data integration, control integration, and presentation integration. The reference model, which describes a wide range of CASE environments, and frameworks, can guide standards development and serve as a basis for educating software engineers. The organizational framework divides systems development and management into three activity levels: IS infrastructure planning and design is undertaken at the enterprise level, systems project management and decisions are made at the project level, and software-development processes are carried out at the individual and team level. The ways in which the organizational framework, which complements the technical framework, can guide the development and deployment of integrated CASE environments, direct future research, and help CASE users select and configure tools in an integrated CASE environment are discussed.< >