bbm482 sqachapter1 part2rev22014 1009kd

BBM 482 SOFTWARE QUALITY ASSURANCE

FALL 2014 September 25th, 2014

Asst.Prof.Dr. Kvan DNER, PMP

2

Textbook

J.ROSS Publishing

2011

3

CHAPTER 1 QUALITY ASSURANCE BASICS

4

Chapter Overview n Connota7ons of the word quality from the standpoint of end

users, providers of goods and services, industry associa7ons, and government bodies

n Exis7ng deni7ons and a proposed comprehensive deni7on for the term quality

n Dierence between quality and reliability

n Evolu7on of the concepts of quality

n Brief sketches of the quality gurus

n Introduc7on to total quality management

n Importance given to quality in soLware development organiza7ons

5

CONNOTATIONS OF THE WORD QUALITY n We oLen see the word quality used as a stand-alone term, without any adjec7ves aQached to it.

n People do not normally use the term good quality to express their sa7sfac7on with the products or services they use. To say that a certain product is a quality product implies that the product is of good quality.

n On the other hand, people certainly use the term bad quality to express their dissa7sfac7on with the products or services they use.

n Therefore, the adjec7ve good is implicitly aQached to the word quality in the minds of most people. Thus, the word quality connotes good quality to most people, including technical professionals.

6

CONNOTATIONS OF THE WORD QUALITY Let us consider the various connota7ons the word invokes, as it means dierent things in dierent sec7ons of society:

n For a customer or end user of a product, quality connotes defect-free func7oning, reliability, ease of use, acceptable levels of fault tolerance during use, and safety from injury to people or property.

n For a customer or end user of a service, quality connotes reliability of performance, ease of obtaining service, expert service, pleasant service, and protec7on from consequen7al damage.

n For a producer of goods, quality connotes conformance of the product to specica7ons, which may be dened by a government body, an industry associa7on or standards body, or by the producers own organiza7on.

7

CONNOTATIONS OF THE WORD QUALITY n For a provider of services, quality connotes mee7ng deadlines and

delivery of service that conforms to customer specica7ons and standards which may have been set by a government body, an industry associa7on or standards body, or by the providers own organiza7on.

n For government bodies, quality connotes safety and protec7on of consumers from fraud.

n For an industry associa7on or standards body, quality connotes safeguarding the industrys reputa7on, protec7ng the industry from fraud and lawsuits, and addressing the concerns of consumers, government bodies, and the industry itself.

It is clear that the word has mul7ple connota7ons aQached to it.

8

WHAT IS QUALITY?

n The Interna7onal Organiza7on for Standardiza7on (ISO 9000, second edi7on, 2000) denes quality as the degree to which a set of inherent characteris7cs fullls requirements.

n Quality can be used with such adjec7ves as poor, good, or excellent.

n Inherent, as opposed to assigned, means exis7ng inside something, as a permanent characteris7c.

9

WHAT IS QUALITY? This deni7on contains three key terms: requirements, characteris7cs, and degree.

n Requirements can be stated by a customer in a made-to-order scenario or by product specica7ons in a commercial o-the-shelf product scenario.

n Characteris9cs refers to the capability of the deliverable or, in other words, the robustness (tness) of the product.

n Degree implies that quality is a con7nuum, beginning with zero and moving toward, perhaps, innity. n This inference, however, is ambiguous and leads to the wrong

percep7on. What is the level at which quality is called poor or good or excellent? More importantly, who is authorized to dene the terms poor, good, and excellent?

10

WHAT IS QUALITY? n Another popular deni7on of quality, as dened by Joseph

Moses Juran, is tness for use, with tness and use being crucial to proper understanding of quality. n Unless we dene these two key words, the deni7on of quality is in-

complete.

n Consumer interpreta7ons and provider interpreta7ons of these two terms oLen are at loggerheads.

11

SPECIFICATIONS n Organiza7ons oLen dene these two terms (tness and use)

in their specica7ons for a product or service they provide. AQributes of specica7ons:

n Specica7ons may be explicit or implicit. Explicit means that the provider selects the specica7ons and makes them available to customers. Implicit means that the specica7ons are not dened but are understood to be necessary; examples include safety, security, and fault tolerance requirements.

n Specica7ons may be dened by either the provider or an external body, such as a government organiza7on, an industry associa7on, or a standards body. They are made available to customers, and they are adhered to by the provider.

12

SPECIFICATIONS n OLen7mes, providers resort to unethical deni7ons of

specica7ons and provide services or products that can be detrimental to customers and perhaps to the industry.

n This has resulted in industry organiza7ons coming together to form associa7ons, such as manufacturers associa7ons and service provider associa7ons, which dene specica7ons for their par7cular industrys products or services.

n Governments also step in and form standards bodies, which dene specica7ons for various products and services.

n Defense departments of various countries oLen dene specica7ons for the diverse range of products to be used by their armed forces. These specica7ons s7pulate a minimum set of standards to be adhered to by providers of products or services, so that tness for use is dened and ensured.

13

SPECIFICATIONS n Such formally dened specica7ons become industry

standards and are released by industry associa7ons to the general public for a nominal fee that covers the cost of produc7on and distribu7on of these standards.

n Examples of bodies that release standards on a regular basis include the American Na7onal Standards Ins7tute (ANSI), Bri7sh Standards Ins7tute, Deutsches Ins7tut fr Normung, ISO, Interna7onal Telecommunica7ons Union (ITU), and Ins7tute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE).

14

SPECIFICATIONS Standards specify, at a minimum, the following:

n AQributes of the components that make up a product, which may include the material used and the dimensions and methods of tes7ng the product

n The intended use of the product or service

n The limita7ons of the product that need to be conveyed to customers

n The process by which the components are made

n The security and safety parameters that need to be built in

15

SPECIFICATIONS n Understanding that specica7ons are at the heart of quality, we can now dene the term in a more cogent manner.

n Moreover, it is important that quality be dened from the standpoint of the provider, as it is the provider that builds quality into products or services, and it is at the providers loca7on where quality is ensured.

16

DEFINITION OF QUALITY FROM THE STANDPOINT OF THE PROVIDER

n Quality is an a?ribute of a product or service provided to consumers that conforms in to or exceeds the best of the available specica9ons for that product or service. It includes making those specica9ons available to the end user of the product or service.

n The specica9ons that form the basis of the product or service provided may have been dened by a government body, an industry associa9on, or a standards body. Where such a deni9on is not available, the provider may dene the specica9ons.

17

DEFINITION OF QUALITY This deni7on of quality mandates that the provider:

n Dene specica7ons if they are not already dened by a higher body, such as a government body, an industry associa7on, or a standards organiza7on

n Adhere to the best of the available deni7on of specica7ons

n Ensure conformance is 100% or beQerno less

n Make available to the customer the specica7ons to which conformance is ensured.

Any product or service that meets the requirements of this deni7on is rated a quality product/service, and any product or service that does not meet the requirements of this deni7on is rated poor quality.

18

DEFINITION OF QUALITY n The result of a product or service that meets the above deni7on of quality is that the customer is able to eec7vely use the product for the length of its life or enjoy the service fully.

n This result further mandates that the provider is responsible for providing any support that is required by the customer for the enjoyment or u7liza7on of the product or service throughout its life.

19

QUALITY AND RELIABILITY Reliability of a product is its capability to func9on at the dened level of performance for the dura9on of its life.

Quality involves delivering the specied func7onality under the specied condi7ons.

Reliability involves delivering the specied func7onality at a specied level of performance over the dura7on of the product life, even with slight devia7ons in the specied condi7ons.

20

QUALITY AND RELIABILITY Two phrases are cri7cal in this deni7on:

n Dened level of performancePerformance level is dened in the specica7ons for the product or service. It should be 100% or more of the specica7ons and no less. n Con7nuous use is also a specica7on. For example, a car may be

capable of being driven at 100 miles per hour, but how long can a car withstand being driven con7nuously at that speed?

n Normally, performance is dened at two levels: normal performance and peak performance.

21

QUALITY AND RELIABILITY Two phrases are cri7cal in this deni7on:

n Dened level of performance

n DuraOon of its lifeDura7on needs to be specied for normal performance as well as peak performance. A product has two lives:

n First life or ini9al lifeIni7al life, before any repairs become necessary, normally is specied as the warranty or guarantee period. ALer expira7on of this life, regular maintenance may be required to maintain performance at the level specied for the product.

n Opera9ng lifeThe period of 7me aLer the warranty expires, assuming maintenance is performed. ALer expira7on of this life, it may not be economical to maintain the product to operate at the specied level of performance.

22

QUALITY AND RELIABILITY n While ini7al life is specied by manufacturers as the warranty period, the life aLer the warranty period usually is not specied.

n If it is, it is specied with such s7pula7ons as subject to the condi7on that the product is maintained and serviced by our own expert technicians or something similar.

n If product maintenance is entrusted to the manufacturer or its authorized maintenance shop, the manufacturer species two norms: mean 7me between failures and mean 7me to repair.

23

QUALITY AND RELIABILITY Reliability is gauged by two measures:

n Mean 7me between failures is the average period between two successive failures, assuming that proper maintenance is performed every 7me and maintenance conforms to the manufacturers s7pula7ons. n It is expressed in the number of running hours for the product.

n Mean 7me to repair is the average 7me it takes to restore the product to its original func7onality by carrying out the necessary repairs. n It is expressed in the number of clock hours it takes to repair the

product.

24

QUALITY AND RELIABILITY n In terms of soLware, an observa7on oLen made is that

soLware has no moving parts that cause the product to deteriorate through wear and tear. Once a soLware product func7ons at its dened level of quality and func7onality, there should be no need for maintenance. Therefore, the term reliability should not be applicable to soLware.

n However, this reasoning is true only if the congura7on on which the soLware product runs remains unaltered.

n Many ac7vi7es change the congura7on of the system on which a soLware product is running, and this is where the ques7on of soLware reliability comes into play.

n A soLware product is said to be reliable if it can withstand minor patches to the opera7ng system and to the middleware.

25

QUALITY AND RELIABILITY The following are a few common situa7ons that can alter the congura7on of hardware and soLware:

n New opera7ng systems enter the market every three years.

n New Web browsers or updates to current browsers are released regularly.

n New viruses and spyware are unleashed on unsuspec7ng Internet users.

n Computers oLen are ooded with a host of new tools, ranging from oce suites to an7virus soLware to downloadable u7li7es.

n Changes are introduced to 7ers (middleware) in mul77er architecture soLware products.

26

QUALITY AND RELIABILITY n SoLware products may make use of shared libraries that are

part of the system soLware supplied along with the opera7ng system. It is likely that these shared libraries are updated or modied.

n SoLware products may make use of third-party code libraries to perform special func7ons such as rules processing, database independence, etc. These third-party code libraries may be updated or modied.

n Installing and uninstalling u7li7es on a system may result in changes to or removal of the shared libraries used by a soLware product.

27

QUALITY AND RELIABILITY n As soLware quality professionals cannot predict what future

upgrades will be made to the system soLware (be it the opera7ng system, database, browser, or middleware), they cannot specify the reliability of soLware in running hours.

n They also may not be able to specify the mean 7me between failures of a soLware product in running hours, because a soLware product does not fail due to use over a number of hours. It can, however, fail due to a change in the system congura7on.

n Such is the case with mean 7me to repair, because the repair is not to restore the soLware to as near the original condi7on as possible but rather to remove the impact of some change in the system congura7on.

28

EVOLUTION OF THE CONCEPTS OF QUALITY

n Ini7ally, it was thought that only the ar7san could achieve a quality product state.

n However, as the Industrial Revolu7on moved manufacturing out of ar7sans shops and into factories, with mul7ple ar7sans working on a single product, the supervisor became pivotal in achieving a quality product.

n If a part was missing or a bolt was loose, it was the supervisors fault for not no7cing it.

29


n As pressure on the supervisor to ensure quality increased, actual supervision took a back seat, which aected produc7vity and produc7on.

n It nally dawned on management that appointment of an independent inspector was needed to ensure that every part was mounted properly and every bolt was 7ghtened. Thus came about the profession of inspec7on, along with the development of a host of inspec7on tools, techniques, and methods.

n Examples of tools developed specically for inspec7on that are now standard in manufacturing milieus include go/no-go gauges and inspec7on jigs.

30


n Inspec7on, as a link in the manufacturing chain, served well for some 7me, but became inadequate as the func7onality of products became more varied.

n Ensuring that every part is properly mounted and that every bolt is properly 7ghtened was soon found to be inadequate to ensure proper func7oning of products.

n This was especially true for electrical products like motors and machines, as such products required func7onality tes7ng in addi7on to overall inspec7on.

n It was realized that inspec7on alone was not enough to ensure the quality of products and that products leaving the factory should be tested for their func7onality as well.

31


n Around the same 7me, subcontrac7ng of the manufacture of parts to specialized manufacturers began to take place, star7ng in the auto industry. This brought in a new issue: ensuring the quality of inputs.

n Thus, inward inspec7on (inspec7on of parts received from suppliers and subcontractors) and tes7ng also arose.

n Batch and job manufacturing also began to emerge around the same 7me, resul7ng in a new concept: quality control. n A host of new literature on methods of quality control came into being,

including sampling inspec7on, sta7s7cal quality control, control charts, and so on.

32

EVOLUTION OF THE CONCEPTS OF QUALITY n Up to this point, the emphasis in terms of quality was on

ensuring the quality of manufacturing. As compe77on increased among manufacturers and as organiza7ons began to provide similarand perhaps beQerproducts, it was discovered that products can fail because of design defects, even if the manufacturing quality was 7ghtly controlled.

n The quality of a product design, which depends on the specica7ons set for that product, is equally, if not more, crucial to the success of the product as is the control of quality during the manufacturing stage.

33

EVOLUTION OF THE CONCEPTS OF QUALITY n In order to achieve beQer design, it became necessary for manufacturers to establish design guidelines, drawing upon the experience and knowledge of organiza7ons in a par7cular industry, as well as feedback from the eld (customer complaints, maintenance personnel observa7ons, and studying compe7tors products).

n This resulted in the development of standards and guidelines to ensure quality of design and specica7ons.

n Design reviews followed to ensure quality in product design.

34

EVOLUTION OF THE CONCEPTS OF QUALITY n While this aspect of product design surely belonged in the

arena of quality, it was beyond the capacity of an organiza7ons quality control department.

n This development gave rise to the concept of quality assurance, an integral part of manufacturing that includes inspec7on, tes7ng, and standards for design.

n There is a misconcep7on in the soLware development industry that quality assurance means tes7ng. Quality assurance encompasses inspec7on (verica7on), tes7ng, and standards.

35

EVOLUTION OF THE CONCEPTS OF QUALITY n In the glossary of the Capability Maturity Model Integra7on

(CMMI) model document for development (version 1.2, 2006), quality assurance is dened as a planned and systema7c means for assuring management that the dened standards, prac7ces, procedures, and methods of the process are applied.

n

36

EVOLUTION OF THE CONCEPTS OF QUALITY n One occurrence of note that had a signicant impact on the

evolu7on of the concepts of quality was the transforma7on Japanese manufacturing organiza7ons underwent.

n Japanese manufacturers rose from their reputa7on as suppliers of cheap, poor-quality goods to become suppliers of high-quality products.

n It was a phenomenal transforma7on, and studies conducted on Japanese manufacturing methods were widely publicized. Some of these methods include quality control circles, zero defects, and right rst 9me.

37

EVOLUTION OF THE CONCEPTS OF QUALITY n One of the Japanese techniques widely adopted by manufacturers

across the world is quality control circles, or simply quality circles, as they popularly became known.

n A quality circle is a voluntary associa7on of workers from the same facility who meet to discuss quality-related issues in their facility and come up with possible solu7ons to improve quality.

n If their discussions point out a defect, together they come up with a solu7on, trying it out on a pilot basis and presen7ng the results to management. If management is sa7sed with the proposal, it is implemented, and the members of the quality circle that came up with the sugges7on are rewarded.

n It was reported that the Japanese manufacturing industry beneted greatly from these quality circles.

38

EVOLUTION OF THE CONCEPTS OF QUALITY n What the transforma7on in the quality of Japanese products did

result in was the awareness that quality is not just the responsibility of the quality department alone; it is an organiza7onal issue.

n If quality is neglected, the very survival of the organiza7on may be at stake.

n This realiza7on led to the development of the concept of total quality management, which requires the en7re organiza7on be involved in achieving qualitynot just in terms of deliverables, but in every ac7vity of the organiza7on.

n The organiza7on is seen as a culture a culture based on qualitythat views quality as a cri7cal ingredient in all of its ac7vi7es.

n

39

EVOLUTION OF THE CONCEPTS OF QUALITY n The development of technology created a new dimension to help

achieve quality: robots.

n Japan again took the lead and extensively deployed robots in its factories.

n Since the chance of human error was removed from a signicant number of opera7ons, the probability of defects was eliminated. Thus, the need for inspec7on became marginal, although tes7ng remained important. It simply was not possible to inspect everything. n Take, for example, a gearbox assembly. Once assembled, the inside cannot

be inspected unless the gearbox is opened, but if it is opened, it has to be reassembled.

n This gave rise to the concept of process quality, which embeds the concept of quality into the manufacturing process itself.

40

QUALITY GURUS

Pioneers in quality:

n William Edwards Deming

n Joseph Moses Juran

n and Philip Bayard Crosby

41

QUALITY GURUS - William Edwards Deming

Dr. William Edwards Deming is considered by most people to be the father of modern philosophy on quality.

Deming was a consultant to Japan in the early 1950s and helped Japanese companies aQain worldwide success.

The Japanese government recognized his contribu7on and honored him with the Order of the Sacred Treasure, Second Class in 1960.

42


In the 1970s, Demings philosophy was summarized by his Japanese disciples as follows:

n When organiza7ons concentrate on quality, quality tends to rise over a period of 7me, and costs tend to fall.

n If organiza7ons focused on costs, costs would rise and quality would decline over a period of 7me.

In short, quality improves produc7vity.

This philosophy was proven by Japanese companies, and they are among the worlds best today.

43


n In 1981, aLer it incurred a loss of $3 billion, Ford Motor Company recruited Deming as a consultant.

n By 1986, Ford became the most protable of the Ameri- can automobile manufacturers. The turnaround was credited to Deming.

n He proposed a new way of looking at management, oering 14 key principles for business success in his book Out of the Crisis, published in 1986.

44

QUALITY GURUS - William Edwards Deming These principles, now known as the famous Demings 14 Points, can be summarized as follows:

n Constancy of purposeCreate constancy of purpose toward improvement of product and service. The purpose is important, and it needs to be constant over a period of 7me.

n Adopt the new philosophyCondi7ons change, and the philosophy ought to be aligned with the current condi7ons.

n StaOsOcal inferencingDeming advocated the use of sta7s7cal techniques for quality control in place of 100% inspec7on of mass- produced components.

n PriceWhen making buying decisions, Deming suggested doing away with the prac7ce of awarding contracts on the basis of lowest price. This ra7onale gave rise to the present-day two-bid (technical bid and nancial bid) system for selec7ng vendors.

45

QUALITY GURUS - William Edwards Deming n Improve conOnuouslyFind problems and solve them.

n On-the-job trainingDeming advocated that organiza7ons provide learning opportuni7es on the job, as well as guided learning.

n SupervisionDeming advocated leadership in place of supervision in organiza7ons.

n FearDeming strongly felt that fear should not be used as a mo7vator in organiza7ons. He suggested driving fear out of organiza7ons so that everyone can work eec7vely.

n BarriersDeming scorned water7ght walls between departments in organiza7ons. He recommended that people work together so that they can learn from each other.

46

QUALITY GURUS - William Edwards Deming n MethodsDeming recommended development and provision of right

methods of working to obtain results.

n He stated that targets, without using the right methods to achieve them, are meaningless. He claried that most of the causes of low quality and low produc7vity are beyond the people who perform the work.

n Eliminate quotasPerhaps Deming recognized the unlimited poten7al of human beings to improve produc7vity. He therefore argued that numerical quotas should be eliminated. He suggested management by objec7ves and leadership in order to improve output.

n PrideDeming argued that workers feel proud of their work-related achievements, and they should not be robbed of this pride by annual performance appraisals. He suggested the removal of any barriers that could stand between workers and their pride in their workmanship.

47

QUALITY GURUS - William Edwards Deming n Retraining and educaOonDeming strongly advocated educa7ng

employees as a means of increasing their awareness and improving their sense of responsibility and ownership.

n ManagementDeming suggested a structured management to drive the above 13 points in the organiza7on, to achieve the desired trans- forma7on in the organiza7on.

48


Deming short-listed the four stumbling blocks to transforming a business into a vibrant organiza7on caused by management:

n Neglec7ng long-range planning

n Relying on technology to solve problems

n Seeking proven methods rather than developing new solu7ons

n Hiding behind the excuse our problems are dierent

49


Deming advocated a four-step cycle for transforma7on to a successful business:

1. PlanPlan for the ac7on. 2. DoCarry out and implement the plan. 3. CheckCheck the results of the ac7on and draw inferences. 4. ActModify the plan as necessary.

n Demings 14 principles and plan-do-check-act cycle are used outside the manufacturing area, in various elds, with success.

50

QUALITY GURUS - Joseph Moses Juran n Dr. Joseph Juran led an ac7ve working life for about 70 years, and

his Quality Control Handbook (1951) is s7ll a reference for quality professionals today.

n Juran started his career at an Electric U7lity Company and rose to the posi7on of chief industrial engineer at its headquarters.

n Later, Juran became chairman of the department of administra7ve engineering at NY University, where he taught for quite a few years. He was also a consultant and the author of several books.

n Juran was an ac7ve member of the American Management Associa7on, on behalf of which he delivered many lectures interna7onally.

n His management philosophies are now embedded in American and Japanese management philosophy.

51

QUALITY GURUS - Joseph Moses Juran

He developed a quality trilogy:

n Quality planningBegin by iden7fying customers and their needs, and then develop a product that meets those needs. Op7mize the product so as to meet the organiza7ons needs as well as the customers needs. That is, quality starts with specica7ons and design.

n Quality improvementDene a process that can produce the product, and then op7mize the process. That is, quality depends on the process.

n Quality controlTest and prove that the process can successfully produce the product, and then implement the proven process in opera7ons.

52


n The Union of Japanese Scien7sts and Engineers invited Juran to Japan to teach the principles of quality management aLer World War II.

n His lectures were published as a book 7tled Managerial Breakthrough (1964).

n He was awarded the Order of the Sacred Treasure, Second Class by the emperor of Japan.

n Juran also founded the Juran Ins7tute, a consul7ng company through which he could propagate his ideas and work; it is one of the leading consultancies in quality management.

53


n He was the rst to incorporate human aspects into quality management, which helped to shape the concept of total quality management.

n Joseph Juran also is credited with the popular deni7on of quality: tness for use.

54

QUALITY GURUS - Philip Bayard Crosby

n Philip Crosby was a businessman and author who contributed to general management theory and quality management prac7ces.

n He began his career at ITT Corpora7on and then opened his own consultancy under the banner Philip Crosby Associates, Inc., which now operates in eight countries.

n His books Quality Is Free (1979) and Quality without Tears (1984) are s7ll popular today.

55


n Crosby dened quality as conformance to certain specica7ons set forth by management and not to some vague concept of goodness.

n The specica7ons are not arbitrary either; they must be set according to customer needs and wants.

n Crosby promoted the popular phrase do it right the rst 7me, or DIRFT, and the concept of zero defects.

56


He compiled four principles of quality:

n The deni7on of quality is conformance to requirements, not to the concepts of goodness or elegance.

n The system of quality is preven7on, which is preferable to quality inspec7ons.

n The performance standard for quality is zero defects, not thats close enough.

n The measurement of quality is the price of nonconformance (poor quality), not indices. This is the precursor to the concept of the cost of poor quality.

57


Crosby dened a 14-step process for management to follow in order to achieve and improve quality:

1. Be commiQed to quality, and ensure that this commitment is clear to everyone in the organiza7on.

2. Create quality improvement teams, with representa7ves from all departments.

3. Measure the process to determine the current and poten7al quality issues.

4. Compute the cost of quality (or poor quality).

5. Raise quality awareness in all employees.

6. Take visible ac7on to correct quality issues.

58


14-step process for management :

7. Monitor the progress of quality improvement, and establish mechanisms to monitor the zero defects concept.

8. Train supervisors in quality improvement.

9. Hold zero defects days.

10. Encourage employees to create their own quality improvement goals (this is perhaps the precursor to the SoLware Engineering Ins7tutes Personal SoLware Process).

11. Encourage employee communica7on with management about obstacles to quality.

59


14-step process for management :

12. Recognize the eorts of par7cipants (workers) in achieving and improving quality.

13. Create quality councils.

14. Do it all over again. Quality improvement is endless.

60


Crosby listed ve key characteris7cs of a successful organiza7on:

1. People rou7nely do things right the rst 7me.

2. Change is an7cipated and is used to the organiza7ons advantage.

3. Growth is consistent and protable.

4. New products and services are developed when necessary.

5. Everyone is happy to work in the organiza7on.

n Philip Crosby believed that management has the primary responsibility for ensuring quality in the organiza7on.

61


n .

62


n .

63


n .

64

TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT

n The most popular quality concept in the manufacturing industry today is total quality management (TQM). Almost all professionally managed manufacturing companies have implemented TQM and prac7ce it diligently.

n The soLware development industry, knowingly or unknowingly, leapfrogged into TQM through process quality cer7ca7ons such as ISO and CMMI.

n ISO denes TQM as a management approach for an organiza7on, centered on quality, based on the par7cipa7on of all its members, and aiming at long-term success through customer sa7sfac7on and benets to all members of the organiza7on and to society.

65

TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT

n TQM is an organiza7on-wide quality ini7a7ve, which means it involves the en7re organiza7on in the management of quality. In Japan, TQM includes four steps:

n KaizenFocus on con7nuous process improvement, to make every process in the organiza7on visible, repeatable, and measurable.

n Atarimae hinshitsuBelief that products will func7on as they are designed to func7on.

n KanseiStudy the way a user uses the product, to facilitate improvement of the product.

n Miryoketuki hinshitsuBelief that products should have aesthe7c value along with usability. For example, a car needs to look aQrac7ve in addi7on to its capability to transport people.

66

TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT n TQM advocates quality standards in all aspects of organiza7onal

func7oning, as well as the philosophy of do it right the rst 7me. It also recommends elimina7on of waste in all its forms.

n As it stands today, TQM is adopted to some degree in organiza7ons that have quality assurance at their heart, with inspec- 7on, tes7ng, and standards implemented thoroughly and consistently.

n Although the concept of quality was developed in manufacturing organiza- 7ons, all of the concepts discussed above are relevant to soLware development organiza7ons as well.

67

ARE WE GIVING ADEQUATE IMPORTANCE TO QUALITY IN ORGANIZATIONS?

n Although consumers can demand beQer quality, they have no control over it.

n They can raise their voices against poor quality and perhaps abstain from purchasing poor-quality goods and services, but it is providers that can supply goods and services of beQer quality.

68


n The quality func7on in an organiza7on is akin to the audit func7on in the nance department of an organiza7on.

n What is the nega7ve impact of not having an audit func7on? Management may steal money from the organiza7on.

n Recognizing this possibility, governments made it mandatory that an external auditor, one approved by a statutory body or cer7ed by a professional associa7on of public or chartered accountants, audit a companys books of accounts and cer7fy that the nances are managed honestly.

n These external auditors are expected to ensure integrity in an organiza7ons accoun7ng process.

n When we see an organiza7ons audited nancial report, we believe that it is an honest statement of the nancial posi7on of that organiza7on.

n The external auditor is viewed as a watchdog over management, to safeguard the interests of the organiza7ons owners (that is, the shareholders).

69


n While the prac7ce of external audi7ng of an organiza7ons books, either yearly or quarterly, is mandatory in most countries, it is not mandatory for an organiza7on to include the quality func7on as one of the departments that regularly undergoes external quality audits.

n This may be surprising, but the fact of the maQer is that many organiza7ons do not have a robust quality department. n Some organiza7ons do have a quality department, but in name only; the

department does not have any real authority to prevent defec7ve products from reaching customers.

n Few organiza7ons have a robust quality department that is empowered to exercise authority in stopping shipments to customers if necessary.

70


n Many organiza7ons do not have a robust quality department.

n Why is this? n Is it because shareholders money needs to be protected, but not the

interests of consumers, who are putng trust in a product or service, risking money, safety, and perhaps health?

n Does this mean that the quality of goods or services is unimportant?

n Does this imply that the adage buyer beware is an adequate safeguard against poor quality?

n Most governments are focused on money more than the quality aspects of products or services being oered by organiza7ons. n But what is the purpose of safeguarding the accoun7ng process of an

organiza7on that is producing poor- quality goods or services and is heading toward failure?

71


n While mandatory declara7ons of nancial results make it feasible to compute a host of nancial ra7os (metrics?) that allow us to ascertain the nancial health of an organiza7on, there is no way we can compute the quality metrics necessary for us to assess the quality health of an organiza7on. n Most organiza7ons never declare what their defect density is.

n Worse s7ll, most organiza7ons do not even have the wherewithal to derive such metrics.

n A signicant number of organiza7ons, especially in the soLware development eld, do not have a head for their quality department.

72


n When we learn that an organiza7on has been appraised by the SoLware Engineering Ins7tute using CMMI or that an organiza7on has obtained cer7ca7on from ISO, we feel condent about the organiza7ons commitment to quality.

n Surprisingly, these cer7fying bodies do not insist that an organiza7on have a quality department, let alone a competent quality department chief.

n Their methods of cer7ca7on do not include ensuring that internal quality controls are in place and are doing their job diligently, as is the case in the eld of nance.

73


n Generally speaking, the quality func7on is one of the most neglected organs of an organiza7on. Of course, there are excep7ons, but for most organiza7ons, quality is a headache, and when there is a conict, management canand almost always doesrule against the quality department. n Yet management cannot rule against an audit in the eld of nance.

n While it only seems logical to have a similar system in place for the quality func7on in any industry, including soLware development, the reality is quite the reverse.

n Although it is possible for the head of an organiza7ons internal audit department to become the head of the nance department and for the head of nance to become the CEO, it is a very rare occurrence for the head of the quality department to become CEO of the organiza7on.

n

74


n Ac7vists like Ralph Nader have forced industries to focus on quality.

n Ini7ally, all guarantees and warran7es were against manufacturing defects, but ac7vism and lawsuits forced industry to expand guarantees and warran7es to cover all defects, including design defects.

n Unfortunately, however, such ac7vism is absent in the area of soLware development, and as a result, quality is given scant respect in this industry. Perhaps about 10% of soLware development organiza7ons may be able to declare their auditable defect density.

75


n Most soLware development organiza7ons do not have full-edged, full- 7me, and fully staed quality departments. This does not mean to say that products are released without any inspec7on or tes7ng. Although such ac7vi7es are carried out by the technical department, most soLware development companies do not designate a set of their qualied professionals to tend to the task of the quality func7on, as is the normal prac7ce in the manufacturing industry.

n The main func7on of the quality department in soLware development organiza7ons, where there is one, is to interface with the cer7fying agencies and ensure that cer7ca7on is obtained or maintained. The quality department also guides and assists the technical departments in keeping and upda7ng records that are necessary to maintain cer7ca7on.

76


n The most popular process model in the soLware development industry, CMMI of the SoLware Engineering Ins7tute of Carnegie Mellon University, does not mandate a full-7me quality department.

n The second most popular issuer of cer7cates, ISO 9000, which mandates a quality policy and a quality management system for the organiza7on, also does not mandate a quality department.

n It is as if they are saying, As long as you manage quality, it is okay.

77


Guarantee

n A guarantee is usually free and is a promise about an item by the manufacturer or company

n It's a promise to sort out any problems with a product or service within a specic, xed period of 7me

n Whether you paid for a guarantee or not, it is legally binding

Warranty

n A warranty acts like an insurance policy for which you must pay a premium - Some7mes a warranty is called an 'extended guarantee'

n May last longer than a guarantee and cover a wider range of problems

n A warranty is a legal contract

78

ORGANIZATIONAL GOALS AND QUALITY GOALS

Every organiza7on has goals, mostly nancial in nature. The most common organiza7onal goals can be classied as follows:

n Strategic (survival, growth)

n Financial (revenue, prot)

n Marke7ng (reach, share, customer support)

n Product (innova7on, quality, reliability, delivery)

n Human resources (sta reten7on, growth, succession)

Of the above classes, the ones that aQract the aQen7on of senior management are strategic and nancial goals. Market forces compel senior management to focus its aQen7on on marke7ng and product goals, as these have a signicant impact on the strategic goals. The remaining goals are delegated to the next line of management to focus on and achieve.

79


n Quality goals, which are normally part of product goals, are further relegated downward.

n It is rather rare to see quality goals dis7nguished as a separate set of goals. Financial charts frequently are displayed behind the desk of the CEO (and in the lobby of the corporate headquarters) in most organiza7ons, but it is uncommon to nd a CEO who has quality charts anywhere in his or her oce (or in the lobby, for that maQer).

n Should the CEO be focusing on quality goals? Is it not the func7on of the development manager to ensure the quality demanded by the customer? n The TQM philosophy states that the CEO needs to be the chief quality

manager of the organiza7on. Without the focus and support of the CEO, the quality func7on becomes an appendage of the technical department.

80


Quality goals can either be generic for all soLware development organiza7ons or specic to an organiza7on: n Achieve and surpass industry benchmarks for product quality and for

product reliability

n For produc7vity goals of quality assurance ac7vi7es specically, reduce 7me spent on inspec7on, tes7ng, and other related quality assurance ac7vi7es, by process improvement and usage of beQer tools

n Reduce the cost of quality assurance without any reduc7on in quality levels

n Quality improvement goals specic to an organiza7on, such as

n Reduc7on in defect density

n Reduc7on in defect injec7on rate

n Improvement in sigma level

81


n The rst and second goals focus on quality at the product level, while the rest focus on quality at the organiza7onal level.

n Also, quality goals dovetail into product goals. Therefore, quality goals ought to be shared by the technical department responsible for delivery and the quality department responsible for monitoring organiza7onal quality.

82


n Since the CEO is responsible for achieving the organiza7onal goals with respect to all func7ons, with the actual responsibili7es delegated to lower level managers, achievement of quality goals needs to be delegated as well.

n But is the technical manager in charge of delivery the right choice for delega7ng the achievement of quality goals?

n The technical managers primary responsibility is to deliverand deliver on 7me; quality of deliverables is a close second. n When the possibility of having to delay delivery to x a quality issue arises,

most oLen delivery takes precedence. Therefore, it is necessary to have a quality champion in the organiza7on, whose primary responsibility is achieving the organiza7ons quality goals. That en7ty is the quality department.

83

IS A QUALITY DEPARTMENT IN SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATIONS REALLY NEEDED?

n I had occasion to discuss this very topic with the CEO of a medium-sized soLware development organiza7on, which is preparing itself for CMMI appraisal. I was trying to impress on him the need for a fully staed quality department with a full-7me and knowledgeable quality head.

n He asked me, Why do we need a quality department? We are performing peer reviews and independent tests rigorously. What addi7onal value can a quality department add? I do not wish to increase overhead without any benet to the organiza7on.

n He went on to add that ins7tu7ng a quality department would directly undermine the commitment of the technical department to quality, in that the technical department would believe that management no longer has condence in its ability to build in quality.

n I explained in as much detail as he allowed me, which I oer below, what a quality department can achieve.

84


Here is why soLware development organiza7ons need a quality department that is fully staed with competent professionals and with a full-7me, competent quality head:

n The quality viewpoint would be provided unhindered by delivery objec7ves at any 7me.

n Con7nuous implementa7on of quality assurance ac7vi7es would be ensured, without excep7on.

n By con7nuously monitoring the quality achievements of the orga-niza7on, a quality department would be able to: a. Prevent deteriora7on of organiza7onal quality before any real damage is caused b. Drive the organiza7on to higher levels of quality and, thus, toward excellence.

85


n

n Process performance would be measured and analyzed to determine if it is achieving its organiza7onal objec7ves, as well as to make it feasible to eect necessary improvements to ensure that the processes perform as designed.

n Organiza7onal quality achievements would be benchmarked with peer organiza7ons, and industry benchmarks would be applied to the organiza7onal processes, thus raising the bar of quality levels.

n There would be an in-house expert on maQers of quality and analysis, who would con7nuously hone the organiza7ons leading edge on quality exper7se.

n Expert support and training on how to achieve quality objec7ves would be provided to technical teams.

86


n

n A repository for quality data generated by the organiza7on would be made available to those who need it.

n Defect analysis would be carried out and elimina7on of the top causes of defects would be facilitated, pushing the organiza7on toward achieving right rst 7me.

n Con7nuity of the organiza7ons ini7a7ves for quality improvement would be championed.

n A watchdog, in-house customer representa7ve, and eyes and ears of management in maQers of product and deliverable quality of the organiza7on would exist, raising its voice when quality trends show a downturn.

87

THE PRESENT SCENARIO IN SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATIONS

n The soLware development industry has not imported the quality philosophy, techniques, and tools from the manufacturing industry.

n While independent teams of inspectors and testers are the norm in the manufacturing industry, the soLware development industry uses project team members to conduct inspec7ons and tes7ng.

n Some organiza7ons do have an independent tes7ng department to conduct system tes7ng and coordinate acceptance tes7ng, but this is not a norm across the industry.

88


n Insistence on cer7ca7on by outsourcing organiza7ons such as the U.S. Department of Defense forced soLware development organiza7ons to seek cer7ca7ons and maturity level ra7ngs from authorized agencies.

n Now it is becoming normal to see the quality department in a soLware development organiza7on coordinate the cer7ca7on ac7vi7es under the umbrella of process quality rather than champion product quality.

89


n Every soLware development organiza7ons brochure contains a statement about its commitment to quality, but this statement is not supported by a strong quality department within the organiza7on.

n When you ques7on such a company, it asserts that it puts less emphasis on quality conformance ac7vi7es and places more emphasis on ac7vi7es that build quality into the product, such as training sta, providing tools, dening processes, conduc7ng audits, and so on.

n Such companies make it sound as if everybody in the organiza7on is quality conscious and that quality is everybodys responsibility. Yet the fact remains that quality is an unwanted child in the organiza7on, because everybodys responsibility generally means that no one can be held accountable.

n

90


To sum up, the present scenario in soLware development organiza7ons is characterized by the following asser7ons:

n All companies rmly state their commitment to quality. Most orga- niza7ons do have one or more cer7ca7ons/maturity ra7ngs.

n Very few organiza7ons have a full-edged quality department, staed by competent professionals and led by a knowledgeable quality professional. Most companies either have a quality department in name only or not at all.

n Where there is a quality department in name only, its role is relegated to interfacing with cer7fying agencies rather than championing organiza7onal quality.

n Quality assurance is understood as being equal to tes7ng in most soLware development organiza7ons.

91


n Most soLware development organiza7ons do not have auditable measurement data for their quality capability. Most do not even aQempt it.

n Most soLware development organiza7ons do not have objec7ve quality goals.

n Most soLware development organiza7ons place the quality func7on under the technical department, whose primary responsibility is delivery.

n Most soLware development organiza7ons do not have independent inspec7on and tes7ng teams; the development teams perform these ac7vi7es.

92


n This is the quality scenario in the soLware development industry. Clearly, there is a lot of room for improvement.

n The focus of this course is how to achieve quality at the product level and how to monitor and improve quality at the organiza7onal level.

93

Homework 1. Clearly dene the following terms and give an illustra7ve example from the soLware domain:

n Normal performance and peak performance

n Guarantee and warrantee

2. Describe the similari7es and dierences of the philosphies of the 3 quality gurus.

3. What are the seemingly poten7al problems of the soLware industry in terms of ensuring quality.

bbm482 sqachapter1 part2rev22014 1009kd

Documents

n quality

word quality n

quality product

denes quality

term quality n dierence

quality gurus n introduc7on

term good quality

n people