None of the software development organizations I am familiar with
(Rockwell Software, Microsoft, IBM, Sun Microssystems) have separate
development and maintenance organizations, but I am aware that there are
organizations that make this separation.  This has lead me to speculate
as to the conditions under which such a separation makes sense.

All of the organizations I am familiar with follow an incremental
development model.  Additional major new functionality is added to a
product over an extended time period after the initial release.

In contrast, some organizations follow a replacement model.  Except for
maintenance work to fix bugs and cope with environment changes, no
major changes are made in a piece of software until it is replaced by
a completely new piece of software that was written "from scratch."
If this is the case, then having a maintenance organization that works
on the old piece of software and a different, development organization
that works on the new software is a reasonable organizational structure.

Under what circumstances does a replacement model make sense?  Here are
some of the situations that I would guess would encourage a replacement
model:

1. The product involves tightly coupled hardware and software.  Major
system upgrades require both hardware and software changes.  Major new
software changes are always designed to  use the latest hardware upgrades.
Under these circumstances,  it requires less effort to completely replace
previous implimentations than to try and add new functionality to them.

2. The product is built on obsolete technology that cannot be upgraded
or converted. An example might be a main frame version of an application
in an organization that is moving to a distributed environment. Again,
under these circumstances, costs would probably be lower to write a new
distributed application "from scratch" than to try and convert the main
frame application to distributed form.

As warned at the beginning of this note, I have no direct experience with
organizations that practice a replacement model.  It would interesting
to here from members of the PPIG community how far off the mark I am.

Ruven Brooks

Reply via email to