Talk:GQM

1994

I really don't see where the 6 steps come from. The original 1994 publication does not appear to distinguish 6 steps.
Same goes for the goals template. In the 1994 publication, goals only have 4 points: issue, object, viewpoint and purpose.
The book, which is not from the same authors, mentions 11 steps and has the goal template presented here.
What's even more confusing, the book references the 1994 publication as the source of the goal template, which doesn't have it.
Any idea what's going on? The 11th plague of Egypt (talk) 13:28, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Hi, answering in reverse, Q2: The book "The Goal/Question/Metric Method: a practical guide for quality improvement of software development" by Solingen/Berghout has templates, for example "Figure 6-3: GQM goal definition template (Basili et al, 1994a)." Q1: How many steps? Well, book has Chapters, starting from "PART 2: THE GQM METHOD STEPWISE":

1. Planning
2. Definition
3. Data Collection
4. Interpretation

Each Phase (Chapter) has sub-sections with sub-phases and procedure, so very likely something was confused here and because it meantions "Corporate goal", this sounds like the sub-list under "Step 1: Define measurement goals", which actually has 7 steps:

1. What are the strategic goals of your organisation?
2. What forces have an impact on your strategic goals?
3. How can you improve your performance?
4. What are your major concerns (problems)?
5. What are your improvement goals?
6. How can you reach your improvement goals?
7. What are possible measurement goals, and what are their priorities?

Should be corrected or mentioned. I may have time for it. This comment is clearing the confusion and can be used as template/evidence for changing the article. Considering it done.  --𝔏92934923525 (talk) 11:09, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Claim

Hi, I removed "Although GQM has served the software industry well for several decades, it never provided explicit support for integrating its software measurement model with elements of the larger organization, such as higher-level business goals and strategies." from the article, since there is no reference. The "served well for decades" needs evidence, as well as the other parts. I don't think it's adding big value to the article either if not further elaborated if the method is used, how, impact, etc.--17387349L8764 (talk) 23:02, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Claim Albert Endres

Hi, German Albert Endres site doesn't mention it explicitly that "Dr. Weiss' work was inspired by the work of Albert Endres at IBM Germany." Yes, AE was IBM. Yes he authored papers and books around software measurement. Nevertheless my research does not indicate or mention anywhere that he "inspired" Weiss. This connection needs proof, and is it really of value? Both authors have individual contributing papers, both useful.--17387349L8764 (talk) 23:07, 18 March 2021 (UTC)