Software quality related forum threads-stat

[Govind]

Yesterday, while I was planning to start a new thread for "Software Reliability". I did a search of the existing threads/posts in the forum to see if there is already any running thread. Result for SW reliability was "0".

I was further curious, searched for ISO 9000-3 (ISO guidelines for SW) and 12207 (life cycle model).
Results are as follows:

ISO 9000-3 yielded 14 threads consisting total 119 replies
12207 yielded 7 threads consisting 42 replies
(Some threads apprear in both search)

While Iam looking at the statistics provided in the home page as
7,401 threads and 70,600 postings, Iam surprised the SW Quality Posting posting in these last several years of this forum usage amounted to just a small fraction of overall postings!

Any senior forum members can throw in few cents in this and tell me why?
Just cusrious. (or correct me if my search results are not as indicated).

I was thinking out load.

Is it because the overall forum members coverage heavily skewed towards Automobile and hardware manufacturing? - Do we have statistics on this?
OR
Branches of Hardware engineering/QMS are much more than the SW engineering/QMS?

Regards,
Govind.

[Marc]

Software quality has never been a big draw. Do a search for Tick-It or CMM. You'll get some threads with CMM as in coordinate measuring machine but there are also threads on Carnegie Mellon's/SEI's Capablity Maturity Model. Software QA is quite specialized and back when I did push it a bit, it just never took off.

The people who find the site are typically manufacturing types, especially automotive (the site started out in 1996 as QS900.com), but has somewhat of a draw for service industry folks.

I think Don Winton started the Medical Device interest, if I remember correctly. ISO 14001 was also not very popular, but that started picking up when the automotives started requiring it. Randy's participation thrust that forward.

You observations are accurate.

[Govind]

Thanks for your reply Marc.Appreciate your efforts to spread SW Quality in this forum.
Iam not sure why a forum like this with extremely good features and functionality did not attract the SW professionals.

I think SW Quality Engineering is an area where lots of improvements can be done.
SW professionals use Quality/process terminology from organization to organization,
vrious models like 12207, CMMI, Bootstrap,Trillium each having its own advantages and disadvantages,ISO9000-3 trying to catchup with ISO9001:2000.

Many SW professionals even argue with me that Quality methodology used for Hardware like Six sigma, QFD, FMEA, SPC is not applicable to Software Engineering development.

SW folks would say; We find bugs so what? It is part and parcel of Coding and development.We can send patches.

In SW,I see even the metrics used in several organizations are very light and they are just collected and not analyzed.

While Iam convinced,ASQ SW Quality division professionals are doing excellent job by having an exclusive SW Quality certification, international conference, ASQ press publications,Magazine,etc. But this is very small portion of SW professionals across the field.

With so many improvement opportunity that is available in the SoftwareFirmware Quality field, why this did not attract enough professions in this forum?

Iam still thinking!

[Marc]

I haven't looked into the ASQ aspect. My coding days were long ago - FORTRAN, PL1 and Cobol back in the 1970's. I enjoyed the logic involved, but never thought of it as a future occupation. Mainly I saw software as a tool in biology and chemistry - you had to write programs for certain models and predictions. Punchcard days.

A while back someone asked for an Embedded Devices & Software forum. It sat there for a year or two and I finally merged the few posts into the Misc forum. What I'm getting at is software is so varied that application of quality assurance in software is like the application of project management. These forums run on php code. Atul may have watched a bit, I doubt anyone else really did, but version 3 - the most recently released version - was announced in early 2002, if I remember correctly, for delivery in late 2002. We went through a lot of bugs as well. I have no idea what their 'quality system' is, if any.

Coders are a breed much like design folks. They tend to hang out in very narrow specialty forums. I don't even think it is about coders not being 'quality minded'. They want to talk code. Just like not that many manufacturing engineers hang out here. The focus has never been manufacturing engineering. While the base number of topics discussed in the forums has broadened over the years, this site has been ISO 9000 and QS-9000 - once related to quality assurance - focused.

I can make a forum dedicated to software QA but I don't think it would fare any better than the Embedded Device forum a few years back. It would also take a couple of people very involved in software QA as 'regular' visitors so people could get their questions answered. These software QA as 'regulars' would also have to actively promote the forum.

If you have ideas, speak out.

[Govind]

Marc,
Thanks for that detailed reply. I also appreciate your willingness to start a Software QA Forum. But if this idea did not work in the past, no point in doing the same thing again.
May be we have to work from a different angle.I have few ideas.

Is there a way we can survey the forum users to find out;
1. Do you use develop Software/Firmware in your current product?
2. Do you use Software for test applications?
3. Do you buy software that go into the product/processes?
4. Do you develop/purchase SW that is used in your product installation?
5. Do you develop/purchase SW that is used in your product maintenance?
6. If a SW Quality forum is started are you interested to post reply, ask questions?
etc.
By getting replies for this questions (Check boxes against the current radio buttons)
we will know if the forum members should worry about SW Quality as a first step.
If "What is in it for me?" is answered, there may be good discussions in the forum in the future.

If the Results favours us, we go ahead to take help of forum members to recruit a SW Quality counterpart/CSQE to register with Elsmar (Each one reach one), Send links to ASQ SW divison requesting support and go from there.

If the results are not favouring us, we will decide to put on hold. (unfortunately).

Any other ideas Marc?? Also from rest of our members?

Govind.


Govind.

[Tom Slack]

Govind,
In regards to your posting inviting us to comment on why there are so few software postings: I feel it is a reflection on how our society treats information. A few people treat it as power and hangs on to it. Most people have the attitude that since you can't wear it, drive it, spend it, or even see it, information can't be important.

Either way the quality profession has overlooked using information strategically. Information travels vertically pretty well (keeping the boss informed), but not horizontally (communications between departments). Try to envision an organization where everyone: engineers, hourly associates, customers, suppliers and managers, know precisely what to do next and had the right information for good decisions! Quality's role in such an organization would change from reacting to angry customers to one of information enablers. All quality problems are caused by people not knowing what to do or they knew but chose not to do it. When quality tries to get a good information system going, cost cutting or turf wars, tears it down. The software used by quality is usually for department use, so there is no need for much complexity.

The other manifestation of this is the shrinking of the Statistics Unit of ASQ. Since there isn't much demand for Quality to get involved in Strategic information systems, therefore there isn't much need for Strategic decision making, therefore there isn't much need for very complex Statistical Analysis.

BTW, the next time you pick up an issue of Quality Progress, look for a SAS software advertisement. Their motto is "The Power to Know."

Hope this helps,

Tom

[Govind]

Tom,
All valid points.Thanks for the reply.
I guess your reply is more focused on software used by Quality.(Infrastucture).
I was referring to Software as a Product Or that is embedded into a Product. There are Quality (System) standards applicable to this type of processes Eg: ISO9000-3, TL9000(S), ISO/IEC 12207,15504, IEEE 730, etc.
Your reply is still valid as to "Quality in a cultural perpective".
Govind.

[Bill Pflanz]

Govind,

I am currently working with Information Technology (IT) people on improving their processes so I thought I would contribute a few comments.

1. When you do any research on quality concepts applied to IT, the main focus is usually on tracking and removing bugs. I am also seeing references to CMM and more information on Six Sigma applied to software. That is not to imply that there is no other subjects but just that it is easier to find information on software defects especially for quantitative metrics.

2. Software quality assurance seems to have traditionally been associated with identifying defects through testing plans. Since that has been the focus, many software quality people are technology oriented rather than associated with the quality professionals like in ASQ. Some of that is changing now that ASQ has added a quality software certification but they do have their own IT societies including for IT quality assurance. The other area that gets more attention is project management (PMP certification) which has quality concepts embedded in it.

3. There are numerous opportunities to apply traditional quality principles to the software development but I am not sure that there are enough individuals who have the knowledge or credibility to apply it. The knowledge issue is for IT people without a quality background and the credibility issue is somewhat related to the belief that you most know software development to improve the quality.

Software is still a very young profession. As the profession matures, it appears to be expanding its horizons on what quality means. CMM is trying to do that but may be getting dragged down the same path as ISO on registration, heavy documentation, lack of management support etc. It may be that it is still too soon to expect them to join the rest of us in a forum like this.

These are just my observations based on what I have seen in a couple of IT departments and what I have heard in talking to IT professionals over the years.

Bill Pflanz