This special issue comprises a selected set of high quality and extended articles of the 29th Systems, Software and Services Process Improvement (EuroSPI) Conference, held in 2022 in Salzburg, Austria.Conferences were held in Dublin (Ireland) in 1994, in Vienna (Austria) in 1995, in Brighton (UK) in 1996, in Budapest (Hungary) in 1997, in Gothenburg (Sweden) in 1998, in Pori (Finland) in 1999, in Copenhagen (Denmark) in 2000, in Limerick (Ireland) in 2001, in Nuremberg (Germany) in 2002, in Graz (Austria) in 2003, in Trondheim (Norway) in 2004, in Budapest (Hungary) in 2005, in Joensuu (Finland) in 2006, in Potsdam (Germany) in 2007, in Dublin (Ireland) in 2008, in Alcala (Spain) in 2009, in Grenoble (France) in 2010, in Roskilde (Denmark) in 2011, in Vienna (Austria) in 2012, in Dundalk (Ireland) in 2013, in Luxembourg in 2014, in Ankara (Turkey) in 2015, in Graz (Austria) in 2016, in Ostrava (Czech Republic) in 2017, in Bilbao (Spain) in 2018, in Edinburgh (UK) in 2019, in Düsseldorf (Germany) in 2020, in Krems (Austria) in 2021, and in Salzburg (Austria) in 2022.EuroSPI is an initiative with the following major action lines (http:// www. euros pi. net)

Cyber-physical systems (CPSs) interact with their physical environment by both monitoring and manipulating objects and processes from the real world. The range of applications for CPSs encompasses agriculture, aeronautics, energy, healthcare, manufacturing, robotics, and transportation, to name just a few. Often, CPSs are part of what we consider critical infrastructure, for example, electric power and water treatment. CPSs communicating with the outside world are security-critical. They open an attack vector through their communication channels. CPSs are safety-critical if they potentially harm their environment. Conventional protection mechanisms like secure design principles are insufficient. We need to guarantee our CPSs' resilience (cf. Segovia et al.1), that is, the ability of a system to withstand adverse events while maintaining an acceptable functionality.2 Communication and coordination features of CPSs demand a combined approach to consider both safety and security concerns. We have published several special issues on the topic of the safety and security of CPSs in previous years.3-6 Similarly, for the current special issue, a general call for articles was announced and also the authors of the best papers of the International Workshop on Cyber-Security and Functional Safety in Cyber-Physical Systems—IWCFS 20207 and IWCFS 20218 —were invited to submit extended versions of their workshop papers. After thorough and stringent reviews, we selected ten articles that provide relevant contributions to the field of safety and security for CPSs. In the article, Identifying Safety Issues from Energy Conservation Requirements by Madala by Do and Tenbergen, the authors propose an approach for identifying safety issues caused by energy conservation recommendations of CPSs. The authors then empirically study four robotic systems to evaluate the approach's effectiveness. The authors find that the energy conservation recommendations compromise safety at the concept phase. In the article, Context Modeling for Cyber-Physical Systems by Daun and Tenbergen, the authors propose a comprehensive, ontologically grounded context modeling framework to systematically explore the problem space in which a CPS under development will operate. This allows for the systematic elicitation of requirements for the CPS, early validation and verification of its properties, and safety assessment of its context interactions at runtime. In the article, Enhancing and Securing Cyber-physical Systems and Industry 4.0 through Digital Twins: A Critical Review by Lampropoulos and Siakas, the authors present an overview regarding the use of digital twins as a means to reinforce and secure CPSs and Industry 4.0 in general. The authors argue that based on the provided literature review, digital twins can constitute an essential tool for the realization, reinforcement, and security of CPSs and Industry 4.0. In the article, F3FLUID: A Formal Framework for Developing Safety-Critical Interactive Systems in FLUID by Singh, Ait-Ameur, Mendil, Méry, Navarre, Palanque, and Pantel, the authors propose a unified formal framework, F3FLUID (Formal Framework For FLUID), for the development of safety-critical interactive systems. This framework is based on the FLUID (Formal Language of User Interface Design) pivot modeling language that enables the specification of high-level system requirements for interactive systems. This modeling language is designed to handle safety-critical interactive systems concepts, including domain knowledge. An industrial case study complying with the ARINC 661 standard for avionics systems is used to illustrate the effectiveness of the F3FLUID framework for the development of safety-critical interactive systems. In the article, Modeling and Verifying NLSR Protocol of NDN for CPS Using UPPAAL by Fei, Zhu, and Yin, the authors attempt to formally model and verify some fundamental properties of the NLSR protocol using model checker UPPAAL. First, the authors validate the NLSR protocol modeled into timed automata with a simulator in UPPAAL. Then, they verify the model with four fundamental properties (termination, reachability of Sync Interest, reachability of Sync Data, and digest synchronization). The first synchronization problem is found in a scenario with two node topology. The authors then give the improved model, which owns a valid result in digest synchronization verification. To capture more problems, the authors make the model to support the simulation of a temporary network crash. The second synchronization problem is also exposed in two comparative scenarios. Finally, the authors also propose a mechanism implemented in the model, which validates digest synchronization verification results. In the article, An Automated Evaluation of MQTT Broker Compatibility by Sochor, Ferrarotti, and Ramler, the authors develop an automated framework for compatibility evaluation of Message Queuing Telemetry Transport (MQTT) brokers, which can be easily generalized to other similar IoT components. They apply this framework to perform a comprehensive experiment conducted with 16 different versions of six popular MQTT brokers. In this work, the authors report inconsistencies in the behavior of varying MQTT brokers and broker versions. Based on the experiment results, the authors calculate and provide a visualization of compatibility among the evaluated brokers regarding their distance, indicating the risk of incompatibilities when replacing a broker with another. The calculation of distance measures can be adjusted by giving higher weights to essential features. The authors use this method to show security-related differences between the brokers. In the article, Safety And Security Risks Management Process for Cyber-Physical Systems: A Case Study by Inayat, Farooq, and Inayat, the authors present an integrated safety-security risk management process. To demonstrate the efficacy of the proposed process, they used a tetra packaging case study to (i) examine the vulnerabilities of CPS by running the risk management process, (ii) identify safety-security requirements, and (iii) align retrieved safety-security requirements with the relevant standards. The results show (i) safety hazards and security risks along with their severity and priority, (ii) mitigation guidelines in accordance with IEC 61508, and (iii) 15 safety-security requirements that were identified and are aligned with ISO 9001 packaging and labeling machine standard. In the article, Uncertainty Handling in Cyber-Physical Systems: State-of-the-Art Approaches, Tools, Causes, and Future Directions by Asmat, Khan, and Hussain, the authors identify current state-of-the-art approaches, tools, root causes, and metrics for uncertainty in the domain of CPSs. In addition, they performed a systematic literature review. The core contributions of this study are: (i) to categorize the tools used for uncertainty mitigation and existing root causes of uncertainty in the CPSs domain, (ii) to categorize the tools used for uncertainty mitigation and existing root causes of uncertainty in the CPSs domain, and (iii) to identify the state-of-the-art methods which cannot elaborate the metrics to measure the uncertainty in CPSs. The results of the proposed study are beneficial in guiding future research on devising new approaches or tools to mitigate the causes of uncertainty in CPSs. In the article, Internet-of-Things Architectures for Secure Cyber-Physical Spaces: the VISOR Experience Report by Pascale, Cascavilla, Sangiovanni, Tamburri, and Heuvel, the authors conduct a field study in a Dutch Easter music festival in a national interest project called VISOR to select the most appropriate device configuration in terms of performance and results. They iteratively architect solutions for the security of cyber-physical spaces using IoT devices. They test the performance of multiple federated devices encompassing drones, closed-circuit television, smartphone cameras, and smart glasses to detect real-case scenarios of potentially malicious activities such as mosh-pits and pick-pocketing. The results pave the way to select optimal IoT architecture configurations, that is, a mix of CCTV, drones, smart glasses, and camera phones, to make safer cyber-physical spaces a reality. Finally, in the article, Model-Driven Engineering of Safety and Security Software Systems: A Systematic Mapping Study and Future Research Directions by Mashkoor, Egyed, Wille, and Stock, the authors present a systematic mapping study on the model-driven engineering of safety and security concerns in software systems. Combined modeling and development of safety and security concerns is an emerging field of research. The mapping study provides an overview of the current state-of-the-art in this field. This study carefully selected 143 publications out of 27,259 relevant papers through a rigorous and systematic process. This study then proposes and answers questions such as frequently used methods and tools and development stages where these concerns are typically investigated in application domains. Additionally, the authors identify the community's preference for publication venues and trends. The discussion on obtained results also features the gained insights and future research directions. The editors of this special issue would like to thank the production team of Wiley for supporting the creation of this special issue. Special mention is also due to our reviewers, who processed all our submissions. Many thanks! This work is partially supported by the Austrian Science Fund (FWF) (grant # I 4744-N) and the LIT Secure and Correct Systems Lab funded by the State of Upper Austria.

This special issue comprises a selected set of high quality and extended articles of the 27th Systems, Software and Services Process Improvement (EuroSPI) Conference, held in 2020 in Düsseldorf, Germany (Figure 1). Conferences were held in Dublin (Ireland) in 1994, in Vienna (Austria) in 1995, in Brighton (UK) in 1996, in Budapest (Hungary) in 1997, in Gothenburg (Sweden) in 1998, in Pori (Finland) in 1999, in Copenhagen (Denmark) in 2000, in Limerick (Ireland) in 2001, in Nuremberg (Germany) in 2002, in Graz (Austria) in 2003, in Trondheim (Norway) in 2004, in Budapest (Hungary) in 2005, in Joensuu (Finland) in 2006, in Potsdam (Germany) in 2007, in Dublin (Ireland) in 2008, in Alcala (Spain) in 2009, in Grenoble (France) in 2010, in Roskilde (Denmark) in 2011, in Vienna (Austria) in 2012, in Dundalk (Ireland) in 2013, in Luxembourg in 2014, in Ankara (Turkey) in 2015, in Graz (Austria) in 2016, in Ostrava (Czech Republic) in 2017, in Bilbao (Spain) in 2018, in Edinburgh (UK) in 2019, and in Düsseldorf (Germany) in 2020. EuroSPI has a cooperation with the EU Blueprint for Batteries project ALBATTS (2020–2023) where leading European industry discusses and establishes a skills agenda to build a European battery production capability for the electrification of European e-mobility. EuroSPI has established the SPI Manifesto, a set of social media groups including a selection of presentations and key notes freely available on YouTube and access to job role-based qualification through the European Certification and Qualification Association (www.ecqa.org). A typical characterization of EuroSPI is reflected in a statement made by a company: “… the biggest value of EuroSPI lies in its function as a European knowledge and experience exchange mechanism for SPI and innovation.” Since its beginning in 1994 in Dublin, the EuroSPI initiative continuously develops the term SPI including more and more fields that contribute. During the years, new communities (Cybersecurity, Internet of Things, Agile, etc …) joined and the term EuroSPI2 became European System, Software, Service, Safety, and Security Process, Product, Programming Improvement, Innovation, and Infrastructure. So in fact it became EuroS5P3I3. In this issue, selected papers from EuroSPI'2020 are presented. In what follows, editors introduce these papers discussing their contribution and highlighting their importance with regards to relevant literature. The paper “The Development of Data Analytics Maturity Assessment Framework: DAMAF” by Mert Onuralp Gökalp, Ebru Gökalp, Selin Gökalp, and Altan Koçyiğit presents a Data Analytics Maturity Assessment Framework that evaluates the organizational data analytics maturity in a staged manner. The presented framework aims to determine the current organizational data analytics maturity level and also provides a comprehensive roadmap to improve organizational data analytics capabilities in a structured way. Although the topic of data analytics maturity is not new, for example, in previous studies [1, 2], and there is even a review on the topic [3], the approach taken by authors is following the path driven by classic software process maturity models, Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI), for instance, and also new developments in the software arena [4, 5] presenting maturity levels in a staged manner. “Symptom-based improvement recommendations” is authored by Jan Pries-Heje, Jørn Johansen, and Morten Korsaa. In this paper, authors present an experience-based method to recommend areas of improvement in organizations. Based on the takeaways of 300 CMMI assessments, authors use cognitive maps and the “five whys” technique to look beyond the symptoms and reveal the underlying problems or causes of the problems. Improvement is a nuclear topic inside EuroSPI community and in software community as a whole, publishing several works in the arena [6-8]; the work by Pries-Heje and colleagues draws a path towards specific recommendations inside improvement endeavors. In “Teamwork quality in technology-driven product teams in large-scale agile organizations” by Alexander Poth, Mario Kottke, Torsten Mahr, and Andreas Riel, authors present the Technical Team Maturity (TTM) approach. TTM is aimed to foster transparency, autonomy, and structured team development modeling competence needs in a structured way. Agility has been a de facto standard for software teams over the last years [9], and its evolution towards large-scale scenarios is a hot topic for software researchers [10, 11]. In this paper, authors focus on teamwork quality as a key factor in large-scale agile organizations. In the paper “A Novel Approach for Visualization, Monitoring and Control Techniques for Scrum Metric Planning using the Analytic Hierarchy Process,” Nesib Tekin, Murat Yilmaz, and Paul Clarke present a study to determine the effect of the multicriteria decision-making process, Analytic Hierarchy Process, to select a set of software metrics components suitable for a software domain, more specifically for Scrum settings. This paper is also linked with agile methods and more precisely with Scrum. The use of metrics in these environments is crucial to assist on the assessment of the quality of the software process [12], and the use of multicriteria decision-making tools, following the path by [13], is a sound way to select metrics in such environments. “Process Improvement Guidance for Automotive - Successful SPI Implementation Practices” is authored by Richard Messnarz, Thomas Wegner, Damjan Ekert, Bernhardt Steger, Ralf Mayer, Rainer Dreves, Bernhard Sechser, Christian Schlager, and Christoph Karner. In this work, authors evolve current VDA (Verein der Deutschen Automobilindustrie) Guidelines by including a process improvement mechanism based on ISO/IEC 33014:2013 and mapped to SPI Manifesto Values and Principles. Automotive is also the functional arena in the paper “Towards a Security-driven Automotive Development Lifecycle,” authored by Jürgen Dobaj, Georg Macher, Damjan Ekert, Andreas Riel, and Richard Messnarz. In the paper, authors present an actionable cybersecurity development lifecycle model that provides concrete action and work product guidance aligned with the ISO/SAE 21434 and Automotive SPICE® extension for cybersecurity. Automotive software is a relatively new, but important research field [14] and these two papers are directing two different but crucial challenges: SPI Implementation practices and the integration of security in the automotive software development lifecycle. Finally, in “Integrating Privacy Debt and VSE's software developments,” the concept of Privacy Debt is introduced by Santamaria, Larrucea, and Fernandez-Gauna. Based on the works on Technical Debt, authors also identify privacy aspects inside ISO/IEC 29110 basic profile and introduce a way to calculate Privacy Debt in these environments. Although the concept of Technical Debt is not new [15] and in the last 10 years has produced a wide set of academic contributions [16], the investigation of privacy aspects is new in the literature and deserves attention. The editorial work of this special issue has been supported by the Austrian Ministry for Transport, Innovation and Technology, the Federal Ministry of Science, Research and Economy, and the Province of Upper Austria in the frame of the COMET center SCCH. EuroSPI has a long-lasting relationship with Wiley publishing selected papers with high industrial experience value extended in special issues of the journal “Software Process: Improvement and Practice” starting in 2004, continuing the earlier tradition [17] with the “Journal of Software Maintenance and Evolution: Research and Practice” and the “Journal of Software: Evolution and Process.” Data sharing is not applicable to this article as no new data were created or analyzed in this study.

Abstract This special issue comprises a selected set of high‐quality and extended articles of the 28th Systems, Software and Services Process Improvement (EuroSPI) Conference, held in 2021 in Krems, Austria. Conferences were held in Dublin (Ireland) in 1994, in Vienna (Austria) in 1995, in Brighton (UK) in 1996, in Budapest (Hungary) in 1997, in Gothenburg (Sweden) in 1998, in Pori (Finland) in 1999, in Copenhagen (Denmark) in 2000, in Limerick (Ireland) in 2001, in Nuremberg (Germany) in 2002, in Graz (Austria) in 2003, in Trondheim (Norway) in 2004, in Budapest (Hungary) in 2005, in Joensuu (Finland) in 2006, in Potsdam (Germany) in 2007, in Dublin (Ireland) in 2008, in Alcala (Spain) in 2009, in Grenoble (France) in 2010, in Roskilde (Denmark) in 2011, in Vienna (Austria) in 2012, in Dundalk (Ireland) in 2013, in Luxembourg in 2014, in Ankara (Turkey) in 2015, in Graz (Austria) in 2016, in Ostrava (Czech Republic) in 2017, in Bilbao (Spain) in 2018, in Edinburgh (UK) in 2019, in Düsseldorf (Germany) in 2020, and in Krems (Austria) in 2021.

Abstract Cyber‐Physical Systems (CPSs) differ from traditional Information Technology (IT) systems in such a way that they interact with the physical environment, i.e., they can monitor and manipulate real objects and processes. For this special issue, the authors of the best papers of IWCFS 2019 were invited to submit extended versions of their workshop papers. Additionally, we received eight submissions from around the globe as a result of an open call. After thorough and stringent reviews, we selected six articles that provide relevant contributions to the field of safety and security for CPSs.

This volume comprises a selected set of high quality and extended articles of the 25th Systems, Software and Services Process Improvement (EuroSPI) Conference, held during September 5-7, 2018, in Bilbao, Spain.Conferences were held in Dublin (Ireland) in 1994, in Vienna (Austria) in 1995, in Brighton (UK) in 1996, in Budapest (Hungary) in 1997, in Gothenburg (Sweden) in 1998, in Pori (Finland) in 1999, in Copenhagen (Denmark) in 2000, in Limerick (Ireland) in 2001, in Nuremberg (Germany) in 2002, in Graz (Austria) in 2003, in Trondheim (Norway) in 2004, in Budapest (Hungary) in 2005, in Joensuu (Finland) in 2006, in Potsdam (Germany) in 2007, in Dublin (Ireland) in 2008, in Alcala (Spain) in 2009, in Grenoble (France) in 2010, in Roskilde (Denmark) in 2011, in Vienna (

Abstract This volume comprises a selected set of high‐quality and extended articles of the 26th Systems, Software and Services Process Improvement (EuroSPI) Conference, held during September 18–20, 2019 in Edinburgh, UK. Conferences were held in Dublin (Ireland) in 1994, in Vienna (Austria) in 1995, in Brighton (UK) in 1996, in Budapest (Hungary) in 1997, in Gothenburg (Sweden) in 1998, in Pori (Finland) in 1999, in Copenhagen (Denmark) in 2000, in Limerick (Ireland) in 2001, in Nuremberg (Germany) in 2002, in Graz (Austria) in 2003, in Trondheim (Norway) in 2004, in Budapest (Hungary) in 2005, in Joensuu (Finland) in 2006, in Potsdam (Germany) in 2007, in Dublin (Ireland) in 2008, in Alcala (Spain) in 2009, in Grenoble (France) in 2010, in Roskilde (Denmark) in 2011, in Vienna (Austria) in 2012, in Dundalk (Ireland) in 2013, in Luxembourg in 2014, in Ankara (Turkey) in 2015, in Graz (Austria) in 2016, in Ostrava (Czech Republic) in 2017, in Bilbao (Spain) in 2018, and in Edinburgh (UK) in 2019.

Security-and safety-critical cyber-physical systemsCyber-physical systems (CPSs) are physical embedded systems with enhanced operations for monitoring, coordination, control, and integration by a computing and communication core. 1 Examples of CPSs include transportations systems, 2 medical systems, 3 and manufacturing systems.4 A CPS can be security-critical, safety-critical, or both.A CPS communicating with the outside world and thus opening an attack vector through the communication channel is considered to be a security-critical CPS.On the other hand, a CPS is considered to be safety-critical if it can harm its environment, eg, a malfunctioning autonomous vehicle might harm its passengers.5 A CPS dealing with both security and safety concerns is considered to be a security-and safety-critical CPS.Contemporary systems and software engineering methods often prove inadequate for the trustworthy and reliable design and engineering of CPSs.Traditional engineering deals with security and safety issues as separate problems.However, given the coordination and communication features of CPSs, such a ''separation-of-concerns'' approach is no longer adequate.We need integrated methods to deal with security and safety concerns within CPSs.

Advances in system, software and service process improvement and innovationEuroSPI is an annual conference series devoted to Software Process Improvement (SPI), and the exchange of best practices in related domains organized since 1994.In 2009, EuroSPI created the SPI manifesto [1][2][3][4] and, also, enriched the term SPI over the last 25 years: System, Software, Services, Safety, Security Process and Product Improvement, Innovation, and Infrastructure (S 5 P 2 I 3 ).From 2017 onwards, EuroSPI created a set of thematic workshops, which deal with specific knowledge areas for the European 2030 agenda.Big changes towards networked societies, self-driving cars and planes, new e-mobility concepts will arise, and more exchange of best practices will be needed to support these new developments.Lead papers from those thematic topics will be selected for the journal in the years to follow.EuroSPI 2017 received a large amount of submissions from authors.All submissions were peer reviewed by top experts in the given research area.From the set of accepted papers, seven articles were selected for their publication in this special issue based on established quality criteria, novelty, and interest.Editors hope this new set is able to provide insights on software process, its evolution, and new developments to practitioners and researchers alike.In what follows, the seven papers are presented and briefly discussed:

Selected functional safety and cybersecurity concerns in system, software, and service process improvement and innovationIn this editorial, we present a set of papers related to the European System and Software Process Improvement and Innovation Initiative (EuroSPI 2 ) launched back in 1994.With more than 20 editions of the conference and around 20 special issues devoted to the initiative 1-13 with the majority of them published in the Journal of Software: Evolution and Process and its predecessors, the community has contributed vastly to the development of the discipline.This special issue presents papers sent as extended versions of previous papers published in the proceedings including also papers indirectly linked to the conference.The focus of this special issue is functional safety and cybersecurity as related to software and service improvement and innovation.Nowadays, nearly all organizations depend on appropriate secure and compliant information processing based on different software systems.14 As a consequence of this importance, the EuroSPI 2 community has approached the topic from a panoply of viewpoints including traceability aspects, 15 safety and availability improvement, 16 process assessment in safety, 17 and action research approaches in financial organizations, 18 naming just some of the more recent and relevant initiatives.This special issue enhances previous efforts by providing an updated and extended view on the implications of security aspects in the service and process improvement and innovation arena.The paper "Extending Automotive SPICE 3.0 for the Use in ADAS and Future Self-Driving Service Architectures" by Richard Messnarz, Christian Kreiner, Georg Macher, and Alastair Walker summarizes the current state of the art and extends the existing concepts of a service architecture supporting the car-to-car and car-to-cloud communication.This leads to an additional service life cycle model that can be plugged into Automotive SPICE (Software Process Improvement and Capability Determination) 3.01.The article also shows an example of a process that needs to be assessed as well to cover not only the vehicle but also the entire service architecture in an assessment and analysis.The paper "Software Quality Model for a Research-driven Organization-An Experience Report" by Marcin Wolski, Bartosz Walter, Szymon Kupiński, and Jakub Chojnacki presents a measurement framework for evaluating quality in software products developed within the research and innovation framework project GEANT2.The proposed framework is based on the quality models by Boehm 19 and McCall 20 but also presents

In software development application lifecycle management (ALM) systems are used to support the development process. As these products are tailored for best fitting the applied programs and their actual usage is diverse. Often, this means that products of different vendors are applied, which reduce the reachability between different artefacts and the overall consistency of the system. In this paper we are analyzing the applicability of Augmented Lifecycle Space as a new approach. This approach provides the capability to enhance the traceability and consistency while reducing human effort through automation both in homogeneous and heterogeneous tool environments.

Application lifecycle management (ALM) systems, used to support software development processes, can be composed from various components depending on the need of company. In this paper we focus on benefits of establishment of cross-tool interoperability with specific regard to heterogeneous platforms. We discuss how the different components can be connected for systemic tool collaboration with the help of Open Services for Lifecycle Collaboration (OSLC). This helps to improve traceability and consistency. Furthermore, workflow can be generated to correct the traceability gaps, consistency problems and even to implement modifications. Moreover, we present how the workload of developers can be decreased by integrating revision control system and development environment with the existing ALM system.

The European System and Software Process Improvement and Innovation Initiative (EuroSPI 2 ) was founded in 1994.EuroSPI 2 's mission is to develop an experience and knowledge exchange platform for Europe where SPI practices can be discussed and exchanged and knowledge can be gathered and shared.This mission is implemented by the following major action lines .• The annual EuroSPI 2 conference supported by Software Process Improvement Networks from different EU countries.EuroSPI took place

Process improvement approaches fertilised by advances in SPI A typical characterisation of EuroSPI was stated by a company using the following words:'… the biggest value of EuroSPI lies in its function as a European knowledge and experience exchange mechanism for SPI and innovation'.EuroSPI 2 2014 was held 25-27 June 2014 at Public Research Centre Henri Tudor, Luxembourg.In 2014, EuroSPI 2 continued with the open workshop communities aligned with the conference and focusing on specific SPI topics.This included, in 2014, the communities for creating environments supporting innovation and improvement, SPI and product-system-software design, SPICE assessors exchanging experiences about high maturity organisations, SPI and measurement, and SPI and business process innovation.The EuroSPI 2 2014 program had five international workshops on day 1, international key notes on days 2 and 3, more than 60 presentations from leading industry and leading research institutes, and a joint paper award with the American Society of Quality.Among the 26 countries represented at EuroSPI 2 2014, the contributions were highly relevant for the European and world-wide industry also appearing in this special issue.The SPI Manifesto, launched in 2009, created a future vision, the extension of SPI to the systems and product level, which led to the involvement of major European manufacturing firms, the building of workshop communities for specific topics creating further networking opportunities, and contributions including good practices about how to achieve the advances.Systems, software, and services process improvement is meanwhile a major learning and success factor world-wide for staying competitive on a global and dynamically developing world market.2. EUROSPI BOARD Since 1994, the EuroSPI initiative is financed and coordinated by a group of leading applied research companies and quality networks.Since 1998, the following board members have been important drivers for the initiative:

Abstract Most existing software systems that lack explicit traceability links between artefacts, or if implemented, are often not leveraged to take advantage of the information it can provide to a development or validation team. Within the medical device domain, as in other safety critical domains, regulation normally requires such systems that are certified before entering service. This involves submission of a safety case (a reasoned argument that the system is acceptably safe) to the regulator. A safety case should include evidence that the organisation has established effective software development processes. At the heart of such processes, they must incorporate traceability. However, numerous barriers such as a lack of awareness of traceability and a lack of guidance as to how to implement traceability hamper its effective implementation. In this paper, we address the lack of guidance on traceability implementation by presenting our experience of developing and trialling a traceability assessment model in two medical device organisations. We show that the assessment model was successful in identifying strengths and weaknesses in both organisations' implementation of traceability. Through experience of trialling the model, we propose an idea to improve it by automation, using the Open Services for Lifecycle Collaboration initiative. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

EuroSPI established a newsletter series (newsletter.eurospi.net), the SPI Manifesto (SPI – Systems, Software and Service Process Improvement), an experience library (library.eurospi.net), which is continuously extended over the years and is made available to all attendees, and a Europe wide certification for qualifications in the SPI area (www.ecqa.org, European Certification and Qualification Association). A typical characterization of EuroSPI was stated by a company using the following words: ‘ the biggest value of EuroSPI lies in its function as a European knowledge and experience exchange mechanism for SPI and innovation’. EuroSPI22011 was held in Roskilde, a historical city in Denmark. Roskilde University was founded in 1972 with the objective of providing research and education at the highest level in the fields of natural science, social science, and the humanities. This year, EuroSPI continued with the open workshop communities aligned with the conference and focusing on specific SPI topics. This included creating Environments Supporting Innovation and Improvement, Integrated Design Principles, SPI in SMEs, Different Standards and Experiences with the Implementation of Functional Safety, Exchanging Experiences across Assessment Models, Researcher – Entrepreneur Qualification and Workshop, and Sourcing IT Workshop. Also, at EuroSPI 2011, we continued to extend the scope of the conference from software process improvement to systems, software service-based process improvement. Networking, experience exchange, and continuous improvement can help to create a competitive advantage on the market. Among the 26 countries represented at EuroSPI'2011, the contributions were highly relevant for the European and worldwide industry also appearing in this special issue. The SPI manifesto from 2009 created a future vision, the extension of SPI to the systems and product level led to involvement of major European manufacturing firms, the building of workshop communities for specific topics created further networking opportunities, and the contributions included good practices about how to achieve that. System, Software, and Service-based Process Improvement meanwhile is a major learning and success factor worldwide to stay competitive on a global and dynamically developing world market. The value of this selection of papers lies in the fact that they present actual industrial experiences. Research-oriented EuroSPI22011 papers were published in separate proceedings. This strategy reflects the EuroSPI multi-dimensional approach in which there are three fundamental components of process improvement known to be people and skills, process, and technology. A further component, which is considered in several papers in this special issue, is ‘business’. We will use these general components and their special approach to categorize the papers. Tim Kasse and Jørn Johansen discuss outsourcing relationships and how to deal with a situation where there is a difference between the maturity of the customer and the maturity of the supplier. This difference has an impact on the outsourcing business. Motoko Takeuchi, Yumi Koishi, and Kazunori SHIOYA discuss the ISO/IEC 29110 standard for Life Cycle Profiles for Very Small Entities and illustrate that in Japan, this is also used as a lean SPICE-based improvement method for departments in large enterprises. Péter Balázs Polgár and Ferenc Kazinci present experiences from the medical industry and show how the Eclipse Process Framework was used for establishing development processes. They also describe the standards, which are specific to the medical industry, and how they were considered in the modeling efforts. Badari Kotejoshyer, Birendra Singh, and Suhas Tittibha present experiences with requirements management in large Automotive and aerospace projects. They propose a specific set of attributes and relationships in a requirement management system, which allows to automatically analyze gaps and non-compliances. Javier Saldaña-Ramos, Ana Sanz-Esteban, Javier García-Guzmán, and Antonio Amescua-Seco look at Global Software Development from the viewpoint of skills and required roles. They describe a framework of roles, communications and skills as well as the role of a GSD expert/coach. Diego Martín, Javier García, Julián Urbano, and Antonio Amescua present a method to re-use process patterns and to build development processes from such process patterns. This re-use approach allows configuring and adapting processes to companies in a shorter time. Miguel-Angel Sicilia, Richard Messnarz, Miklos Biro, Elena García-Barriocanal, Miguel Garre-Rubio, Kerstin Siakas, Adrienne Clarke, and Sonja Koinig describe the new ISO 26000 standard for social responsibility and illustrate how this will impact SPI in the future. Tomas Schweigert and Andreas Nehfort present the new Test SPICE assessment model and discuss specific technical issues such as test automation, test environments, and test data. Timo Varkoi, Risto Nevalainen, and Timo Mäkinen discuss the Nuclear SPICE model and how it combines both SPICE-related generic requirements with functional safety and nuclear specific elements. Nuclear power industry is one of the most challenging domains worldwide because of its extreme safety requirements. The editors would like to express their thanks to the members of the EuroSPI22011 Industrial Programme Committee for their contribution to the review and selection of the papers: Bachmann Volker Ovi SIBAC GmbH Germany, Bæk Jørgensen Jens Mjølner Informatics A/S Denmark, Balstrup Bo Center for Software Innovation Denmark, Biró Miklós Software Competence Center Hagenberg, Austria, Breske Eva Robert Bosch GmbH Germany, Christiansen Mads DELTA Denmark, Daughtrey Taz James Madison University USA, Dussa-Zieger Klaudia Method Park Software AG Germany, Ekert Damjan ISCN GmbH Austria, Fehrer Detlef SICK AG Germany, Fenz Andrea Skills International GmbH Austria, Forselius Pekka 4SUM Partners Finland, Georicke Stephan iSQI GmbH Germany, Hagenmeyer Philipp ZF Friedrichshafen AG Germany, Hallikas Jarmo Falcon Leader Oy Finland, Hind Tim AXA UK, Johansen Jørn DELTA Axiom Denmark, Johansson Mika FiSMA Finland, Lichtenecker Gerhard Magna Steyr Austria, Messnarz Richard ISCN Ltd Austria/Ireland, Nevalainen Risto FiSMA Finland, Pikkarainen Minna VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland, Poth Alexander SQS Software Quality Systems AG Germany, Renault Samuel Centre de Recherche Public Henri Tudor Luxembourg, Romcea Cristina Conti Temic microelectronic GmbH Germany, Sauberer Gabriele TermNet Austria, Schweigert Tomas SQS Software Quality Systems AG Germany, Spork Gunther Magna Powertrain Austria, Stefanova-Pavlova Maria Center for Innovation and Technology Transfer-Global Bulgaria, and Von Bronk Peter Systemberatung Software-Qualität Germany

A typical characterization of EuroSPI was stated by a company using the following words: '… the biggest value of EuroSPI lies in its function as a European knowledge and experience exchange mechanism for SPI and innovation'. EuroSPI22012 was held for the second time in Vienna, the capital of Austria. In 2012, EuroSPI2 continued with the open workshop communities aligned with the conference and focusing on specific SPI topics. This included Creating Environments Supporting Innovation and Improvement, SPI and Product, System, Software Design, and SPICE Assessors: Exchanging Experiences Across Assessment Models, Business Process Innovation and Improvement, SPI and Measurement, and SPI in small-sized and medium-sized enterprises. Also, at EuroSPI22012, we continued to extend the scope of the conference from software process improvement to systems, software and services process improvement. Among the 26 countries represented at EuroSPI22012, the contributions were highly relevant for the European and worldwide industry also appearing in this special issue. The SPI Manifesto from 2009 created a future vision, the extension of SPI to the systems and product level led to the involvement of major European manufacturing firms, the building of workshop communities for specific topics created further networking opportunities, and the contributions included good practices about how to achieve that. Systems, software and services process improvement is meanwhile a major learning and success factor worldwide for staying competitive on a global and dynamic developing world market. In 2012, the Institute of Software Technology and Interactive Systems of Vienna University of Technology and the International Network for Terminology (TermNet) collaborated with this board to coordinate with EuroSPI22012. The value of this selection of papers lies in the fact that they present actual industrial experiences. Research-oriented EuroSPI22012 papers were published in separate proceedings. Since its beginning in 1994 in Dublin, the EuroSPI2 initiative outlines that there is no single silver bullet to solve SPI issues, but you need to understand a combination of different SPI methods and approaches to achieve real benefits. Therefore, each proceeding covers a variety of different topics and, at the conference, we discuss potential synergies and the combined use of such methods and approaches. This proceeding contains a selection of industrial experience papers leveraging SPI in various application domains, which reflect EuroSPI2's multidimensional approach with the three fundamental components of process improvement known to be people and skills, process, and technology. The paper by Phelim Dowling describes the transformation of a research project into a fully fledged commercial entity with an emphasis on the software process and quality methodologies used that in this case are mainly based on agile methods. In this paper, the author outlines how to engage in the software process, specifically agile, from an early stage transforming a research project into a commercial spinout. The paper 'Methodological framework for the allocation of work packages in GSD' by Ruano-Mayoral, Casado-Lumbreras, Garbarino-Alberti, and Misra presents and tests a framework devoted to allocate tasks among project participants in global software development settings. This framework is tested in real projects with promising results in terms of lower defects introduction and increased overall satisfaction from all parties. Onur Kaynak and N. Alpay Karagöz present an experience report about the integrated management of the ISO (International Organization for Standardization)/IEC (International Electrotechnical Commission) 15504, ISO/IEC 27001, ISO/IEC 20000, and ISO/IEC 9001:2008 in an information technology solutions provider company. This paper depicts the process improvement initiative challenges with the four different management systems. The paper by Hervé Cholez and Frédéric Girard proposes a method that is aimed to conduct a first assessment of enterprise information security maturity and consequently improves its process accordingly. The research work has been performed by the Public Research Centre Henri Tudor, Luxembourg in collaboration with the Luxembourg's Ministry of Economy and Foreign Trade and is specifically designed for small-sized and medium-sized enterprises. The paper by Martin McHugh, Fergal McCaffery, and Valentine Casey presents the results of a survey devoted to study the barriers on the adoption of agile practices in the medical device industry. Medical device developers must develop software in accordance with regulatory requirements and as a result, a number of the barriers to agile adoption are associated with the process of achieving regulatory conformance. Tomas Schweigert et al. present a study devoted to investigate agile Maturity Models by means of an industrial survey. Results show that we cannot find a common accepted agile Maturity Model, and extensive research on the area is needed to develop a common proposal from the information available. Hideto Ogasawara, Takumi Kusanagi, and Minoru Aizawa propose an SPI framework and introduce the results of SPI activities based on Toshiba's approach that has been implemented since 2000. The editors would like to express their thanks to the members of the EuroSPI22012 Industrial Programme Committee for their contribution to the review and selection of the papers: Bachmann Volker, SIBAC GmbH, Germany; Bæk Jørgensen Jens, Mjølner Informatics A/S, Denmark; Breske Eva, Robert Bosch GmbH, Germany; Christiansen Mads, DELTA, Denmark; Daughtrey Taz, James Madison University, USA; Dekkers Carol, Quality Plus Technologies, USA; Dussa-Zieger Klaudia, Method Park Software AG, Germany; Ekert Damjan, International Software Consulting Network Ltd GmbH, Austria; Fehrer Detlef, SICK AG, Germany; Fenz Andrea, Skills International GmbH, Austria; Forselius Pekka, 4SUM Partners, Finland; Georicke Stephan, International Software Quality Institute GmbH, Germany; Hagenmeyer Philipp, ZF Friedrichshafen AG, Germany; Hallikas Jarmo, Falcon Leader Oy, Finland; Hällmayer Frank, Software Factory GmbH, Germany; Hind Tim, AXA, UK; İbrişim Ayşegül, Turkish Standards Institution, Turkey; Johansen Jørn, DELTA Axiom, Denmark; Johansson Mika, Finish Software Measurement Association, Finland; König Frank, ZF Friedrichshafen AG, Germany; Messnarz Richard, ISCN Ltd, Austria/Ireland; Morgenstern Jens, Germany; Nevalainen Risto, FiSMA, Finland; O'Leary Eugene, EQN Ltd., Ireland; Poth Alexander, Software Quality Systems AG, Germany; Renault Samuel, Centre de Recherche Public Henri Tudor, Luxembourg; Romcea Cristina, Conti Temic microelectronic GmbH, Germany; Sauberer Gabriele, TermNet, Austria; Schweigert Tomas, SQS AG, Germany; Sechser Bernhard, Method Park, Germany; Spork Gunther, Magna Powertrain, Austria; Stefanova-Pavlova Maria, Center for Innovation and Technology Transfer-Global, Bulgaria; Von Bronk Peter, Systemberatung Software-Qualität, Germany; and Wegner Thomas, ZF Friedrichshafen AG, Germany.

A typical characterization of EuroSPI was stated by a company using the following words: ‘ … the biggest value of EuroSPI lies in its function as a European knowledge and experience exchange mechanism for SPI and innovation’. EuroSPI22013 was held in Dundalk Institute of Technology, Ireland. In 2013, EuroSPI2 continued with the open workshop communities aligned with the conference and focusing on specific SPI topics. This included in 2013 the communities for Creating Environments Supporting Innovation and Improvement, SPI and Product-System-Software Design, SPICE Assessors Exchanging Experiences across Assessment Models, and SPI and Measurement. The EuroSPI 2013 program had four international workshops on day 1, and on the conference days 2 and 3 international key notes, more than 60 presentations from leading industry and leading research institutes, and a joint paper award with the American Society of Quality. EuroSPI 2013 also hosted a fourth conference day to celebrate 20 years of EuroSPI, which included a set of key notes to think about the next 20 years of SPI in the future. These anniversary key notes have been videotaped and are available online. Among the 26 countries represented at EuroSPI22013, the contributions were highly relevant for the European and worldwide industry also appearing in this special issue. The SPI manifesto from 2009 created a future vision, the extension of SPI to the systems and product level led to involvement of major European manufacturing firms, the building of workshop communities for specific topics created further networking opportunities, and the contributions included good practices about how to achieve that. Systems, software, and services process Improvement is meanwhile a major learning and success factor worldwide for staying competitive on a global and dynamically developing world market. In 2013, Dundalk Institute of Technology collaborated with this board to coordinate EuroSPI22013. The value of this selection of papers lies in the fact that they present actual industrial experiences. Research-oriented EuroSPI22013 papers were published in separate proceedings. Since its beginning in 1994 in Dublin, the EuroSPI2 initiative outlines that there is no single silver bullet to solve SPI issues but you need to understand a combination of different SPI methods and approaches to achieve real benefits. Therefore, each proceeding covers a variety of different topics, and at the conference, we discuss potential synergies and the combined use of such methods and approaches. This proceeding contains a selection of industrial experience papers leveraging SPI in various application domains, which reflect EuroSPI2's multi-dimensional approach with the three fundamental components of process improvement known to be people and skills, process, and technology. The paper by Filipe Albero Pomar, José Antonio Calvo-Manzano, Edgar Caballero, and Magdalena Arcilla-Cobián contributes to the improvement of our understanding of the software development process by presenting a thorough approach to identifying the root causes of issues arising in the context of Scrum implementations. Paraic Hegarty, Eoghan O'Leary, Danny Dineen, David Bustard, and Adrian Moore address the issue of the transition from an initial product developed for a specific commission to a software product line supporting curriculum management in higher education. The paper describes the experiences and identifies the general lessons learned. The exploitation of the shift from traditional knowledge management to networked knowledge sharing in information technology including the software industry is addressed by Ricardo Colomo-Palacios, Richard Messnarz, Kerstin Siakas, Daniel Palosi, and Darragh Coakley. The paper gives account among others of a newly available job role qualification program contributing to process improvement. Valuable lessons learned from experimentation and their use for the improvement of IT processes, in three different partially outsourced contexts, are presented in the paper by Stéphane Cortina, Alain Renault, and Michel Picard based on the TIPA® process assessment framework. The cost/benefit ratio of reaching Capability Maturity Model Integration maturity level 5 is often considered to be a priori disappointing. Lucas Grossi, José Antonio Calvo-Manzano, and Tomas San Feliu show the benefits of high maturity levels and present their experiences in coordinating the implementation in two constellations (Service and Development) in a consultancy company. Alberto Heredia, Javier Garcia-Guzman, Antonio Amescua-Seco, and Manuel Velasco-Diego address the development environment of the strongly emerging mobile app market. The paper adapts agile methodologies to the development of mass-market applications to provide project teams with a clear guide to successfully produce an app without missing any step in the process and also considering marketing issues. The paper by Masao Ito and Koichi Kishida considers the difficulties of separating safety and non-safety requirements when applying the ISO 26262 ‘Road vehicles – Functional safety’ standard whose scope is supported by the proposed method and tool. The applicability of the approach extends to a wide range of fields beyond the automotive industry. Many companies need assessments according to several standards and reference models whose separate consideration means extra costs. Xabier Larrucea and Izaskun Santamaria discuss multi-model approaches efficiently integrating different reference models and report about statistical data and conclusions derived from 47 industrial assessments. Antoni-Lluís Mesquida and Antonia Mas describe the results obtained and the lessons learned from the implementation of the ISO/IEC 29110 standard (Software engineering — Lifecycle profiles for Very Small Entities) in four small software development companies clustered in a joint process improvement program. The paper by Efi Papatheocharous and Andreas S. Andreou provides an in-depth analysis of empirical evidence on the state of practice within the agile domain obtained through a survey focusing on agile software processes and teams, and particular topics of interest encompassing communication, project management, quality assurance, and validation. The editors would like to express their thanks to the members of the EuroSPI22013 Industrial Programme Committee for their contribution to the review and selection of the papers: Bachmann Volker, SIBAC GmbH, Germany; Bæk Jørgensen Jens, Mjølner Informatics A/S, Denmark; Breske Eva, Robert Bosch GmbH, Germany; Christiansen Mads, DELTA, Denmark; Daughtrey Taz, James Madison University, USA; Dekkers Carol, Quality Plus Technologies, USA; Dussa-Zieger Klaudia, Method Park Software AG, Germany; Ekert Damjan, ISCN GmbH, Austria; Fehrer Detlef, SICK AG, Germany; Fenz Andrea, Skills International GmbH, Austria; Forselius Pekka, 4SUM Partners, Finland; Georicke Stephan, iSQI GmbH, Germany; Hagenmeyer Philipp, ZF Friedrichshafen AG, Germany; Hallikas Jarmo, Falcon Leader Oy, Finland; Hällmayer Frank, Software Factory GmbH, Germany; Hind Tim, AXA, UK; İbrişim Ayşegül, Turkish Standards Institution, Turkey; Johansen Jørn, DELTA Axiom, Denmark; Johansson Mika, FiSMA, Finland; König Frank, ZF Friedrichshafen AG, Germany; Messnarz Richard, ISCN Ltd, Austria/Ireland; Morgenstern Jens, Germany; Nevalainen Risto, FiSMA, Finland; O'Leary Eugene, EQN Ltd., Ireland; Poth Alexander, SQS Software Quality Systems AG, Germany; Renault Samuel, Centre de Recherche Public Henri Tudor, Luxembourg; Romcea Cristina, Conti Temic microelectronic GmbH, Germany; Sauberer Gabriele, TermNet, Austria; Schweigert Tomas, SQS Software Quality Systems AG, Germany; Sechser Bernhard, Method Park, Germany; Spork Gunther, Magna Powertrain, Austria; Stefanova-Pavlova Maria, Center for Innovation and Technology Transfer-Global, Bulgaria; Von Bronk Peter, Systemberatung Software-Qualität, Germany; Wegner Thomas, ZF Friedrichshafen AG, Germany. Some contributions published in this volume have been funded with support from the European Commission. In this case, the publications reflect the views only of the author(s), and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use, which may be made of the information contained therein. In addition to the EuroSPI research proceedings, a selection of the best industrial experience papers from the conference has been published in the Wiley ‘Journal of Software: Evolution and Process’ or its predecessors since 2004 1. The compilation for EuroSPI 2005 2 grew to gather a collection of 12 papers covering aspects that range from software standards to human factors and from software improvement to outsourcing. EuroSPI 2006 led to a collection of 10 papers under the umbrella of ‘European Industrial Experiences in Process Improvement and Innovation’ 3. In EuroSPI 2007, initiatives were presented and selected to be extended in a set of papers entitled ‘Process Improvement Lessons Learnt in Small and Large Organizations Worldwide’ 4. EuroSPI 2008 grew in the number of papers selected to reach a set of 11 papers edited under the name ‘SPI Experiences and Innovation for Global Software Development’ 5. ‘Topics in Software, Systems and Services Process Improvement’ 6 was the first of the collections published in the new ‘Journal of Software: Evolution and Process’. In this edition, hosted by Universidad de Alcala de Henares, Madrid, Spain, one of the main outputs presented by the EuroSPI initiative was the SPI manifesto. In a collection entitled ‘Industrial experiences with software process assessment and improvement’ 7, a set of seven papers was extended to be published in Volume 25 Issue 4 of the ‘Journal of Software: Evolution and Process’. EuroSPI 2011 took place in Roskilde, Denmark. ‘Application themes of software process assessment and improvement’ 8 gathers a set of nine papers covering aspects like Test SPICE, Nuclear SPICE, or Global Software Development. For 2011, in addition to the works published in ‘Journal of Software: Evolution and Process’, a new collection of papers was published in another of the key journals in the area: IET Software. Under the name ‘European Systems and Software Process Improvement and Innovation’ 9, six papers were extended to be included in the Volume 6, Issue 5 of this journal. The 2012 edition of the conference was held in Vienna. This compilation under the title ‘Software process improvement leveraged in various application domains’ 10 includes seven papers from the event. However, another special collection devoted to EuroSPI 2012 was issued in Elsevier's Computer Standards & Interfaces 36(1) under the generic name of ‘Systems, software and services process improvement’ and including set ofsix papers 11. In summary, in addition to the industrial and research proceedings, during the last 10 years, around a hundred papers have been published in top journals of the discipline. At EuroSPI 2013, the 20th anniversary of the conference was celebrated with an extra day of worldwide key notes sharing their thoughts about the next 20 years of SPI. This offers a set of leading ideas about how to continue with SPI in the future and how to even further support the innovation and improvement experiences in Europe and worldwide. From 2014 onwards, EuroSPI will use these ideas to further extend the EuroSPI scope. Also, from 2014 onwards, the European Certification and Qualification Association (ECQA) community joins EuroSPI conferences officially, and a memorandum of agreement was signed between Chinese delegations and ECQA, leading to Chinese participation from 2014. To celebrate the ongoing collaboration between EuroSPI and the Journal of Software: Evolution and Process, Wiley created in 2012 a Virtual Issue entitled ‘EuroSPI Collection’ bringing all previous EuroSPI Special Issues together in one collection. The special collection is introduced in the editorial ‘Empirical insights into process improvement: The EuroSPI papers’ 12 by Prof. Darren Dalcher, Editor-in-Chief of the journal who professionally nurtured the special issues from the beginning. The special collection is also the result of the dedication of Ms. Alice Wood, Wiley Senior Publishing Assistant. EuroSPI has an agreement with the ASQ (American Society of Quality, Software Division) to jointly issue an annual best paper award. It is planned that these best papers will be published in the Wiley journal. All this means that EuroSPI will continue growing, will be sustained for further years, and will develop more SPI stories, benefiting research and industry, to be published in collaboration with Wiley.

ABSTRACT Software Process Improvement (SPI) activities aim at driving change in information technology development towards increased quality and productivity levels. The SPI Manifesto describes the key values and principles for a successful implementation of SPI. About two‐thirds of its principles relate to human, social, and organizational aspects and one‐third to technical aspects. This raises the question if these aspects have a relationship with ‘social responsibility’ principles. The new ISO 26000:2010 standard provides guidance about social responsibility (SR), describing the core subjects and issues an organization has to consider when implementing SR. In this paper, we describe how the values and principles of the SPI Manifesto have a relationship with the SR issues described in the ISO 26000. In addition, this paper describes about the steps taken in an industry group to exchange best practices about how social strategies can be used to achieve higher acceptance and sustainability of SPI initiatives. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Abstract The paper discusses structure, quality and content of the currently available agile maturity models. It presents two approaches on how to deal with such models. As a first step of the analysis, the paper contains a compilation of maturity level naming used by these agile maturity models because the variety of level naming is a sign of the variety of understanding and of definition of agile maturity. While many papers deal with agile from an inside perspective, this paper is written from the perspective of Software Process Improvement (SPI) and Capability Determination, the European Certification and Qualification Association PI Manager Certification Scheme and also the SPI Manifesto. The paper does not explicitly present its own agile maturity model. The analysis approaches presented in the paper show that the currently available agile maturity models are not fit for industrial use. The synthesis of an acceptable model seems to be feasible as the analysed models address typical organisational processes including life cycle management. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Fergal Mc Caffery and Valentine Casey describe how a lightweight assessment method was developed to educate Irish software development organisations in relation to becoming medical device software suppliers for the Medical Device (MD) and diagnostic industry.Anne Kramer presents an analysis of the new standard ISO 26262 for the automotive industry.She compares this standard to existing regulations of another safety-critical domain, that is, the medical device industry.She discusses the question 'Can we learn from each other?' to identify synergies between the automotive and the medical industry.

It is well-known that process improvement change requires “tools-processes-people.” Engineers have spent most energy on the tools and processes, but everything is done by people, and success depends on people and their competencies. The increasing focus on people is reflected in many change models; some are discussed in this paper.

An annual EuroSPI conference supported by Software Process Improvement Networks from different EU countries. Establishing an Internet-based knowledge library, newsletters, and a set of proceedings and recommended books. Establishing an effective team of national representatives (from each EU country) growing step by step into more countries of Europe. Establishing a European Qualification Framework for a pool of professions related to SPI and management. This is supported by European certificates and exam systems. A typical characterisation of EuroSPI was stated by a company using the following words: ‘ … the biggest value of EuroSPI lies in its function as a European knowledge and experience exchange mechanism for SPI and innovation’. EuroSPI 22009 was held in Alcala, a historical city close to Madrid. The University of Alcala, as the host of EuroSPI 2009, is one of the oldest universities of Europe and was then a model for establishing other universities across Europe. They also act as the reference University for all the Spanish Speaking Countries world wide and they issue the annual Cervantes price of the literature. The university stands for collaboration and networking with an impressive history. As in previous years, a joint best paper award was jointly delivered at the conference by EuroSPI and the ASQ (American Society of Quality). This year, experts from 14 countries met before the conference and established a first version of an SPI manifesto. EuroSPI hosted its foundation in Alcala on 3.9.2009 and the manifesto has been released on 1.2.2010. This SPI Manifesto is published across the world during 2010. It gives expression to the state-of-the-art knowledge on systems, software and services process improvement grounded in hundreds of man years of practice and experience from organizations worldwide. Also at EuroSPI 2009, the scope of the conference was expanded from software process improvement to systems, software, and services-based process improvement. EMIRAcle is the institution for innovation in manufacturing being a result of the largest network of excellence for innovation in manufacturing in Europe. EMIRAcle's key representative joined the EuroSPI community. Papers, case studies for process improvement on systems and product level will be included in the future. EMIRAcle and Grenoble Institute of Technology are the hosts for EuroSPI 22010. Networking, experience exchange and continuous improvement can help in creating a competitive advantage on the market. Among the 24 countries represented at EuroSPI'2009, the contributions were highly relevant for the European industry. The SPI manifesto creates a future vision, the extension of SPI to the systems and product level will lead to the involvement of major European manufacturing firms, and the contributions include good practices about how to achieve that. Systems, Software and Services-based Process Improvement meanwhile is a major learning and success factor worldwide for staying competitive on a global and dynamically developing world market. Readers are welcome to the next conference in the EuroSPI series to be held in Grenoble, France, from 1st to 3rd September, 2010. Since 1994 the EuroSPI initiative is financed and coordinated by a group of leading applied research companies and quality networks. Since 1998 the following board members have been important drivers for the initiative: American Society for Quality Software Division, http://www.asq.org; German SW Quality Association ASQF, http://www.asqf.de; DELTA, Denmark, http://www.delta.dk; ISCN, Ireland and Austria, http://www.iscn.com; SINTEF, Norway, http://www.sintef.no; STTF and FiSMA (Finish Software Measurement Association), http://www.sttf.fi. In 2009, the University of Alcala closely collaborated with this board to coordinate EuroSPI 22009. The value of this selection of papers lies in the fact that they present actual industrial experiences. Research-oriented EuroSPI 22009 papers were published in a separate proceedings. Since its beginning in 1994 in Dublin, the EuroSPI initiative outlines that there is no single silver bullet to solve SPI issues but you need to understand a combination of different SPI methods and approaches to achieve real benefits. Therefore, each proceeding covers a variety of different topics and at the conference we discuss the potential synergies and the combined use of such methods and approaches. This proceeding contains selected industrial experience papers for different complementary topics, such as: SPI and Testing; SPI in Small Companies; SPI and Safety/Quality; SPI and Knowledge; SPI and Systems Improvement; SPI and Agile; SPI and Industrial Measurement Standards. This strategy reflects the EuroSPI multi-dimensional approach in which the three fundamental components of process improvement are known to be people & skills, process and technology. A further component which is considered in several papers in this special issue is ‘business’. We will use these general components and their special approach to categorize the papers. Patricia A. McQuaid describes disasters that happened at NASA and defense projects in the US and the lessons learned. She concludes that in all cases more professional testing, systems analysis and reviews, and optimized processes would have avoided the disasters. Monique Blaschke, Michael Philipp, Tomas Schweigert describe an ISO/IEC 15504 conformant test assessment approach. They review the common approaches of ISTQB, TMM and TPI/TMAP and outline a first version of Spice 4 Test. Ivan Garcia, Carla Pacheco, Jose Calvo-Manzano, Gonzalo Cuevas, Tomás San Feliu, Eloy Mendoza describe that SPI methods usually work in scenarios within large companies. The authors describe how they helped small software development organizations to adopt an iterative approach by providing a Process Improvement Web-based Tool. Antonia Mas, Bartomeu Fluxà, Esperança Amengual describe a first-hand experience in Software Process Improvement within a Spanish company which, since 2002, has been involved in an improvement program led by their research group. Experiences and results of this improvement programme, as well as the lessons learned to deal with new future improvement initiatives in other companies are discussed. Mika Johansson, Risto Nevalainen give an insight into the certification of safety-critical software as a multi-disciplinary topic. Process assessment is an essential part of that, but is not enough for software certification. Certification also employs several other method families, such as inspections and reviews, independent V&V, conformance with selected reference standard(s) and use of selected measurements and analyses. Jose A. Calvo-Manzano, Gonzalo Cuevas, Gerzon Gómez, Jezreel Mejia, Mirna Muñoz, Tomás San Feliu, Angel Sánchez describe a methodology that implements a smooth and continuous process improvement, depending on the organization's business goals, but allowing users to establish their improvement implementation pace. The methodology focuses on a process improvement basic component known as ‘best practice’. Tomas Schweigert, Richard Messnarz, Morten Korsaa, Jorn Johansen, RistoNevalainen, Miklos Biro state that while there is widespread knowledge about the performance of assessments, the real implementation of SPI (Software, Systems and Services Process Improvement) takes a lot of effort and experience to achieve an actual ROI (Return on Investment). To ensure the success of the improvement actions, another additional qualification is needed, which is the (SPI) Software, System and Services Process Improvement Manager. The paper describes these skills and offers participation in the SPI manifesto. Volker Bachmann, Richard Messnarz describe the principles of a platform strategy based on experiences in automotive engineering companies implementing mechatronic system with mechanics, electronics and software. It shows how requirements management, architectural design and solutions for products for a number of different customers with a high capability level and reuse factor can be established. The paper by Andreas Riel, Serge Tichkiewitch, Anca Draghici, George Draghici, Damian Grajewski Collaboration outlines that for systems improvement, integrated design skills have become an incontestable necessity for professionals in engineering teams. Engineering teams are becoming more and more interdisciplinary and distributed, products and the environments they are created, used and recycled in are increasingly complex. Design engineers, system architects as well as requirements engineers and managers have to be able to understand the product and its whole life cycle in order to be able to respect the constraints and requirements that are imposed on the product by different actors. Padraig O'Leary, Fergal McCaffery, Ita Richardson, Steffen Thiel discuss Software Product Lines (SPL) and Agile practices which have emerged as new paradigms for developing software. Both approaches share common goals, such as improving productivity, reducing time to market, decreasing development costs and increasing customer satisfaction. These common goals provide the motivation for this research. In this paper, they present an outline of their Agile framework for product derivation that was developed through industry-based case study research. Elli Georgiadou and Kerstin V. Siakas offer a new model for knowledge sharing and learning for workplaces in general but particularly for virtual workplaces where there is a need for a methodology for identifying and converting individual expertise, skills and experience into organizational knowledge. This is a highly relevant need in the systems, software and services business. Alain Abran, Jean-Marc Desharnais and Juan Jose Cuadrado-Gallego discuss the standards ISO 15939 and ISO 9126 and outline the differences between the standards. They present the Measurement Information Model in ISO 15939 and illustrate the use of this standard with two examples from ISO 9126, focusing on a single attribute and the second one attempting to quantify a set of relationships across a number of product quality attributes. We express our thanks to the members of the EuroSPI 22009 Industrial Programme Committee for their contribution to the review and selection of the papers: B ACHMANN Volker Sibac GmbH Germany, B ALSTRUP Bo Center for Software Innovation Denmark, B ARAFORT Beatrix Centre de Recherche Public Henri Tudor Luxembourg, B RESKE Eva Robert Bosch GmbH Germany, Christiansen Mads D ELTA Denmark, C OLLINOAlessandro O NION S.p.A. Italy, Colomo Palacios Ricardo Universidad Carlos III de Madrid Spain, Daughtrey Taz H. James Madison University U.S.A., Davies Richard Schlumberger WesternGeco Norway, Dussa-zieger Claudia Method Park Software AG Germany, E KERT Damjan ISCN Austria, Fehrer Detlef Sick AG Germany, Hagenmeyer Philipp ZF Friedrichshafen AG Germany, Hind Tim Axa Sun Life U.K., Johansson Mika Finnish Software Measurement Association FiSMA Finland, Kastner Norbert sepp.med gmbh Germany, Lichtenecker Gerhard Magna Steyr Fahrzeugtechnik Austria, Messnarz Richard ISCN Ireland, Morgenstern Jens Tuev Germany, Nevalainen Risto Falcon Leader Oy Finland, O Leary Eugene EQN Ltd. Ireland, Pikkarainen Mika VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland Finland, POTH Alexander SQS Software Quality Systems AG Germany, Renault Samuel Centre de Recherche Public Henri Tudor Luxembourg, Riel Andreas Grenoble Institute of Technology France, Romcea Cristina Conti Temic microelectronic GmbH Germany, Sanders Marty U.K., Schweigert Tomas SQS Software Quality Systems AG Germany, SEHL Georg iMBUS AG Germany, Smite Darja Blekinge Inst. of Technology Sweden, Spork Gunther Magna Powertrain Austria, Stefanova-pavlova Maria Center for Innovation and Technology Transfer-Global Bulgaria, Ulsund Tor Geomatikk AS Norway, Von Bronk Peter Systemberatung Software-Qualität Germany, Wöran Bruno Danube Austria.

SUMMARY Software process improvement (SPI) can be seen as a profession having its own competence needs and its own community of interest. European projects EQN and EU Cert have defined skill sets and a common certification scheme for about 20 professions, mainly in the IT domain. European Certification and Qualification Association ECQA is created to manage certification and provide the necessary infrastructure. A common way to approach the IT domain from a process perspective is the ‘3S’ concept (Software, Systems, Services). Software process can be seen as the first spearhead among these. The first software process models, such as CMM and SPICE, have already existed for about 20 years. With all the experience that the models bring, it is reasonable to start the PI profession from the software process. Software Process Improvement Manager (SPI Manager) is one of the new topics in ECQA. The development of the SPI Manager training and certification scheme has been done in many small steps so far. This paper explains the current structure and the main components of SPI Manager competences, training needs and the certification scheme. Several other schemes will be developed in the future for process improvement‐related competences. The current version of the SPI Manager skill set is mainly based on software, systems and service processes and their related reference models. It could also be used in the future in domains other than IT. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.