Education, Information Technology, and the "Software Crisis"

by Lawrence I. Baker, Defense Acquisition University and
L. John Michel III, National Defense University

Ever since the "software dark ages", prior to circa 1975, and even during, many people have called attention to the so-called 'software crisis' and how it is causing all manner of problems in our high technology society. It is our belief that this focus, no matter how well intentioned, has been misplaced at best, and at worst is completely misleading. The concentration should be on the product, not the process. It may very well be, as the Total Quality Management (TQM) advocates claim, that the quality of the process determines the quality of the product; but unless one has a clear definition and expectation for the product, the process is irrelevant. It is analogous to the Chinese belief that states (paraphrased), "If you don't know where you want to go, a map is useless"; and, accordingly, "Any road will do." In other words, we believe that Dr. W. Edwards Deming's reluctance to embrace TQM was correct; and his ideas relative to 'profound knowledge' being the key to enterprise, organization, or system success are being overlooked. Basically, he was looking for answers to the following. What is it that we want to accomplish? What are the useful products of the endeavor? How will it benefit the stakeholders? The "accepted" means to successfully accomplish the objectives are controversial, ranging across a spectrum that is bounded by the Software Engineering Institute's Capability Maturity Model at one end to Extreme Programming at the other, with a 6-sigma compromise approach somewhere in between. Each has its proponents, merits, and demerits; however, it is clearly beyond the scope of this paper to discuss it beyond stating that each can be shown to be more or less advantageous depending on the situation.

Thus, the critical area of focus should be the outcomes; the means of getting there are myriad. We assert that there is definitely a crisis and the unpredictable, 'software dragon' is part of it; but there is a larger issue that must be addressed from the system, organization, or the enterprise point of view. Ultimately, if one looks at the situation from that perspective, it is the information that becomes paramount. Thus, it is the management of the information and the technology that supports it which should be of utmost concern to us; and it applies regardless of the domain. Whether for a corporate enterprise, a government agency, a national security system, an intelligence system, a weapons systems, a C4I system, a management information system, or some other application, unless the human as an individual, or the group, or society in general is economically provided what he, she, or they require in a timely manner, all else can be considered to be of little matter.

Given that, let's look at where we are. Our systems are increasingly becoming more software intensive because software is replacing the functionality formerly performed by people and hardware. Rear Admiral Robert M. Moore, former commander of the Naval Information Systems Management Center, identified this transition in March 1993, when he stated, "At one time, it was the hardware that supported the mission. Today, the hardware is rather generic, capable of supporting any mission. It is the software that provides the real functionality." Figure 1 illustrates this point; although presenting information only through 1995, the trend has continued.

In a 1992 report to the House Armed Services Committee, the General Accounting Office estimated that total annual software cost would account for twenty percent of the Department of Defense's (DoD) budget by 2008 [1]. In October, 1997, Federal Sources, Inc. completed a survey of defense spending on software used for weapons systems, information systems, and command, control, communications, computers, and intelligence systems [2], excluding software for non-tactical systems. The report projected that, in 2002, DoD will spend over $20 billion annually on such software.

Software is the critical component of today's defense systems. Yet, software acquisition and development within DoD continues to be a significant management problem. A variety of studies and analyses over the past twenty years have continued to identify significant systemic software acquisition problems and an un-abating need for software knowledgeable acquisition management professionals. In September, 1987, the Defense Science Board (DSB) Report on Military Software, Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, stated, "Application-knowledgeable, technically skilled leaders are the military's limiting resource in acquiring today's computer technology. Few program offices are staffed [properly] due to a shortage of qualified people. ... the DoD should implement the education and training necessary for its software acquisition management personnel to master both software technology and acquisition management." We would further amplify this statement by adding that the educational process must emphasize that the technology (software) supports the management of the information.

The DoD Software Master Plan, Vol. I, February, 1990, developed by the Defense Acquisition Board Science and Technology Committee, reported, "Improving software education and training is critical. ... there is a need to coordinate efforts of the National Defense University (NDU), the Defense Systems Management College (DSMC), and the Industrial College of the Armed Forces to integrate software acquisition and development programs into existing courses and to establish mandatory software engineering education for all DoD technical and contractual personnel involved in the acquisition process."

The DoD Information Systems (IS) Work Force Education, Training and Career Development Executive Resources Task Force Report (October, 1992) asserted, "Technical vitality of the IS work force is critical to effectively deploy information systems in support of the DoD war-fighting mission. The need to provide recurring technical training to individuals, especially at mid-career and executive levels, was communicated throughout our meeting with services, agencies, and private industry. This training is essential to ... keep pace with the acquisition of more advanced computer and telecommunications systems."

In November, 2000, the DSB Task Force on Defense Software, Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Technology, stated unequivocally that, "If we are to establish an elite information force, the following actions should be taken:

1. Institute mandatory software-intensive systems training for program managers and key staff on all ACAT programs;
2. Require collaborative government/contractor team training at program start and at critical milestones;
3. Require annual software technology refresher training for joint government/contractor teams;
4. Develop a graduate-level program for software systems development and acquisition training; and
5. Require that each ACAT program office appoint an expert software systems architect."

"Technology is dominated by two types of people: those who understand what they do not manage and those who manage what they do not understand" ­ Anonymous. Without question, there is a critical need for a work force highly trained in the complex programmatic discipline of software acquisition management. It continues to be a daunting task to educate members of the DoD acquisition work force who acquire, develop, engineer, test and evaluate, conduct research on, or procure software-intensive systems. This has been amplified in the past by a dearth of appropriate educational opportunities.

Aristotle stated that, "The educated differ from the uneducated as much as the living from the dead." The need for a review of the DoD's software acquisition management education and training curricula and career programs was reinforced in May, 1993 by the Acquisition Management Functional Board, an organization that advises DoD component executives in the management of accession training and career development of acquisition work force personnel. On Oct. 19, 1993, the 'terms of reference' for the review of software acquisition management education was approved by Ms. Colleen A. Preston, then Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition Reform.

Approved in March, 1994, the review team's report established a set of nine critical competencies and twenty-four key competency areas. It is important to note that the competencies address and encompass all of the relevant and pertinent disciplines, not just software. It is insufficient for an acquirer to have a "stovepipe" view of software; the "bigger picture" must not be ignored. In addition, the report contained the recommendation for the development of assignment-specific mandatory courses for software acquisition personnel for Level I, II, and III training career levels.

Level I courses would be informational in nature; students would be provided the basis for understanding. Level II would be knowledge-based and practitioner oriented. Level III would be knowledge management oriented with emphasis on the decision making process. Under the auspices of the Defense Acquisition University, the Information Resources Management College (IRMC), located at NDU, and DSMC began joint development of an evolutionary course curriculum. IRMC was tasked to lead the design of the courses for the communications and computer career field and the Level III software capstone courses; DSMC led the design of the Level I basic and Level II intermediate software courses.

The developed courses are Level III - IRM303, SAM301; Level II - IRM201, SAM201; and Level I (distance learning via the Internet) - IRM101, SAM101. The courses are essentially equivalent; the differences tend to reflect the special needs of the community that each institution generally serves - IRMC for the ASD(C3I) constituency and DSMC for the USD (AT&L) constituency. The developers of the courses did achieve the goal of incorporating the theme that successful outcomes of the acquisition process require that the technology supports the management of information. The following table shows the specifics for each of the courses.

Since there is no true software career field at the present nor does there appear to be any impending groundswell for one, the software acquisition management courses remain assignment-specific, providing unique opportunities to acquire the knowledge required for a specific job or position. However, they have also been identified by the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics as integral to the education of all acquisition work force personnel.

They allow the individuals to maintain proficiency by remaining current with legislation, regulation, policy, and current practice. The courses are for people who acquire, develop, engineer, test, evaluate, conduct research on, and procure software-intensive systems.

Carl Sandburg has said, "Sometime they'll give a war and nobody will come." Few 'dragon slayers' have taken up their swords and joined the crusade to slaughter the dragon. Given the criticality of the situation, the numbers of attendees have, in the past, been abysmal. Why the disappointing response? Perhaps, it is because software acquisition is accurately recognized as not being a career field of its own; perhaps, it is because the realization has not sunk in that (almost) all systems are information systems and the ubiquitous 'thing' that collects, transfers, manipulates, presents, secures, assures, and archives that information is software; perhaps it is the draw down of the acquisition work force; or perhaps it is because software acquisition courses are perceived as just another set of educational requirements that takes the participant out of his or her workplace.

For whatever reason, the "software education crisis" is not being rectified, and the 'dragon' still roams the land. The students' evaluations of the courses indicate that the colleges have developed quality programs that meet the needs of the software acquisition professional. This shortfall means that seats are readily available. In the context of the overwhelming individual and societal needs, the excuses are meaningless and unavailing. Malcolm Forbes has been quoted as saying,

"Education's purpose is to replace an empty mind with an open one."

Those who agree should visit one of the following web sites or contact the authors of this article.
www.ndu.edu
www.dau.mil

The views in this article are those of the authors and do not reflect the official policy or position of
the Defense Acquisition University, the National Defense University, the Department of Defense, or the U.S. Government.

Lawrence I. Baker is a Professor of Engineering Management in the Technology and Engineering Department and the Program Director for information technology course development at the Defense Acquisition University. He was formerly a member of the Software Acquisition Management Department at the Defense Systems Management College. Including his last nine years of government service, his background includes over 40 years of systems, software, and hardware experience in information technology with an emphasis on collection, transmission, processing, presentation, securing, and archiving. Mr. Baker earned his Baccalaureate Degree in Electrical Engineering (BEE) from the City College of New York in 1959 and his Master of Science (Systems Management) from the University of Southern California in 1986.

L. John Michel is a Professor of Systems Management at the Information Resources Management College, the National Defense University. Currently, he manages the course: Assuring the Information Infrastructure. He formerly managed Advanced Software Acquisition Management and Software Management for Executives. He has over 22 years experience in programmatic aspects of software intensive systems in the command and control, intelligence, and personnel communities. He has a BBA and MBA from the University of Georgia.

Author Contact Information
Mr. L. John Michel, III 300 5th Avenue Marshall Hall (Building 62) Fort Lesley J. McNair, DC 20319 Phone: 202-685-2062 DSN: 325-2062 E-mail: [email protected]	Mr. Lawrence I. Baker Defense Acquisition University 9820 Belvoir Road Fort Belvoir VA 22060 Phone: 703-805-3636 DSN: 655-3636 E-mail: [email protected]

---