< Prev Next >
NATO SOFTWARE ENGINEERING CONFERENCE 1968
95
9. Working Papers
d) Producing provisional systems for temporary programming usage and testing.
e) Producing modifiers to update customer’s system and documentation for distribution.
f) Producing original manuals and updatings.
g) Producing the field report summary and statistics.
h) Producing records of all these processes for the manufacturer.
i) Acting as well or better than a human supervisor in the control of production (i.e., not accept software systems modifications submitted by the programmer unless they meet certain standards)?
2. TRAINING AND ORGANIZATION
Are programmers given formal training in production methods and techniques?
Do the programmers provide training in system operation to field marketing and field engineering personnel so that they can pass such training on to customers?
Is there an excess of programming personnel to allow flexibility of redistribution, emergency and unbudgeted projects, meanwhile utilizing them in being trained, assisting in the field, and experimentation and research?

Are programmers periodically rotated to machine operation or to the field to obtain current hands-on experience?
Is a skills inventory maintained for the programming staff?
Is there a method to upgrade operators and other personnel to programming?
Are personnel operating the software production computers given the opportunity to review operating system design for proper man-machine characteristics?
Are basic manuals on software production available?
Is there an adequate library?
Is good usage made of the library by programmers?
Does an adequate percentage of programming personnel maintain membership in professional societies?
Is publication encouraged?
Is the software staff organized to participate in advanced projects (as opposed to the 85 percent of repetitive software production), particularly when hardware and software must be developed concurrently?
Does software production undergo continuous mechanization to minimize perturbations from management change?
Does the software organization provide comprehension courses for their management to ensure that its relative importance is properly reflected in their planning?
3. DESIGN
Is the software planned for categorization by the relative amount of effort expended to produce, maintain and distribute it?
Are the criteria for this categorization published and distributed to field personnel and customers?
Are gross functional specifications for software provided by a joint effort of Product Planning and Field Marketing, with considerations and options for hardware tradeoffs?
Do these gross functional specifications include data on allowable configurations for both hardware and software, with suggested categories for quality and service?