國內目前已有許多廠商通過開發方的軟體成熟度整合模式(Capability maturity Model Integration for Development, CMMI-DEV)成熟度第3級(Maturity Level III, ML3)的認證，而ML3須達到落實18個流程領域(Process Area, PA)。在這麼多流程領域中，籌獲方對於CMMI-DEV廠商是否在每個流程領域都有真正落實到已定義能力等級(Defined Process)，以及CMMI-DEV廠商相較於未導入CMMI-DEV的廠商，或是CMMI-DEV廠商導入CMMI-DEV後相較於其導入前，是否真的有實質效益的呈現，亦或是CMMI-DEV廠商僅有CMMI-DEV證照的虛名而仍未達到或落實實質軟體開發成熟度等級的能力。另外，企業從事流程改善而導入CMMI-DEV時，應會有許多不同構面的效益（成本、時程、品質、投資報酬率、客戶滿意度等），然而四個流程領域群組（工程、流程管理、專案管理、支援）之落實程度對各效益構面的影響為何，至今文獻中仍尚未有對此議題的研究。又文獻中對軟體流程改善或CMMI-DEV導入效益的研究，主要是從軟體廠商來收集流程改善效益的資料，因此所收集到的資料未必是客觀的。
基於上述的研究動機，本研究主要是從籌獲方角度來探討以下三個主要問題：(1)國內CMMI-DEV廠商流程領域是否有實際落實執行？各流程領域群組之落實程度是否有統計顯著差異？(2)國內CMMI-DEV廠商所承接之軟體委外專案績效是否因為導入CMMI-DEV而有實質的效益呈現？各效益構面是否有統計顯著的差異？(3)CMMI-DEV四個流程領域群組之落實程度對流程改善各效益構面的影響為何？研究結果發現籌獲方政府機關對於各流程領域群組落實程度認同度明顯高於不認同，而流程改善效益雖仍給予肯定，但效益尚未能完全彰顯；各流程領域群組落實程度對整體效益有顯著的正相關，深入探討發現專案管理群組對時程、成本效益有顯著的因果關係，而工程性流程群組對品質、客戶滿意度與組織競爭力有顯著的因果關係。綜合本研究結果的分析，可以做為國內CMMI-DEV導入廠商、輔導顧問、或政府提昇資訊軟體品質CMMI-DEV計畫承辦單位等對目前國內CMMI-DEV流程改善落實程度、流程改善效益與之間的相關性有一些瞭解。

At present, many domestic software enterprises have acquired the Maturity Level III (ML3) certification of the Capability Maturity Model Integration for Development (CMMI-DEV); however, some domestic software acquirers suspect that if those domestic CMMI-DEV enterprises have practically satisfied the requirement of the defined process capability. Are there any direct benefits to the CMMI-DEV enterprises after they passed the CMMI-DEV appraisal comparing to those enterprises not being appraised? There could be some CMMI-DEV enterprises that obtained the appraisal but did not obtain the real benefit of process improvement. In addition, when enterprises implement software process improvement via CMMI-DEV, they would benefit from various aspects such as cost, schedule, quality, and the customer satisfaction. To date, the effects of the practical implementation degree of the CMMI-DEV PA categories, including engineering, process management, project management, and the support, on the performance areas of software process improvement still have not been fully investigated and discussed. Meanwhile, some literature work that reported the performance of the software process improvement via exists, but the performance data of their process improvement is mainly provided by themselves and thus its objectivity is questionable.
Based on the above research motivation, this research mainly addresses the following three main questions from the acquirers' perspectives: (1) Have those domestic CMMI-DEV enterprises actually institutionalized the process implementation? Is there any significant statistical difference in the practical implementation degree of four CMMI-DEV process area categories? (2) Have those domestic CMMI-DEV enterprises really earned the benefits after they passed the certifications? Is there any significant statistical difference of the software process performance for them? (3) What are the effects of practical implementation degree of CMMI-DEV process area categories on the performance areas of software process improvement? This research results found that the government acquirers had a higher degree of recognition on the practical implementation degree of CMMI-DEV process area categories. But they did not fully recognize the effect of software process improvement. Practical implementation degree of CMMI-DEV process area categories had a remarkable relation to the performance of software process improvement. This research also found that the CMMI-DEV project management category had a statistically significant relation to the time and cost areas of process improvement performance; and the CMMI-DEV engineering category had a statistically significant relation to the quality, organization competition, and customer satisfaction areas of process improvement performance. This research results provide the information which can assist domestic software enterprises, consultants, and the government in further understanding the effects of the practical implementation degree of the CMMI-DEV process areas on the performance areas of software process improvement.

中文部分
[1]朱家佑，「軟體產業生產力要素、能力成熟度與品質關連性之研究」，碩士論文，東吳大學，民國九十七年。
[2]江靜旻，「CMMI成熟度等級對軟體流程改善效益影響之研究」，碩士論文，國立臺灣科技大學，民國九十八年。
[3]吳宗穆，「軟體流程改善量化績效指標制訂之研究」，碩士論文，國立臺灣科技大學，民國九十六年。
[4]吳純慧，「軟體程序成熟度與專案績效」，碩士論文，國立中正大學，民國八十九年。
[5]郭怡岑，「組織特性與投入資源對CMMI流程改善效益影響之研究」，碩士論文，國立臺灣科技大學，民國九十五年。
[6]陳政雄，「軟體能力成熟度整合模式下的專案管理流程領域對軟體品質成本影響之研究」，碩士論文，國立成功大學，民國九十三年。
[7]楊茲檢，「導入CMMI對軟體專案管理績效之影響」，碩士論文，輔仁大學，民國九十四年。
[8]蔡佳穎，「時間維度對國內CMMI流程改善效益影響之研究」，碩士論文，國立臺灣科技大學，民國九十八年。
[9]蕭怡祺，「使用者因素與成熟度層級對組織績效的影響：軟體能力成熟度為例」，碩士論文，清華大學，民國九十一年。
[10]謝文川，「導入CMMI對專案績效的影響」，碩士論文，淡江大學，民國九十八年。
[11]謝承鑫，「專案團隊、軟體能力成熟度與專案績效之探討」，碩士論文，中正大學，民國九十年。
[12]謝菊蓁，「CMMI及知識管理導入與軟體專案組織成效之關係」，碩士論文，輔仁大學，民國九十三年。
[13]藍昭雄，「軟體組織導入CMMI對組織績效影響之研究-企業程序再造之調節觀點」，碩士論文，輔仁大學，民國九十六年。
英文部分
[14]Ashrafi. N. (2003). “The impact of software process improvement on quality: in theory and practice.” Information and anagement 40(7), 677-690.
[15]Brodman, J.G. & Johnson, D.L. (1995). “Return on investment from software process improvement measured by U.S. industry.” Crosstalk, 9(4), 23-29.
[16]Damian, D., Zowghi, D., Vaidyanathasamy, L. & Pal, Y. (2002). “An industrial experience in process improvement: An early assessment at the Australian Center for Unisys software.” International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering (ISESE’02), 111-123.
[17]Devellis, R. F. (1991). Scale Development Theory and Application. London: SAGE.
[18]Dion, R. (1993). “Process improvement and the corporate balance sheet.” IEEE Software 10(4), 28-35.
[19]Dyba. T.J. (2002). Enabling Software Process Improvement: An Investigation of the Importance of Organizational Issues. Empirical Software Engineer 7(4), 387-390.
[20]Emam, K & Briand, L. (1997). “Costs and benefits of software process improvement.” Institute for Experimental Software Engineering (IESE) Report No 047.97/E.
[21]Emam, K., Goldenson, D., McCurley, J. & Herbsleb, J.(1998). Success or Failure? Modeling the likelihood of software process improvement. International Software Engineering Research Network technical report ISERN-98-15.
[22]Goldenson, D.R. & Gibson, D.L. (2003). “Demonsrating the impact and benefits of CMMI: an update and preliminary results.” Special Report, CMU/SEI-2003-SR-009.
[23]Goldenson, D.R. & Herbsleb, J. (1995). After the Appraisal: A Systematic Survey of Process Improvement, its Benefits, and Factors that Influence Success. Technical Report, CMU/SEI-95-TR-009.
[24]Harter, D.E., Laughter, S.A. ”Quality Improvement and Infrastructure Activity Costs in Software Development: A Longitudinal Analysis.” Management Science Vol. 49, No. 6, June 2003, 784-800
[25]Herbsleb J, Carlton A, Rozum J, Siegel J, Zubrow D..(1994). “Benefits of CMM-based software process improvement: initial returns.” Technical Report, CMU/SEI-94-TR-013.
[26]Herbsleb, J., Goldenson, D.R. (1996). A systematic survey of CMM experience and results. 18th International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE), 323-330.
[27]Iversen, J.; Ngwenyama, O. “Problems in measuring effectiveness in software process improvement: A longitudinal study of organizational change at Danske Data. “Internation Journal of Information Management 26(2006), 30-43.
[28]Jiang, J.J., Klein, G. Hwang, H.G. Huang, J & Hung, S.Y.(2004). “An exploration of the relationship between software development process maturity and project performance.” Information & Management 41(3), 279-288
[29]Krishnan, M.S. & Kellner, M. I. “Measuring Process Consistency: Implications for Reducing Software Defects. “IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 25, 6(November/December 1999): 800-815.
[30]McGibbon, T. (1999). “A business case for software process improvement revised.” DoD Data Analysis Center for Software(DACS).
[31]Mehner, T., Messer, T., Paul, P., Paulisch, F, Schless, P. & Volker, A. (1998). “Siemens process assessment and improvement approaches: experiences and benefits.” 22nd International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE), 186-195.
[32]Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric Theory(2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
[33]O’Hara, F. (2000). “European experiences with software process improvement.” Proceedings of the 22nd international conference on Software engineering, 635-640.
[34]Park, C.H., & Kim, Y.G. (2003). Identifying key factors affecting consumer purchase behavior in an online shopping context. International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 31(1), 16-29.
[35]Pitterman, B. (2000). “Telcordia Technologies; the journey to high maturity.” IEEE Software 17(4), 89-96.
[36]Rainer, A., & Hall, T.(2002). Key success factors for implementing software process improvement: A maturity-based analysis. Journal of Systems and software. 62, 71-84.
[37]Sakamoto, K.; Niihara, N., “ Analysis of Software Process Improvement Experience using the Project Visibility Index.” Software Engineering Conference, Dec 1996, 139-148.
[38]SEI, Performance Results of CMMI-Based Process Improvement, August 2006.
[39]SEI, Software Tech News, Improved Performance Should Be Expected from Process Improvement, March 2007.
[40]SEI, Software Tech News, Motorola Software Group’s China Center: Value Added by CMMI, March 2007.
[41]SEI, CMMI for Development, Version 1.2, August 2006. CMU/SEI-2006-TR-008.
[42]Shaikh, A., Ahmed, A., Memon, N., Memon, M. "Strengths and weaknesses of maturity driven process improvement effort." International Conference on Complex, Intelligent and Software Intensive Systems, CISIS 2009, art. no. 5066828, 481-486.
[43]Subramanian, G.H.; Jiang, J.J.; Klein, G. “Software quality and IS project performance improvements from software development process maturity and IS implementation strategies. “ The Journal of Systems and Software 80(2007), 616-627.
[44]Wohlwend, H. & Rosenbaum, R. (1993). Software improvement in an international company. 15th international conference on Software Engineering, 212-220.
[45]Yamamura, G. (1999). “Process improvement satisfies employees.” IEEE Software 16(5), 83-85.
[46]Yeom, H.-G., Hwang, S.-M. "A design of tool for software processes assessment and improvement." Advanced Software Engineering and its Applications, ASEA 2008 , art. no. 4721353, 245-248.
網路資料
[47]洪肇奎，「發展軟體是所有產業升級關鍵」，http://www.ithome.com.tw/itadm/article.php?c=43258
[48]張玉鳳，「品質台灣 縱橫全球98年度提升資訊軟體品質（CMMI）計畫成果發表會」，http://www.cmn.com.tw/shownews.asp?news_id=14273