* Re: With the Real Engineers please stand up.
[not found] <34b73885.5453328@news.thegrid.net>
@ 1998-01-06 0:00 ` Andrew Hunt
1998-01-06 0:00 ` Nick Xidis
` (2 subsequent siblings)
3 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Hunt @ 1998-01-06 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
On Tue, 06 Jan 1998 15:22:26 GMT, Trevor Longbow <xmobay@thegrid.net> wrote:
> QUESTION 1.
>
> I remember some study that identified this: that engineering outfits
> typically operate at one of a set number of--I think it was 5 or
> 6--levels of optimum culture. I don't remember the terminology. As I
>
> Does anyone know what it is I'm talking about--the study, the term,
> the book?
I believe you are referring to the Capability Maturity Model (CMM), check
out www.sei.cmu.edu, the Software Engineering Institute at Carnegie Mellon.
> 4. After the group reviews of all the demos we've seen, we should
> then and only then make a decision and purchase a case tool.
>
The vendor will, of course, report a perfect fit in all
cases. I think the emphasis should be on design skills, not
case tools. Concentrate on good design at the whiteboard
(maybe even one of the magic printing whiteboards), after
you and your team have done that for a while you will be better
able to determine your needs in a case tool.
/\ndy
(remove the nospam to reply)
+-----------------------------------------------------------------+
| Andrew Hunt | Object Oriented |
| Toolshed Technologies, Inc. | Software Design and Development |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------+
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: With the Real Engineers please stand up.
[not found] <34b73885.5453328@news.thegrid.net>
1998-01-06 0:00 ` With the Real Engineers please stand up Andrew Hunt
@ 1998-01-06 0:00 ` Nick Xidis
1998-01-08 0:00 ` Jerry van Dijk
1998-01-10 0:00 ` Alan E & Carmel J Brain
3 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Nick Xidis @ 1998-01-06 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
It really sounds like the folks your working with need to spend some time
learning OO design methods. Perhaps some training would be a better use
of the company's budget. One of the best tools I've found to learn on is
Playground, you can get it at http://www.oi.com/. It's either free or
very cheap but, if folks need a learning tool it's a good choice.
Cheers
Nick
BTW: Your right about not making any real progress until there is a
systematic approach. But, perhaps even more important is a clear vision
of product your trying to create. Without a good product that the market
will buy, your toast even with the bast engineering.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: With the Real Engineers please stand up.
[not found] <34b73885.5453328@news.thegrid.net>
1998-01-06 0:00 ` With the Real Engineers please stand up Andrew Hunt
1998-01-06 0:00 ` Nick Xidis
@ 1998-01-08 0:00 ` Jerry van Dijk
1998-01-10 0:00 ` Alan E & Carmel J Brain
3 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Jerry van Dijk @ 1998-01-08 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
Well, this is about Ada in some sense...
In article <34b73885.5453328@news.thegrid.net> xmobay@thegrid.net writes:
>Just started a new job yesterday. Same problems, new company. Someone
>once had a good idea, a family of products evolved over time, and
>today the outfit limps along from fire to fire. Too much time is spent
>in Surgery, and too little in Preventative Lifestyle.
Yep, this is the sort of thing that pays my mortgage... :-)
Usually it means two things: 1) a lack of a clear process (including the
development process, it's program and quality control and supporting
functions, ranging from version/configuration control to basic
administration) and 2) product control (architecture, infrastructure,
audits, problem/change management, documentation, etc.)
>I remember some study that identified this: that engineering outfits
>typically operate at one of a set number of--I think it was 5 or
>6--levels of optimum culture.
Most likely you are referring to either Nolan/Norton or the CMM.
>QUESTION 2.
If you are on this level, I would move back to the basic three 'P's:
Process, Product and Price. Analyze whatever data is available to
determine the most prominent structural problems and establish a
baseline.
Then tackle the two most pressing problems and show by monitoring
your baseline parameters that things are actually improving.
Keep repeating this in incremental steps.
Some quick notes:
1) remember that attitude has to change first, prepare for the 'Yes, but...'
2) try to change too much at once and you will tackle more then you can handle
3) manage your management tactfully, or start sending out your resume
4) clear communication and management right from the start is essential
5) organizational changes and its consequences are ultimately inevitable.
If you would like more advice, I know this great story about a lawyer and
a physician dining together... :-)
Good luck!
--
-- Jerry van Dijk | Leiden, Holland
-- Consultant | Team Ada
-- Ordina Finance | jdijk@acm.org
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: With the Real Engineers please stand up.
[not found] <34b73885.5453328@news.thegrid.net>
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
1998-01-08 0:00 ` Jerry van Dijk
@ 1998-01-10 0:00 ` Alan E & Carmel J Brain
1998-01-10 0:00 ` Matthew Heaney
1998-01-13 0:00 ` Mark Bennison
3 siblings, 2 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Alan E & Carmel J Brain @ 1998-01-10 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
Trevor Longbow wrote:
> I remember some study that identified this: that engineering outfits
> typically operate at one of a set number of--I think it was 5 or
> 6--levels of optimum culture. I don't remember the terminology. As I
> recall, in the most suboptimal cultural state, everything is done
> ad-hoc. The culture practices anarchy on a daily basis (kinda like
> this new outfit). At optimum culture, an outfit has identity, clarity,
> organization, and method--plus some other set of positive engineering
> attributes.
>
> Does anyone know what it is I'm talking about--the study, the term,
> the book?
Capability Maturity Model. Set your search criteria to SEI CMM.
(Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie-Mellon). I think there's a
link from http://www.adahome.com
--
aebrain@dynamite.com.au <> <> How doth the little Crocodile
| Alan & Carmel Brain| xxxxx Improve his shining tail?
| Canberra Australia | xxxxxHxHxxxxxx _MMMMMMMMM_MMMMMMMMM
abrain@cs.adfa.oz.au o OO*O^^^^O*OO o oo oo oo oo
By pulling MAERKLIN Wagons, in 1/220 Scale
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: With the Real Engineers please stand up.
1998-01-10 0:00 ` Alan E & Carmel J Brain
@ 1998-01-10 0:00 ` Matthew Heaney
1998-01-13 0:00 ` Mark Bennison
1 sibling, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Matthew Heaney @ 1998-01-10 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
In article <34B717E8.45A8@dynamite.com.au>, aebrain@dynamite.com.au wrote:
>Trevor Longbow wrote:
>
>> I remember some study that identified this: that engineering outfits
>> typically operate at one of a set number of--I think it was 5 or
>> 6--levels of optimum culture. I don't remember the terminology. As I
>> recall, in the most suboptimal cultural state, everything is done
>> ad-hoc. The culture practices anarchy on a daily basis (kinda like
>> this new outfit). At optimum culture, an outfit has identity, clarity,
>> organization, and method--plus some other set of positive engineering
>> attributes.
>>
>> Does anyone know what it is I'm talking about--the study, the term,
>> the book?
The author of the CMM is Watts Humphrey. The CMM is described in
Managing the Software Process
Watt Humphrey
There's a guide too:
A Guide to the CMM
Ken Dymond
You may also want to read Jerry Weinberg's four-volume Quality Software
Management series. The first one has a bunch of stuff about interpreting
Humphrey's taxonomy of process maturity in terms of cybernetic theory:
Quality Software Management
Volume I: Systems Thinking
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Matthew Heaney
Software Development Consultant
<mailto:matthew_heaney@acm.org>
(818) 985-1271
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: With the Real Engineers please stand up.
1998-01-10 0:00 ` Alan E & Carmel J Brain
1998-01-10 0:00 ` Matthew Heaney
@ 1998-01-13 0:00 ` Mark Bennison
1 sibling, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Mark Bennison @ 1998-01-13 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
On Sat, 10 Jan 1998 16:40:40 +1000, Alan E & Carmel J Brain
<aebrain@dynamite.com.au> thought long and hard and wrote:
>>Trevor Longbow wrote:
<snip>
>>Capability Maturity Model. Set your search criteria to SEI CMM.
>>(Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie-Mellon). I think there's a
>>link from http://www.adahome.com
>>
Try http://www.sei.cmu.edu/sei-home.html
This takes you to the SEI home page. There are links there to lots of
useful stuff.
Mark.
--
Mark Bennison, +-----------------------------------+
Technical Consultant, | All opinions expressed are my own |
EASAMS Software Systems. +-----------------------------------+
"Death is a fickle hen, and random are her eggs" - Armando Iannucci
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread