Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!src.honeywell.com!skyler.mavd.honeywell.com!djbailey
From: djbailey@skyler.mavd.honeywell.com
Newsgroups: comp.software-eng
Subject: Re: Software Quality
Message-ID: <1991Mar20.092834.58@skyler.mavd.honeywell.com>
Date: 20 Mar 91 09:28:34 CST
References: <SBANG.91Mar13155652@empty4.iesd.auc.dk>  <JGAUTIER.91Mar19174642@vangogh.ads.com>
Distribution: comp.software-eng
Lines: 12

In article <JGAUTIER.91Mar19174642@vangogh.ads.com>, jgautier@vangogh.ads.com (Jorge Gautier) writes:
> [...] To attach metrics to this fundamental activity of
> process quality improvement--"let's see, last month you did 7.2 on our
> quality index, this month you did 8.1: good job!"--is ... well, I
> don't have the words to describe it.  [...]

Instead of "good job!", the appropriate comment is, "Do you think our
quality index is measuring something useful?"  Measurements are
important but it's just as important to avoid giving them more 
credibility than they deserve.

-- Don J. Bailey