NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #30/NN_1992_30.iso/spool/comp/software/4894

Text File | 1992-12-12 | 3.8 KB | 85 lines

Newsgroups: comp.software-eng
Path: sparky!uunet!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!decwrl!parc!rocksanne!news
From: [e-mail] (Mike Kirby)
Subject: Re: Is SEI's CMM being used in Anger or ju
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: Xerox Corporation, Webster NY
References: <[e-mail]>
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1992 16:40:25 GMT
Lines: 72

In article [e-mail], [e-mail] (Bonus, Iniquus, Celer - Delegitus Duo) writes:
> In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Dan Drake) writes:
> > [e-mail] writes:
> > + [much excellent material on un-reuse, etc., omitted]
> > The reference may be to a recent message of mine contrasting my
> > perceptions of Deming's and SEI's outlooks.  Having read Out of the
> > Crisis doesn't make me any kind of expert on Deming, much less Juran,
> > but consider this: Deming's consistent message is that hundreds of
> > companies have got into Continuous Improvement, outside of Japan as well
> > as inside, and he loads his writing with success stories.  *Obviously*
> > he doesn't think that a super-elite Level 5 status that virtually nobody
> > has achieved is a prerequisite.
>
> Dan's point is fundamentally correct.  The ISO certification process requires
> continuous improvement from the get-go.  It turns out that a lot of the things
> that the CMM asks about will come into play.  A point made earlier by someone
> from Martin Marrieta (sorry-forgot name) expresses some of my thoughts.
> "Here's a model", or if you got a model, "Here's some additional ideas."  The
> CMM is not gospel, but it can be useful.  On the other hand, you could have
> followed Deming and Juran without the CMM and improved quality.  Guess what:
> no silver bullets and no stock answers.
>
> George Kambic
> standard disclaimer

It is my understanding that the ISO 9001(1987) document states that there must be
a documented process for the development and maintenance of software.  It does not
specify what that process is, or that the process should continously improve (remeber,
Continous improvement of Process is not the same as continous improvement of product!)

From the ISO 9001:1987,4.1.1

Quality Policy:
    The supplier's management shall define and document its policy
    and objectives for, and commitment to, quality. The supplier
    shall ensure that this policy is understood, implemented and
    maintained at all elevels in the organization.

From ISO 9001:1987,4,1,2.2

Verification resources and personnel
    The supplier shall identify in-house verfication requirements, provide
    adequate resources and assign trained personnel for verification activities.

    Verification activities shall include inspection, test and
    monitoring of the design, production, installation and
    servicing processes and/or product; design reviews and audits of the
    quality system, processes and/or product shall be carried out by personnel
    independent of those having direct responsibility for the work being
    performed.

Essentially I believe that the ISO 9001 standard is saying we want you to have
a quality process and we want it to be documented.  We could care less if you
change that process over the years. (of course, if the process doesn't work
they want you to change it, but that is different from continous improvement
of process).

Also it seems that much of the ISO 9001 quality standard is Management process
related.  There is not much talk of engineering processes.

I have been told that a competent level 2 organization should be able to iso certified
without much trouble.  A level 3 organization can do it with both hands tied
behind its back.  Anyone out there actually been ISO certified?  Comments??


Mike Kirby
Xerox Corp
E-mail: [e-mail]