What software practitioners need from academicians and methodologists?

June 28, 2010 at 9:57 am | Posted in Software Engineering | Leave a comment

Recently I came across an article about different software development methodologies by Roger Smith at http://archive.devx.com/uml/articles/Smith03/Smith03-1.asp
According to him “A software methodology is a set of rules and practices used to craft computer programs. The weight of the process needed on any given project is inversely proportional to the sophistication of the developers working on that project, with less-experienced developers needing heavier-weight processes and vice versa.”

Another aspect that affects the right weight of the process is speed of change in the environment. Faster the change, lighter the processes require to be able to adapt to the change quickly. In my opinion, software practitioners need a good flexible and extensible structure which will help them to make the right choices appropriate to their context. At the same time, it should not be so heavy, detailed and constraining that they lose the freedom to respond quickly to the dynamics of the environment and situation. Hence rather than trying to define every detail, the academicians and methodologists should provide a simple, flexible and coherent framework with enough guidelines to make right choice given the type of project, market dynamics and the team. Such a framework will help all involved in software development, especially the project managers and the teams to make decisions rather than blindly sticking to one methodology or another.

Academicians can come up with the theoretical inputs which practitioners will benefit from. Such inputs will cover mathematical as well as conceptual aspects and may use rigorous or empirical methods to validate them. They need not wait to perfect the inputs but can share even the tentative ones if that makes sense to the practitioners. The practitioners in turn can then use them in real life situations to verify and validate. On the other hand, the academicians could start with common observations from practice and generalize them into meaningful theories which consistently explain the observations. This would require close and collaborative interactions. It is not possible to centrally manage and control it by few. Hence the importance of a compelling vision and capturing hearts and minds of a large software community to make it a self-motivated self-driven activity. After all the proof of the pudding is in eating.

By the way, would this apply to the practitioners in any field and not just software development?

Advertisements

Leave a Comment »

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.
Entries and comments feeds.

%d bloggers like this: