Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!watmath!att!rutgers!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!pt.cs.cmu.edu!sei!bwb From: bwb@sei.cmu.edu (Bruce Benson) Newsgroups: comp.software-eng Subject: Re: Ultra composable (reusable) "objects" Message-ID: <7881@fy.sei.cmu.edu> Date: 16 Jul 90 20:40:59 GMT References: <39400113@m.cs.uiuc.edu> <112789@linus.mitre.org> <112896@linus.mitre.org> <5361@stpstn.UUCP> Reply-To: bwb@sei.cmu.edu (Bruce Benson) Organization: Software Engineering Institute, Pittsburgh, PA Lines: 45 In article <5361@stpstn.UUCP> cox@stpstn.UUCP (Brad Cox) writes: >There is no shortage of technology. What we're lacking is the determination >to use technologies already rotting on the shelves. How does the average software organization introduce or import new technology? How do they track and understand it to know that it will work in their environemnt? How many orgnaizations really understand how software gets built in their own organizations (ask a middle manager, then ask the practitioners - thou tough to always get honest answers)? We don't lack determination as much as we seem to lack the understanding of how to adopt and institutionalize the technology. There seems to be a few enduring fundamentals: 1. You must understand how things REALLY get done before you can improve on productivity and quality (or just solve development problems). Ask the people doing the work - those most affected by new technology being considered. 2. Learning a new technology (method, software, process, etc.) takes time and temporarily reduces productivity and quality. If your priority is to deliver that product in the minimum time, you may not REALLY be interested in changing to a better way of doing software. 3. It takes time for a new technology to be used productively throughout an organization. Hughes Co did a study that showed it took them about six years (plus or minus two) to institutionalize a new software technology (if it was used at all). 4. PEOPLE are the active element in software. Technology is worthless without people using it, especially where technology is used to enhance the creative work of people. New technology should be viewed in terms of how it effects the individual practitioner not the inherent power in the technology. Useability, technology maturity, education, support, etc., become the first considerations, not the last. People have done wonderful work with all sorts of obsolete technology. I suspect they can even do better ... just ask them how you can help. * Bruce Benson + Internet - bwb@sei.cmu.edu + + * Software Engineering Institute + Compuserv - 76226,3407 + >--|> * Carnegie Mellon University + Voice - 412 268 8496 + + * Pittsburgh PA 15213-3890 + + US Air Force