An ISO/IEC 25010 Based Software Quality Assessment of a
Faculty Research Productivity Monitoring and Prediction
System
Ranie B. Canlas, DIT∗ Keno C. Piad, Dit
Don Honorio Ventura State University Bulacan State University
raniecanlas@dhvsu.edu.ph kenopiad@gmail.com
ABSTRACT
A known primary indicator of performance of academic institutions
is the productivity of their academic personnel in terms of research
outputs. Monitoring the outputs of faculty requires systematic and
technology-based methods for easy access and creation of reposi-
tory. This study generally aimed to provide solution in monitoring
the research undertakings of faculty through the development of
a system for effective and efficient management of research out-
puts. Specifically, it tried to identify necessary features that can
be integrated in the development of research productivity mon-
itoring and prediction system; assess system performance based
from the parameters of ISO/IEC 25010 Software Quality Model;
and identify differences on the assessment of the respondents in
terms of evaluation of software quality. The key features of the
developed system include support submission of paper proposals,
review and approval of proposal, monitoring of ongoing approved
papers, utilization of research outputs, research outputs repository
and predictive analysis. The assessment of the expert-respondents
resulted to a grand mean of 3.87 which corresponds to a verbal
interpretation of “Strongly Agree”. Results showed that the system
has the necessary features in determining research productivity
of faculty along with the high evaluation of system performance
based from the assessment of expert-respondents.
CCS CONCEPTS
• Software and its engineering; • Information systems; • Gen-
eral and reference;
KEYWORDS
Faculty Research Productivity Monitoring System, Prediction Sys-
tem, ISO/IEC 25010 Software Quality Model, Software Quality As-
sessment
ACM Reference Format:
Ranie B. Canlas, DIT, Keno C. Piad, Dit, and Ace C. Lagman, Dit. 2021. An
ISO/IEC 25010 Based Software Quality Assessment of a Faculty Research
∗ Principal author
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or
classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed
for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation
on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM
must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish,
to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a
fee. Request permissions from permissions@acm.org.
ICIT 2021, December 22–25, 2021, Guangzhou, China
© 2021 Association for Computing Machinery.
ACM ISBN 978-1-4503-8497-1/21/12. . . $15.00
https://doi.org/10.1145/3512576.3512619
238
Ace C. Lagman, Dit
Far Eastern University
aclagman@feutech.edu.ph
Productivity Monitoring and Prediction System. In 2021 The 9th Interna-
tional Conference on Information Technology: IoT and Smart City (ICIT 2021),
December 22–25, 2021, Guangzhou, China. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 5 pages.
https://doi.org/10.1145/3512576.3512619
1 INTRODUCTION
Research productivity cannot be described by a single definition
as perceived by scholars since the output varies across academic
institutions. Similarly, a number of criteria and attributes classifying
wide range of research outputs are applied. On the other hand, the
theoretical definition of research productivity is normally viewed
in peer-reviewed journal publications and other scholarly articles
[1]. Generally, it is measured based from the publications produced
by faculty out of the proposals completed.
Academic personnel can improve their performance by engaging
in research in order to be more relevant in the academic community.
Faculty can improve their skills and learn something new in connec-
tion with their areas of specialization. In research, they can explore
new topics and conduct investigations, compiles facts or informa-
tion, reaches conclusions, provide powerful recommendations and
suggest new ideas. The researchers thoroughly explore data, sepa-
rate data, explain data, confirm data, examine differences in views,
and provide new insights to the body of knowledge. Establishing
research work generates new knowledge [2].
Managing information generated by organizations or institutions
can be supported by information systems for more efficient process
from collecting up to storing of data [18].
Literatures provide several quality models for evaluation of soft-
ware products and systems [16, 17] and one of the latest available
standards is the ISO/IEC 25010 or the Software Quality Model. The
standard is an expanded form of the ISO 9126 model.
This study primarily aimed to develop a system for monitoring
research productivity of faculty research engagements with predic-
tive analysis and assess the performance of the developed system
using an instrument based from the parameters of ISO/IEC 25010
Software Quality Model.
2 RELATED LITERATURE
The process of efficiently employing inputs to maximize output
is commonly referred to as productivity. Publication of research
undertakings serves as the output while academic personnel, re-
searchers, resources like journals and access to scholarly databases
serve as the inputs [14].
Research productivity could be construed as the result of research
product and effort produce by researchers. Research productivity
ICIT 2021, December 22–25, 2021, Guangzhou, China
would mean publications produced by academic staff in the re-
search institutes surveyed: such publications include books, journal
articles, chapters in books, conference papers and proceedings, tech-
nical reports, patents, scientific peer- review bulletin, occasional
papers, monographs, co-authored books, theses/dissertations and
Journal publications published [22].
Despite its crucial importance, most academic institutions find it
difficult to achieve a high level of research production. As a result,
most academic organizations consider research productivity as a
shared concern, as research production necessitates skills, time, and
patience. Academic institutions are having difficulty producing and
implementing high-impact researches. Lack of research training,
continuous education, moral, and financial issues are all to blame
[4].
There are more and more new inventions in the world of tech-
nological development, particularly in the sector of information
technology. This information technology has the potential to bene-
fit a variety of groups through easing data processing, as well as
receiving and transmitting information [19].
One of the international standards for evaluating the quality of
software and systems is the ISO/IEC 25010 which is also known
as the SQuaRE (Systems and software Quality Requirements and
Evaluation) model [16]. This standard evaluates both the quali-
ties of software and usage. This standard includes 8 features that
measure software product quality, namely, functional suitability,
performance efficiency, compatibility, usability, reliability, security
and maintainability. [6].
Many scholars have used the ISO/IEC 25010 standard in their
research [10, 11, 14]. The standard makes it simple to incorporate
in the development of a variety of specialized software products.
Measurement of software and/or system is important, according
to existing research [8]. It is vital to note that determining software
performance and information system assessment are crucial, which
resulted in software measurement issues. It is clear that the rele-
vance of highlighting concerns and requirements are connected
to gauging system outcome and effectiveness. Software or system
testing and evaluation is critical before deployment [7].
3 METHODOLOGY
This research is both descriptive and developmental in essence. The
researchers utilized quantitative research design when it attempted
developing the system and assessing its performance.
The researchers used the following techniques that include
Knowledge Discovery in Databases (KDD) as data mining process
and spiral model as software development model.
The KDD provides systematic process to extract useful data
model in predicting faculty research productivity. The main steps
of KDD involve data preprocessing, modeling and evaluation. The
researchers used the modified steps of Knowledge Discovery in
Databases enumerated as, (a) recognizing the problem and data, (b)
data formulation, (c) data extraction, (d) assessment of discovered
knowledge, and (e) use of the uncovered knowledge.
The spiral model integrates design and prototyping elements
in stages to combine the gains of top down and bottom up con-
cepts, where other models can be used [15]. The process breaks
the project into smaller segments providing more flexibility in
239
Ranie Canlas et al.
adopting changes in the development procedures further providing
opportunity in conducting risks evaluation and appraisal in the con-
tinuation of the project right through the life cycle. In this model,
the improvement focuses on adding functionality to the application
serves as the increasing spiral until it is ready for installation and
implementation [12]. The steps involved in the spiral model phases
include planning, design, evaluate, implement and playtest. This
development cycle allows evaluating the results of the project even
before it proceeds to the succeeding spiral or segment. This model
of software development was utilized by the researchers in creating
the system for monitoring and predicting research productivity of
faculty.
In Figure 1, the paradigm of the study is presented which provides
a diagram on how the researchers viewed it. As a starting point, the
researchers gathered relevant data about the outputs of the faculty
in terms of their research engagements. Important attributes, which
influences the capacity and capability of the faculty to do research,
and other underlying factors were reviewed. All of this information
served as the basis in the development of the system. Data mining
techniques were used and tested with the system in looking for
relationships and patterns that provided the most appropriate data
model for predicting faculty research productivity. The system did
not merely serve as a repository and monitoring tool about the
research outputs of the faculty but most importantly, it was also
used as a tool in predicting the research productivity along with the
identification of probability of completing the research according
to set timelines and based on the identified attributes.
In assessing the system’s quality according to the evaluation of
experts-respondents, the ISO/IEC 25010 standard was used. Accord-
ing to the International Organization for Standardization (2005),
the quality of a software can be evaluated using the ISO/IEC 25010
standards. The properties of a software can be assessed using the set
characteristics which includes functional suitability, performance
efficiency, compatibility, usability, reliability, security and maintain-
ability [6] which are presented in Figure 2.
The developed system was evaluated by fifteen (15) respondents,
who are classified as experts with functions as administrators, IT
professionals and research experts, using the parameters of the said
standard.
4 DISCUSSION
The succeeding sections present the findings of study which include
features of the developed system, system performance based from
the parameters of ISO/IEC 25010 or the Software Quality Model,
and assessment of experts based from the criteria of this standard.
4.1 Key Features of the Developed Research
Productivity Monitoring and Prediction
System
Determining research productivity of faculty can be influenced by
several factors which include their profile, qualifications, research
engagements, designations, tasks and other functions. In developing
the system, one of the prime considerations is the creation of central
repository of all records necessary in determining the research
productivity of faculty. This will allow the institution to collect data
An ISO/IEC 25010 Based Software Quality Assessment of a Faculty Research Productivity Monitoring and Prediction
System ICIT 2021, December 22–25, 2021, Guangzhou, China

Figure 1: Conceptual Model of the Study

Figure 2: ISO/IEC 25010 Software Quality Model

Figure 3: Features Diagram of the System

on research engagements of faculty which can be used for data
driven policy formulation and enhancements.
When it comes to analysis of system requirements, feature dia-
gram was used. The feature diagram represented a tree with the
root that corresponds to a concept as well as the nodes indicating
the concept features [21]. Figure 3 presented the features of the
developed system.
The major features of the developed system are described in the
succeeding sections.
4.1.1 Support Submission of Paper Proposals. The research journey
of the faculty starts with the submission of paper proposals. The
system supports the submission of the proposals of faculty once
their accounts are already activated. Necessary information about

240
ICIT 2021, December 22–25, 2021, Guangzhou, China
the faculty needs to be encoded in the system first such as their per-
sonal profile, educational background, professional engagements,
field of specialization and teaching loads or workload equivalence
which may have influence on their capability to complete a proposal
within the prescribed period. Thereafter, the faculty can encode or
upload the content of its proposal based from the requirements of
the institution. The proposed timeline or GANTT chart can also be
provided.
4.1.2 Review and Approval of Paper Proposal. Review process is
the most critical stage undertaken by the personnel of the research
office. The submitted proposal will undergo initial review process
through the coordinator account. In here, the concern staff will
thoroughly review the submitted paper based on the approved in-
stitutional guidelines. The coordinator can also provide comments
directly on the part of the paper when necessary. These can be seen
by the concern faculty once the paper is returned for revisions. If no
revisions are necessary, the coordinator can approve it and it will be
forwarded to the account of the college dean for further review and
endorsement to the research director. If the dean will not approve
it, it is then returned to the faculty with the comments needing
revisions. The research director account is the last approving au-
thority within the system Only those reviewed and approved by
the coordinator and college dean will be forwarded to the research
director for final approval.
4.1.3 Monitoring of Ongoing Approved Papers. This is one of the
vital features of the system where the current situation of the insti-
tution finds it to be very challenging. After important data were
provided to the system, management and monitoring faculty re-
search undertakings become efficient. The system provides for
dashboards for each user to see the statistics of research papers
recorded in the system such as how many are for approval and on-
going. Progress are presented at a glance based from the approved
GANTT chart and uploaded data can be reviewed. Through the
system, the research director, college dean and coordinator can
view the status of the paper whether it is going with the schedule
or not. This can then be a tool to identify needed intervention or
strategy if the faculty is faced with challenges to meet the timelines.
4.1.4 Utilization of Research Outputs. Utilization is the measure
of usability of the research findings. This can be done through
presentation in various conferences, publication to refereed jour-
nals and community adoption. After the completion of the paper,
the coordinator can input necessary information on the next ac-
tivities of the faculty concerning the paper such as presentation
to various research conferences, publication to refereed journals,
applicable Intellectual Property Rights filed and adoption of the
community. For each activity, the system can support uploading
of related documents which serve as evidences in the filing of said
undertakings.
4.1.5 Research Outputs Repository. The system allows the insti-
tution to have a database of all the research outputs that were
uploaded or registered in the system. With this, the research office
has access to all the records that were approved by the university
as well as the compilations of all associated documents for the
research engagements of faculty. This can be very helpful to the
institution for data-driven policy and decision making.
241
Ranie Canlas et al.
4.1.6 Predictive Analysis. The system incorporates this feature in
determining whether the faculty will complete a research paper
based from the generated prediction model. The system used sev-
eral parameters in order to predict the completion of the paper
proposed by a faculty such as length of service, age, teaching loads,
academic rank, designations, deloading of units, civil status, aca-
demic qualification, sex and status of appointment.
4.2 System Performance based from the
Parameters of ISO/IEC 25010 or the
Software Quality Model
Evaluating the developed system is one of the most important as-
pects of software development cycle prior deployment as it reveals
how respondents perceived the system in terms of determined
criteria.
The instrument was validated by 10 experts for measuring the
accuracy and consistency of items in relation to the study [3]. These
validators are from the IT industry and academic researchers from
other institutions. All 10 experts approved the relevance of the
items. Item content validity indices are between the range of 90.00%
and 100% (acceptable based on Lynn’s criteria). The minimum scale
content validity index is 96.67% and maximum of 100.00%.
To assess the performance of the system, the researchers used
ISO / IEC 25010 through the criteria of functional suitability, perfor-
mance efficiency, compatibility, usability, reliability, security and
maintainability.
As gleaned in Table 1 presented above, the grand mean of the
system evaluation as perceived by experts is 3.87 with a verbal inter-
pretation of “Strongly Agree”. It is evident that all criteria present in
the instrument have also a verbal interpretation of “Strongly Agree”
which means that system is reliable in term of executing system
functions and can be concluded that is ready for deployment.
4.3 Assessment of Experts based from ISO/IEC
25010 Criteria
In order to determine whether significant difference exists between
the mean of evaluation using the characteristics of ISO/IEC 25010
or the Software Product Quality Model when grouped according to
respondents’ category. The gathered data were subjected to analysis
of variance (ANOVA). Theoretically, this type of statistical analysis
involves models and the correlated procedures in estimation in an-
alyzing the variance among means. The table below shows that the
computed significant value which is 0.257 is higher than the alpha
of 0.05. This explains that no significant difference was recorded
in terms of the means of the group of respondents. This concludes
that their perception in terms of system evaluation are the same
across all the respective criteria.
5 CONCLUSION
The features of the developed system are necessary in address in-
gthe requirements of the research office for managing, monitoring
and predicting the research productivity of the faculty from pa-
per proposals up to the utilization of outputs of completed paper
which includes support submission of paper proposals, review and
approval, monitoring of ongoing approved papers, utilization of
An ISO/IEC 25010 Based Software Quality Assessment of a Faculty Research Productivity Monitoring and Prediction
System ICIT 2021, December 22–25, 2021, Guangzhou, China

Table 1: System Performance

Indicators Average Mean Verbal Interpretation

Functional Suitability 3.93 Strongly Agree
Performance Efficiency 3.93 Strongly Agree
Compatibility 3.89 Strongly Agree
Usability 3.84 Strongly Agree
Reliability 3.78 Strongly Agree
Security 3.87 Strongly Agree
Maintainability 3.85 Strongly Agree
Portability 3.89 Strongly Agree
Grand Mean 3.87 Strongly Agree

Table 2: Analysis of Variance Between the perceptions of the Experts

ANOVA Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

Between Groups 0.19 2 0.095 1.527 0.257
Within Groups 0.748 12 0.062
Total 0.938 14
*significant at 0.05 level

research outputs, research outputs repository, and predictive analy-
sis. The system performance based from the parameters of ISO/IEC
25010 resulted to a grand mean of 3.87 that corresponded to a verbal
interpretation of “Strongly Agree”. This denoted that performance
of developed system addressed the requirements and intended use
as perceived by the respondents. The results showed that no sig-
nificant difference recorded in terms of the means of the group
of respondents which concluded that their perception in terms of
system evaluation are the same across all the respective criteria.
REFERENCES
[1] Nasser-Abu Alhija, F. M., & Majdob, A. (2017). Predictors of teacher educators’
research productivity. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 42(11). http:
//dx.doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2017v42n11.3
[2] Batool, A., Ahmad, S., & Naz, S. (2021). Correlation of personal and institutional
factors with research productivity among university teachers. Humanities &
Social Sciences Reviews, 9(2), 240-246.
[3] Bolarinwa O.A. (2015). Principles and methods of validity and reliability test-
ing of questionnaires used in social and health science researches. Nigerian
Postgraduate Medical Journal, 22(4), 195-201. doi: 10.4103/1117-1936.173959
[4] Brown, N. (2019). Issues in academic educational research: The impact of cur-
rent issues on research activity [Doctoral dissertation, Edith Cowan University].
Research Online Institutional Repository. https://ro.ecu.edu.au/theses/2166
[5] Debnath, N., Perakta, M., Salgado, C., & Baigorria, L. (2021). Digital transforma-
tion: A quality model based on ISO 25010 and user experience. EPiC Series in
Computing, 75(2021), 11-21.
[6] DeLone, W. H., & McLean, E. R. (2016). Information systems success measurement.
Foundations and Trends in Information Systems, 2(1), 1–116.
[7] Fadhel, I. E. I. (2015). An evaluation of information system success based on stu-
dents’ perspective: The case of Hadramount University. Universiti Utara Malaysia.
[8] Fadhel, I.E.I., Idrus, S.Z.B.S., Abdullah, M.S.Y., Ibrahim, A.A.E.A., Omar, M. &
Khred, A. (2020). A new perspective of web-based systems quality engineer-
ing measure by using software engineering theory (ISO 25010): An initial
study. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1529(2020), 1-14. doi:10.1088/1742-
6596/1529/2/022004
[9] França, J.M.S., Soares, S. M. (2015). “SOAQM: Quality Model for SOA Applica-
tions based on ISO 25010”, Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on
Enterprise Information Systems (ICEIS-2015), pages 60-70
[10] Haoues, M., Sellami, A., Ben-Abdallah, H. and Cheikhi, L. (2017). “A guideline for
software architecture selection based on ISO 25010 quality related factors”, Int J
Syst Assur Eng Manag (November 2017) 8(Suppl. 2):S886–S909
[11] Hurst, J. (2020). Comparing Software Development Life Cycles. Semantic Scholar.
https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/
[12] International Organization for Standardization (2005). System and software
quality model (ISO/IEC 25010 edition 1). https://iso25000.com/index.php/en/iso-
25000-standards/iso-25010
[13] Iqbal, H. and Babar, M. (2016). An Approach for Analyzing ISO / IEC 25010 Product
Quality Requirements based on Fuzzy Logic and Likert Scale for Decision Support
Systems. International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications,
7(12), 245-260. doi: 10.14569/IJACSA.2016.071232
[14] Kabba, F.E. & Ejbari, Z. (2021). Research productivity at public universities: Ev-
idence from Morocco. International Journal of Accounting, Finance, Auditing,
Management and Economics, 2(6), 171-182
[15] Lynn, M.R. (1986). Determination and quantification of content validity. Nursing
Research, 35, 382–385.
[16] Munassar, N.M.A. & Govardhan, A. (2010). A Comparison Between Five Models
of Software Engineering. International Journal of Computer Science Issues, 7(5),
94- 101. https://www.ijcsi.org/papers/7-5-94-101.pdf
[17] Peters, E., & Aggrey, G.K. (2019). An ISO 25010 Based Quality Model for ERP
Systems. Advances in Science, Technology and Engineering Systems Journal,
5(2), 578-583. https://dx.doi.org/10.25046/aj050272
[18] Peters, E., & Aggrey, G. K. (2019a, March). “Evaluating the Effectiveness of ERP
Systems in HEIs: A Proposed Analytic Framework”. In 2019 International Con-
ference on Computing, Computational Modelling and Applications (ICCMA) (pp.
40-45). IEEE.
[19] Saptarini, I., Rochimah, S., & Yuhana, U.L. (2016). Security quality measurement
framework for Academic Information System (AIS) Based on ISO/IEC 25010
Quality Model. The 2nd International Seminar on Science and Technology. August
2nd 2016, Postgraduate Program Institut Teknologi Sepuluh Nopember, Surabaya,
Indonesia
[20] Saputra, E., & Banowosari, L.Y. (2021). Quality analysis of e-office application pt.
kai (persero) use method ISO 25010. International Research Journal of Advanced
Engineering and Science, 6(1), 96-100
[21] Tekinerdogan, B., Blouin, D., Vangheluwe, H., Goulão, M., Carreira, P., & Amaral,
V. (2021). Multi-Paradigm Modelling Approaches for Cyber-Physical Systems, pp
1-6. Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-819105-7.00006-4.
[22] Williams, H.A. (2003). A mediated hierarchical regression analysis of factors re-
lated to research productivity of human resource education and workforce devel-
opment postsecondary faculty [Doctoral Dissertation, Louisiana State University]
LSU Digital Commons. https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_dissertations/
1765/

242