Software crisis 2.0

Although only about 50 years old, the software domain has already endured one well documented crisis, which was identified early in its evolution in the 1960s. Simply summarised, the initial software crisis – Software Crisis 1.0 as it is termed here – referred to the fact that software took longer to develop than estimated, cost more to develop than estimated, and did not work very well when eventually delivered. Over the years many studies have confirmed the Software Crisis 1.0. Nevertheless, software has been one of the key success stories of the past 50 years and has truly revolutionised modern life. However, over the past 50 years, there have also been enormous advances in hardware capability – dramatic reductions in hardware costs allied to dramatic increases in processing power and proliferation of devices; almost infinite amounts of data are now available through ubiquitous sensors and through applications such as Google. Complementing these ‘push’ factors, there is a significant ‘pull’ factor arising through the emergence of ‘digital native’ technology consumers who have never known life without technology. The opportunities for individuals, business and society afforded by the advances in hardware technology and the vast amounts of data potentially available, when allied to the insatiable appetite of digital natives, are truly enormous. Unfortunately there have not been similar advances in relation to our software development capability, and thus the critical limiting factor in realising the potential of the advances mentioned above is again software – the Software Crisis 2.0 as I label it here. Individual efforts are seeking to address this crisis – data analytics, parallel processing, new development methods, cloud services – but these are disjointed, and not likely to deliver the software development capacity needed

A critical look at open source

In recent years, open source software - more properly, free and open source software - has emerged as one popular solution to the so-called "software crisis". Advocates regard F/OSS as an agile, practice-led initiative that addresses three key issues namely cost, time scale and quality. F/OSS products are usually freely available for public download. The collaborative, parallel efforts of globally distributed developers allow many F/OSS products to be developed much more quickly than conventional software. Many F/OSS offerings are recognized for their high standards of reliability, efficiency, and robustness; products such as GNU/Linux, Apache, and Bind have become "category killers" stifling the incentive to develop any competing products

The systems development dilemma: whether to adopt formalised systems development methodologies or not?

Systems development issues occupy a position of central imponance in the information systems field and, indeed.. much has been prescribed in the quest for successful systems development. However. given the well· documented Msoftwarc: crisis", success is far from guaranteed for many systems development projects. Many researchers see the solution to the software crisis in terms of increased control and the morc widespread adoption of rigorous and formalised system development methodologies (SDMs), and this paper first presents the arguments and pressures in favour offormaIised methodologies. However, the problems associated with the use of fonnalised methodologies have: not perhaps recieved as much actention in the literature. A number of arguments are presented in this paper which question the value of formalised methodologies. These dichotomous arguments-for and against fonnalised SDMs-bring about a dilemma for systems developers as to whether to adopt a formalised development methodology or not. The implications of this dilemma are discussed in this paper and a number of issues for further research are proposed

Formalised systems development methodologies: a critical perspective

Systems development issues occupy a position of central importance in the information systems field and, indeed, much has been prescribed in the quest for successful systems development. However, given the well-documented "software crisis", success is far from guaranteed for systems development projects. Many researchers see the solution to the software crisis in terms of increased control and the more widespread adoption of rigorous and formalised system development methodologies. This paper first presents some arguments and pressures which support the use of methodologies. Some evidence of the literature bias which favours methodologies is also provided. However, the problems associated with the use of methodologies have not perhaps received as much attention in previous research. This paper identifies a number of arguments and pressures which question the value of methodologies, and reports the results of a field study which investigated the role of methodologies in practice. The critical perspective adopted in this paper shows that, contrary to the predominant literature view, the assumption that increased adoption of methodologies would help address the problems inherent in systems development is by no means proven

Executive information systems without executives

Executive information systems (EIS) are the most-recent computer-based information systems to have emerged with the intention of providing executives with the information they require to run their businesses. Some advocates of these systems see them as a panacea - the long-awaited moment when computing will provide meaningful and significant assistance to top management. However, others have questioned the extent to which these systems are suited to executive work, and see them as yet another passing fad in a field that has had more than its share of the same. This paper discusses some of the potential benefits to executives that have been identified in the literature as arising from the use of EIS. The results of a field study which investigated the extent to which EIS are actually used by executives are reported. The findings corroborate the now widespread finding that executives are not the main users of EIS. Some reasons for this are identified and possible remedies are suggested

Open source software: lessons from and for software engineering

Open source software can elicit strongly contrasting reactions. Advocates claim that OSS is high-quality software produced on a rapid time scale and for free or at very low cost by extremely talented developers. At the same time, critics characterize OSS as variable-quality software that has little or no documentation, is unpredictable as to stability or reliability, and rests on an uncertain legal foundation—the result of a chaotic development process that is completely alien to software engineering’s fundamental tenets and conventional wisdom. Research suggests a more balanced view. On one hand, OSS is not the “silver bullet” championed by its most vocal partisans. On the other hand, it does not radically diverge from traditional software engineering practice as its severest detractors claim, and, as evidenced by some notable successes, OSS offers many tangible benefits

An empirical investigation into the adoption of systems development methodologies

A postal survey was conducted to determine the following: the extent to which systems development methodologies are used in practice; the rating of their contribution to the development process; and the future trend in methodology adoption, whether the trend is toward increased usage or not. Among the main findings of the study were that 60 percent of the respondents were not using methodologies. Also, only six percent of respondents reported following a methodology rigorously. Finally, the forecast is not positive for methodology advocates: 79 percent of those not using a methodology indicated that they did not intend to adopt one

Informing each other: bridging the gap between researcher and practitioners

As an applied discipline, the gap between IS theory and practice is a potentially worrying one. This special series focuses on this gap, and the papers published consider the problems in some detail and how they might be addressed from a high level view and also in the context of specific initiatives which have been undertaken successfully. The issue is framed by this paper which considers the bipolar gap between theory and practice, a futile scenario in which both poles are ultimately cold

A descriptive framework for investigating problems in the application of systems development methodologies

It is generally taken as axiomatic that systems development methodologies (SDMs) play a useful role in guiding the development process, and that their increased adoption would improve the product and process of systems development. This paper begins by briefly reviewing the arguments and pressures in favour of SDMs. Following this, a descriptive model of the system development process is formulated, and this is then used as a framework to map a number of fundamental problems in relation to the use of SDMs and their contribution to systems development

Developing systems to support organisational learning in product development organisations

There are aspects of New Product Development (NPD) business processes that pose particularly difficult challenges to Organizational Learning systems. Short product and process life cycles compress the available time window for recouping the expenses associated with product development. Cross-functional collaboration in product development organizations requires the merging of knowledge from diverse disciplinary and personal skills-based perspectives. Cross-institutional collaboration leads a requirement for knowledge to be combined from participants across multiple collaborating organizations. Transient existence in teams and high turnover results in a reduction in organizational knowledge unless there is a repository for knowledge rather than a dependence on knowledge which is situated in the minds of individuals. High rates of change in turbulent industries, such as electronics, motivates participants in NPD processes to effectively overcome these Organizational Learning challenges. The potential payoff includes time saved by not repeating mistakes and reuse of knowledge that leads to successful products and processes. IS research has paid little attention to NPD processes despite the fact that some IS appears to have the potential to have an impact in that area. Recent research completed by these researchers in Analog Devices Inc identified Organizational Learning challenges encountered by engineering teams in product development. This paper will report on these challenges and will describe how systems were developed to support organizational learning to support the product development process