TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Subject:Re: SERIOUS: Formal vs. informal organizations From:"Collins, Darren DA" <Collins -dot- Darren -dot- DA -at- BHP -dot- COM -dot- AU> Date:Mon, 8 Mar 1999 11:58:48 +1100
There are cases where formal environments have an advantage. The NASA guys
who develop the software for the space shuttle spring to mind. I read an
article about them a while ago. If I recall correctly, they had only 1
defect in the last 3 revisions of their software (revisions are for
added/changed functionality, not bug fixing). And that defect was in a
piece of software for controlling a manipulator arm that has been designed
but never installed for any missions to date. They count something as tiny
as a letter on a monitor display being one character out of place as a
defect, so that's a pretty impressive record!
Such quality comes at a price, though. Like you say, they need huge amounts
of bureaucracy to control everything so closely. They don't have any code
cowboys there - the programmers are all conservative types (they don't look
like programmers at all!). No piece of code is ever added/deleted/changed
without filling out paperwork and being checked/tested/approved by several
people. The dollar cost of all the extra effort is enormous. But, at the
end of the day, the manager of the group must sign a piece of paper before
every launch that he personally certifies the code as defect-free and posing
no risk to human life.
I wouldn't like to sign anything like that for the software my group here at
work develops, but then our software isn't safety-critical.
I guess companies need to make a decision for themselves as to how important
it is that their software is defect-free and how tightly they need to
control design. It's a continuum, trading off control/quality/consistency
for time/dollars.
Darren Collins
Computer Engineer, Blast Furnaces
BHP Steel, Port Kembla, Australia
> -----Original Message-----
> I am curious about your thoughts on this "informal vs formal" concept.
> Mostly, can anyone think up solid, tangible benefits to a
> super-formal environment?
>
> Andrew Plato
> President / Principal Consultant
> Anitian Consulting, Inc.
> www.anitian.com