The DOI matches its Crossref record; 72 of the 76 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Fuzzy AHP based prioritization and taxonomy of software process improvement success factors in global software development
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Düllmann et al. [24] and some other researchers [69], [78], [81] considered neglecting change control in security most challenging factor of DevOps.”
From Prioritization based taxonomy of DevOps security challenges using PROMETHEE (2020) · cites this paper as [78]
In the citing paper
“We reviewed those studies briefly and extracted all the challenging factors including lack of secure coding standards [2], [23], [80], [81], using unsuitable performance metrics for security evaluation [2], [69], [78], [79] and lack of integrated testing tools to secure DevOps [14], [52], [53], [71].”
From Prioritization based taxonomy of DevOps security challenges using PROMETHEE (2020) · cites this paper as [78]
Citations
Cites
The Analytic Hierarchy Process
Saaty, T. L., & Kearns, K. P. (1985) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-08-032599-6.50008-8 · Cited by 15,407
Applications of the Extent Analysis Method on Fuzzy AHP
Chang, D.-Y. (1996) · European Journal of Operational Research · doi:10.1016/0377-2217(95)00300-2 · Cited by 4,874
The Sage encyclopedia of social science research methods
(2004) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.42-0062 · Cited by 1,340
The Analytic Hierarchy Process
Wang, J., Chakraborty, C., & Ouyang, H. (2011) · IGI Global eBooks · doi:10.4018/9781599048437.ch003 · Cited by 1,334
Herbsleb, J. D., & Moitra, D. (2001) · IEEE Software · doi:10.1109/52.914732 · Cited by 1,059
A discipline for software engineering
(1995) · Control Engineering Practice · doi:10.1016/0967-0661(95)90062-4 · Cited by 1,018
IEEE Standard Glossary of Software Engineering Terminology
(1990) · doi:10.1109/ieeestd.1990.101064 · Cited by 995
The Capability Maturity Model for Software
Paulk, M. C., Curtis, B., Chrissis, M. B., & Weber, C. V. (2011) · Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers eBooks · doi:10.1109/9781118156667.ch2 · Cited by 801
Group decision making process for supplier selection with VIKOR under fuzzy environment
Sanayei, A., Mousavi, S. F., & Yazdankhah, A. (2009) · Expert Systems with Applications · doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2009.04.063 · Cited by 604
Fuzzy Sets, Fuzzy Logic, and Fuzzy Systems: Selected Papers by Lotfi A Zadeh
Klir, G. J., & Yuan, B. (1996) · Cited by 559
Prioritization of human capital measurement indicators using fuzzy AHP
Bozbura, F. T., Beşkese, A., & Kahraman, C. (2006) · Expert Systems with Applications · doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2006.02.006 · Cited by 483
Önüt, S., Kara, S. S., & Elif, I. (2008) · Expert Systems with Applications · doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2008.02.045 · Cited by 437
Wong, J. K. W., & Li, H. (2008) · Building and Environment · doi:10.1016/j.buildenv.2006.11.019 · Cited by 432
A fuzzy AHP approach to personnel selection problem
Güngör, Z., Serhadlıoğlu, G., & Kesen, S. E. (2008) · Applied Soft Computing · doi:10.1016/j.asoc.2008.09.003 · Cited by 401
A Fuzzy Ahp Approach For Supplier Selection Problem: A Case Study In A Gearmotor Company
Ayhan, M. B. (2013) · International Journal of Managing Value and Supply Chains · doi:10.5121/ijmvsc.2013.4302 · Cited by 363
Construction Partnering Process and Associated Critical Success Factors: Quantitative Investigation
Cheng, E. W. L., & Li, H. (2002) · Journal of Management in Engineering · doi:10.1061/(asce)0742-597x(2002)18:4(194 · Cited by 319
A discipline for software engineering
(1995) · Computers & Mathematics with Applications · doi:10.1016/0898-1221(95)90243-0 · Cited by 305
Evaluation and Measurement of Software Process Improvement—A Systematic Literature Review
Unterkalmsteiner, M., Gorschek, T., Islam, A., Cheng, C. K., Permadi, R. B., & FELDT, R. H. (2011) · IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering · doi:10.1109/tse.2011.26 · Cited by 290
Supplier selection in electronic marketplaces using satisficing and fuzzy AHP
Chamodrakas, I., Batis, D., & Martakos, D. I. (2009) · Expert Systems with Applications · doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2009.05.043 · Cited by 285
A maturity model for the implementation of software process improvement: an empirical study
Niazi, M., WILSON∗, D. J., & Zowghi, D. (2003) · Journal of Systems and Software · doi:10.1016/j.jss.2003.10.017 · Cited by 285
An application of quality function deployment to improve the quality of teaching
Lam, K., & Zhao, X. (1998) · International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management · doi:10.1108/02656719810196351 · Cited by 238
ISO 9000 and ISO 14000 standards: an international diffusion model
Marimón, F., Fa, M. C., & Saizarbitoria, I. H. (2006) · International Journal of Operations & Production Management · doi:10.1108/01443570610641648 · Cited by 223
Investigating software process in practice: A grounded theory perspective
Coleman, G., & O’Connor, R. (2008) · Journal of Systems and Software · doi:10.1016/j.jss.2007.07.027 · Cited by 202
Towards an Evidence-Based Understanding of Electronic Data Sources
Chen, L., Babar, M. A., & Zhang, H. (2010) · Electronic Workshops in Computing · doi:10.14236/ewic/ease2010.17 · Cited by 191
Key success factors for implementing software process improvement: a maturity-based analysis
Rainer, A., & Hall, T. (2002) · Journal of Systems and Software · doi:10.1016/s0164-1212(01)00122-4 · Cited by 184
Challenges of project management in global software development: A client-vendor analysis
Niazi, M., Mahmood, S., Alshayeb, M., Riaz, M. R., Faisal, K. A., Cerpa, N., Khan, S. U., & Richardson, I. (2016) · Information and Software Technology · doi:10.1016/j.infsof.2016.08.002 · Cited by 177
Khan, A. A., Keung, J., Niazi, M., Hussain, S., & Ahmad, A. (2017) · Information and Software Technology · doi:10.1016/j.infsof.2017.03.006 · Cited by 174
Self-citationNgwenyama, O. K., & Nielsen, P. A. (2003) · IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management · doi:10.1109/tem.2002.808267 · Cited by 167
Khan, S. U., Niazi, M., & Ahmad, R. (2010) · Information and Software Technology · doi:10.1016/j.infsof.2010.08.003 · Cited by 161
Software Quality: Theory and Management
Gillies, A. C. (1992) · CERN Document Server (European Organization for Nuclear Research) · Cited by 153
Proceedings of the 31st Annual ACM Symposium on Applied Computing
van Dam, I., van Ginkel, G., Kuipers, W., Nijenhuis, N., Vandic, D., & Frăsincar, F. (2016) · doi:10.1145/2851613 · Cited by 153
Niazi, M., Wilson, D. N., & Zowghi, D. (2005) · Journal of Systems and Software · doi:10.1016/j.jss.2004.09.001 · Cited by 147
Analyzing Rater Agreement: Manifest Variable Methods
von Eye, A., & Mun, E. (2004) · CERN Document Server (European Organization for Nuclear Research) · Cited by 140
Özdağoğlu, A., & Özdağoğlu, G. (2007) · DergiPark (Istanbul University) · Cited by 126
A practitioner’s guide to light weight software process assessment and improvement planning
Pettersson, F., Ivarsson, M., Gorschek, T., & Öhman, P. (2007) · Journal of Systems and Software · doi:10.1016/j.jss.2007.08.032 · Cited by 124
Gillies, A. C. (1993) · Cited by 118
Software process improvement success factors for small and medium Web companies: A qualitative study
Sulayman, M., Urquhart, C., Mendes, E., & Seidel, S. (2012) · Information and Software Technology · doi:10.1016/j.infsof.2011.12.007 · Cited by 114
Telcordia Technologies: the journey to high maturity
Pitterman, B. (2000) · IEEE Software · doi:10.1109/52.854074 · Cited by 107
Shameem, M., Kumar, R. R., Kumar, C., Chandra, B., & Khan, A. A. (2018) · Journal of Software Evolution and Process · doi:10.1002/smr.1979 · Cited by 104
Self-citationKhan, A. A., & Keung, J. (2016) · IET Software · doi:10.1049/iet-sen.2015.0038 · Cited by 98
Self-citationSoftware Process Improvement barriers: A cross-cultural comparison
Niazi, M., Babar, M. A., & Verner, J. M. (2010) · Information and Software Technology · doi:10.1016/j.infsof.2010.06.005 · Cited by 97
Factors of software process improvement success in small and large organizations
Dybå, T. (2003) · ACM Joint European Software Engineering Conference and Symposium on the Foundations of Software Engineering (ESEC/FSE) · doi:10.1145/940071.940092 · Cited by 96
"Follow the Sun" Workflow in Global Software Development
Carmel, E., Espinosa, J. A., & Dubinsky, Y. (2010) · Journal of Management Information Systems · doi:10.2753/mis0742-1222270102 · Cited by 95
Shih, C.-C., & Huang, S.-J. (2010) · Information & Management · doi:10.1016/j.im.2010.06.001 · Cited by 94
Soh, S. (2010) · Global Journal of Business Management · doi:10.5897/ajbm.9000012 · Cited by 81
Prioritizing key success factors of software projects using fuzzy AHP
Yaghoobi, T. (2017) · Journal of Software Evolution and Process · doi:10.1002/smr.1891 · Cited by 63
Empirical investigation of success factors for offshore software development outsourcing vendors
Khan, S. U., Niazi, M., & Ahmad, R. (2012) · IET Software · doi:10.1049/iet-sen.2010.0038 · Cited by 62
The impact of staff turnover on software projects
Hall, T., Beecham, S., Verner, J. M., & WILSON∗, D. J. (2008) · ACM SIGCPR Conference on Computer Personnel Research (SIGCPR) · doi:10.1145/1355238.1355245 · Cited by 61
Governing Software Process Improvementsin Globally Distributed Product Development
Ramasubbu, N. (2014) · IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering · doi:10.1109/tse.2013.58 · Cited by 60
Process improvement satisfies employees
Yamamura, G. (1999) · IEEE Software · doi:10.1109/52.795105 · Cited by 59
Evaluation of customer oriented success factors in mobile commerce using fuzzy AHP
Kabir, G., & Hasin, M. A. A. (2011) · UPCommons institutional repository (Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya) · doi:10.3926/jiem..v4n2.p361-386 · Cited by 59
Critical success factors taxonomy for software process deployment
Bayona-Oré, S., Calvo-Manzano, J. A., Cuevas, G., & Feliú, T. S. (2012) · Software Quality Journal · doi:10.1007/s11219-012-9190-y · Cited by 58
A propose framework for requirement Change Management in Global Software Development
Khan, A. A., Basri, S. B., & Dominic, P. D. D. (2012) · doi:10.1109/iccisci.2012.6297161 · Cited by 56
Self-citationAnalyzing Rater Agreement: Manifest Variable Methods
Choudhary, P. K. (2006) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.1198/jasa.2006.s107 · Cited by 52
Towards a theoretical framework of SPI success factors for small and medium web companies
Sulayman, M., Mendes, E., Urquhart, C., Riaz, M., & Tempero, E. D. (2014) · Information and Software Technology · doi:10.1016/j.infsof.2014.02.006 · Cited by 51
Khan, A. W., & Khan, S. U. (2013) · IET Software · doi:10.1049/iet-sen.2013.0013 · Cited by 49
Self-citationEvaluation of customer oriented success factors in mobile commerce using fuzzy AHP
Kabir, G., & Hasin, M. A. A. (2011) · Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management · doi:10.3926/jiem.2011.v4n2.p361-386 · Cited by 49
Khan, S. U., & Azeem, M. I. (2014) · IET Software · doi:10.1049/iet-sen.2013.0012 · Cited by 46
Khan, A. A., Keung, J., Niazi, M., Hussain, S., & Shameem, M. (2018) · Journal of Software Evolution and Process · doi:10.1002/smr.1988 · Cited by 46
Self-citationA comparative study of software process improvement implementation success factors
Niazi, M. (2015) · Journal of Software Evolution and Process · doi:10.1002/smr.1704 · Cited by 41
Factors of software process improvement success in small and large organizations
Dybå, T. (2003) · ACM SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes · doi:10.1145/949952.940092 · Cited by 37
Enabling Software Process Improvement: An Investigation of the Importance of Organizational Issues
Dybå, T. (2002) · Empirical Software Engineering · doi:10.1023/a:1020535725648 · Cited by 35
Khan, A. A., Basri, S. B., Dominic, P. D. D., & Amin, F.-E. (2013) · Research Journal of Applied Sciences Engineering and Technology · doi:10.19026/rjaset.6.3554 · Cited by 35
Self-citationViana, D., Conte, T. U., Vilela, D., de Souza, C. R. B., dos Santos, G., & Prikladnicki, R. (2012) · International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering (EASE) · doi:10.1049/ic.2012.0015 · Cited by 31
Ali Babar, M., & Niazi, M. (2008) · Arrow@dit (Dublin Institute of Technology) · doi:10.34961/9591 · Cited by 28
A Survey Based Study on Factors Effecting Communication in GSD
Khan, A. A., Basri, S. B., & Amin, F.-E. (2014) · Research Journal of Applied Sciences Engineering and Technology · doi:10.19026/rjaset.7.396 · Cited by 25
Self-citationA model for the implementation of software process improvement: a pilot study
Niazi, M., WILSON∗, D. J., & Zowghi, D. (2003) · Asia-Pacific Conference on Quality Software (APAQS) · doi:10.1109/qsic.2003.1319103 · Cited by 24
Addressing the people issues of process improvement activities at Oerlikon Aerospace
Laporte, C. Y., & Trudel, S. (1998) · Software Process Improvement and Practice · doi:10.1002/(sici)1099-1670(199812)4:4 · Cited by 23
Habib, Z. (2009) · Cited by 16
Information technology. Software process assessment
(1998) · doi:10.3403/01361411 · Cited by 15
Sulayman, M., & Mendes, E. (2010) · ACM Symposium on Applied Computing · doi:10.1145/1774088.1774568 · Cited by 13
A framework for assisting software process improvement program in global software development
Khan, A. A. (2016) · ACM Symposium on Applied Computing · doi:10.1145/2851613.2852006 · Cited by 2
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
4 of the 76 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.
Research works printed but not linked: 8
- M. Kuhrmann, C. Konopka, P. Nellemann, P. Diebold, J. Münch, Software process improvement: where is the evidence?: initial findings from a systematic mapping study, in: Proceedings of the International Conference on Software and System Process.
- P. Abrahamsson, Measuring the success of software process improvement: the dimensions. arXiv preprint arXiv:1309.4645, 2013. · arXiv
- M. Bano, N. Ikram, Software process improvement: A systematic literature review, in: 15th International Multitopic Conference, INMIC, 2012, pp. 459–464. · DOI
- Ayhan, 2013, Fuzzy topsis application for supplier selection problem, Int. J. Inf. Bus. Manag., 5, 159
- IEEE, 1991, Standards coordinating committee of the IEEE Computer Society
- N. Baddoo, T. Hall, D. Wilson, Implementing a people focused SPI programme, in: 11th European Software Control and Metrics Conference, 2000, pp. 373–382.
- N. Bunditwongrat, T. Mathupayas, N. Atcharawan, An empirical framework of key success factors for software process improvement, in: Proceedings of the European Conference on Information Management & Evaluation, 2011, pp. 82–90.
- Kabir, 2011, Comparative analysis of AHP and fuzzy AHP models for multicriteria inventory classification, Int. J. Fuzzy Log. Syst., 1, 1
Cited by
Sorted by citations
A review of fuzzy AHP methods for decision-making with subjective judgements
Liu, Y., Eckert, C. M., & Earl, C. (2020) · Expert Systems with Applications · doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2020.113738 · Cited by 1,088
Analytical hierarchy process: revolution and evolution
Madjid Tavana, D., Soltanifar, M., & Santos‐Arteaga, F. J. (2021) · Annals of Operations Research · doi:10.1007/s10479-021-04432-2 · Cited by 327
Quantum computing challenges in the software industry. A fuzzy AHP-based approach
Awan, U., Hannola, L., Tandon, A., Goyal, R. K., & Dhir, A. (2022) · Information and Software Technology · doi:10.1016/j.infsof.2022.106896 · Cited by 163
Saeidi, P., Mardani, A., Mishra, A. R., Cajas, V., & Galarraga-Carvajal, M. (2022) · Journal of Cleaner Production · doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.133380 · Cited by 121
Mahmoudi, A., Javed, S. A., & Mardani, A. (2021) · Operations Management Research · doi:10.1007/s12063-021-00178-z · Cited by 125
Metadata
- Authors
- Khan, A. A., Shameem, M., Kumar, R. R., Hussain, S., & Yan, X.
- Affiliations
- Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics (CN)
- Indian Institute of Technology Dhanbad (IN)
- COMSATS University Islamabad (PK)
- Corresponding author
- Khan, Arif Ali
- Venue
- Applied Soft Computing
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2019-10
- Volume
- 83
- Pages
- 105648
- ISSN
- 1568-4946 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2965033383
- Cited by
- 126
- References
- 76
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 32 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 33 · 2019: 1
- FWCI
- 26.44
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Applied Soft Computing (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics (1015-YAH18056, 41401010201, 41401010401)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Software Engineering Techniques and Practices
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Multi-Criteria Decision Making
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Software › Advanced Software Engineering Methodologies
- Keywords
- distributed software development, software process improvement, success factors, fuzzy analytic hierarchy process, factor prioritization, taxonomy (general classification scheme), multi-criteria decision making, expert opinion
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
