Dave Pitt

Software Engineering: A New Professionalism

Computing is at a stage in its development that engineering was at in the United States 80 years ago. It is at that point where it can decide to become a “profession” or remain merely a profitable occupation. This is a significant decision for computer practitioners and for society at large. Many conceptual muddles have to be avoided or cleared up before making this decision. I believe one such muddle has to do with the concept of a professional as it is related to Software Engineering. I argue that the traditional concept of professionalism is not appropriate for Software Engineering. There is a newer, more appropriate meaning of profession which is currently achievable by software engineers and will move Software Engineering in a positive direction. The evidence for my argument is drawn from three computing societies’ developing codes of ethics, conduct and practice. These codes indicate an awareness that a different sense of professionalism is required for Software Engineering to be a profession.

Software Project Management Ethics

It appears universally accepted that the most effective way to develop software is through the use of a project-based organizational structure which encourages individuals to participate in teams with the goal of achieving some common objective. Much has been written about the management of software development projects and no doubt much will be written in the future. The purpose of this chapter is to examine whether project management practice effectively caters for the ethical issues surrounding the software development process. For the sake of clarity, only one project management approach is discussed. The aim is to tease out the fundamental issues and not to dwell on the nuances of a particular approach.

Establishing Standards of Professional Practice

Computing has been slow to respond to the increasing impacts of computing products on society. The effect of these products now influences more aspects of our society and the areas of influence are more critical than they had been. Computers no longer merely calculate the speed of vehicles, but they also control the speed and breaking ability of automobiles. Computing practitioners are more aware of these changes in area and criticality of their work products and have started to respond to this change in an organized way. Two major computing societies have joined forces in an effort to respond to these changes. Described here is the joint effort of the IEEE-Computer Society (IEEE-CS) and the Association for Computing Machinery(ACM) to professionalize Software Engineering.

Attributes and Goals for a Mature Profession

A mature profession promotes high standards for professional practice and supports the rapid dissemination of new knowledge. The SEI (Carnegie Mellon University Software Engineering Institute) recently completed a feasibility study to determine what it means to have a mature Software Engineering profession. Our analysis of mature professions led to a framework that is composed of two levels we call the practitioner level and the infrastructure level. At the practitioner level there are three components: professionals, knowledge, and professional practice. At the infrastructure level we found eight components: initial professional education, accreditation, skills development, professional development, certification, licensing, code of ethics, and professional society. Most of these components are present in mature professions and are under the active stewardship of appropriate formal organizations and volunteer groups.

Who Holds the Key to the Glass Door

This chapter was prompted by my observation that few women apply for interview for jobs as programmers at the IBM United Kingdom Laboratories at Hursley Park. It seeks to raise awareness of the apparent shortage of female applicants, and presents statistics which suggest there is indeed a limited supply.

Revenge of the Methodology Anarchist

The Software Engineering profession has an unfortunate tendency to equate professionalism with methodologies. This chapter argues that “software engineer” plus “software methodology” does not equal “professional software engineer.” It examines the relationship between methodologies, practitioners and customers. While acknowledging that methodologies can help to deliver systems, it focuses on the many ways in which methodology abuse can hinder successful Software Engineering. The chapter describes popular methodology pitfalls which will be familiar to all professional software engineers. It offers pragmatic advice to help software engineers to exploit, rather than be exploited by, methodologies.

Responsibilities under the Capability Maturity Model

Software Engineering teams in organizations of all types and sizes are facing increasing pressure to deliver high-quality, complex products in highly competitive, complex and global environments. Concurrent with the increased mission-critical status of software and the reduced time to market inherent in many software development environments is the drive for higher quality which is increasingly being measured by process assessments. The Software Capability Maturity Model (CMM) developed by the Software Engineering Institute (SEI) at Carnegie Mellon University addresses key process areas (KPAs) for progressively higher (or more mature) levels of software development. Incumbent within these different levels of software development maturity are clear indicators of appropriate professional responsibilities for software engineers. The CMM is focused on process, however, and does not directly address people or teams and the issues arising from changing professional responsibilities. This chapter examines these responsibilities, many of which have new or renewed importance for software development professionals, in the context of the software maturity levels defined by the SEI CMM.

Can a Software Engineer Afford to be Ethical

Most practising software engineers would probably accept that the present professional climate does appear to support “ethics” as a professionally relevant issue [Myers95]. Many of the most important indicators certainly point in this direction. Codes of professional conduct have been revised and promoted, articles and books have been written, and conferences held. Professional issues are now even considered by the British Computer Society (BCS) and many universities to form an essential part of the training of every computer scientist.

Converting Computer Science Graduates into Professionals

It is the experience of the GPT company (formerly Plessey Networks and Office Systems) that computer science graduates tend to come into the industrial world full of theory but without the awareness of the real world that is needed to apply their knowledge as effective professionals [Leventhal87] and [Dawson92] (upon which this chapter is based). The following quote about graduates, by an industrialist outside GPT, shows that other companies have similar views: “Very knowledgeable — but not a lot of use!”

Selling, Marketing and Procuring Software

Every year, the British higher education system turns out some 9000 graduates in computing, in some shape or form, most of whom are absorbed by the software industry or its customers. It turns out even larger numbers of graduates in law and rather fewer in marketing. However, almost none of these graduates combine a reasonable knowledge of software development with an appreciation of the commercial aspects — sales, marketing, contracts, procurement procedures, etc — of the industry. Those who enter the supply side of the industry may, at length, acquire such an appreciation, partly by osmosis and partly by learning from their mistakes; those who enter the user side are less likely to acquire it in this way but may well find themselves more in need of it as they become involved in the acquisition of new systems.