From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_50,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,e4b2dce209393666 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: "John Duncan" Subject: Re: Business Week (12/6/99 issue) article on Software Quality Date: 1999/12/13 Message-ID: <833dkp$ndm$1@usenet01.srv.cis.pitt.edu>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 560173872 References: <8261sr$enu$1@usenet01.srv.cis.pitt.edu> <1e9b4e00.977952a1@usw-ex0107-041.remarq.com> <8329sf$qj3$1@fir.prod.itd.earthlink.net> X-Priority: 3 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600 Organization: University of Pittsburgh X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1999-12-13T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: [snip links] Thanks for fetching those links for me. There's also a homepage for Cleanroom Software Engineering, but it might be down at the moment. It seemed like a side project of a consultant. Further, I have this link: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0201385953/o/qid=945090562/sr=8-1/104 -0800228-5527666 Stavely, Allan M. "Toward Zero-Defect Programming". Addison Wesley, 1998 I found this book to be good, but like all process books, it does not directly help you with your application domain. You have to apply the principles to your work. Extreme Programming is a Smalltalk-spawn process framework. My guess is that if everyone switches to XP, more people will use Smalltalk. http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0201616416/qid%3D945090741/104-080022 8-5527666 Beck, Kent. "Extreme Programming Explained: Embrace Change". Addison Wesley, 1999. I've been hearing a lot of good feedback from the XP folks, but, you know, it has a sexy name. I know that SEI has been monitoring the XP stuff because Mark Paulk mentioned it at a SPIN meeting a few months ago. Beware of anything that will tell you learning a new way is easy. The XP guys say it is, but there is a lot of cultural change that has to take place before it will be truly understood by your organization. One problem with improvement is that the founding member of a new methodology is always respected well enough to get his own way. I am pretty sure that Dr. Mills never had any trouble getting the precise resources he needed to bring his vision to reality. I also think that the C3 project, the flagship of XP, is a very unique case. (Not a unique application, but a unique environment.) To institute change, you will need to envision the company as a whole after the change, and bring that state about. You will need to be able to assure people that, by following a new path, the company will be better and happier. You will need to show that your company is sick. If you can't do it yourself, shill the next highly paid consultant to pitch the plan for you. My advice to anyone who wants to see SPI occur in his organization is: 1. If you go around and tell people that they are doing it wrong, you will make enemies. Imagine if you wrote a nifty routine, and someone told you it was wrong because it had the wrong comment style. This is the way process improvement sounds when people use it in a condescending manner. Many times I have heard people say that they are _the_ above-average (star) programmer in their organizations. They say this on newsgroups, and people have to say either, "present co. excluded" or "I'm sure you can still improve." You may think you've figured it out, but so has everyone else. Look toward the "meek", the ones who don't think they've figured it out. They are the easily impressionable ones. Start discussion groups. Never act like you are right and "they" are all wrong. 2. If people think bosses are the trouble, they are already overencumbered by the system. They need to think that the bosses show symptoms of the systemic disease just as much as the workers do. Do you really think that it is upper management that is causing the problem? Look at yourself, and the people on your left and right. You all have much influence on the system, but you are probably not looking at your problems systemically. Get people into system thinking. 3. If you are not a shining example of the benefits of a little process control, people will not trust you. Perhaps you'd get a few things done, but if you are not actively improving, people will think it is all a joke. Work honestly at your own self-improvement. 4. If you show that you have stabilized the process, and then improved it to a much more productive and stable process, the data will speak for themselves. If you don't have a stable base to work from, what is the meaning of a good streak? Every now and again a project in a Level-1 org comes in well under budget and nearly defect-free. Is this a testament to the process? No, the history will show that eventually a number of projects will be killed for being late and costly, or full of defects. Try to figure out how to make everything predictable first, then work on increased returns. I think that the above four points will be useful. We'll notice that neither Cleanroom nor XP allows you to do it by yourself. In cleanroom, you need a bunch of people, but you can borrow them from project to project. In XP, you need at least two people, but to get the benefit the entire project needs to support the paradigm. I hope you all may have found this useful. -John