Author: Gautam Brahma
 Quality
has been defined differently by different people. Goodness,
Fitness for Use, Minimum Lifetime Cost and many other definitions
have been proposed and still find many takers. One particularly
neat definition has come from Philip Crosby and has become
very popular among practicing managers. Crosby defines quality
as 'conformance to requirements'. This implies that quality
is defined by the customer or user. The same artifact may
appear to have high quality for one set of users and low quality
for another set of users. This definition has worked very
well for software as it suggests a practical way of determining
quality viz. capture requirements accurately, design tests
to cover all requirements, and use these tests to assess conformance.
Of late, companies have started realizing that software mediates
customer experiences. In simpler terms, the impressions that
customers or prospective customers form about a company are
shaped by that company's software as available on its web
site, its call center, its billing department, and other departments
that rely on software for efficient information processing.
It is this software that customers actually interact with
when they think they are interacting with the company. Software
is, thus, being seen as strategically important even by many
companies whose core business is far removed from IT. This
has resulted in renewed interest in determining what constitutes
software quality and the subject is attracting sharp thinkers
from outside the group of traditional software engineering
researchers.
One evidence of this is a recent article in the Sep-Oct 199
issue of the Harvard Business Review where C. K. Prahalad
the leading writer, thinker and researcher in the area of
corporate strategy has addressed the issue of quality in the
information age. Along with co-author M. S. Krishnan, Prahalad
has analyzed the current trends in software design and usage.
The authors suggest that conformance to requirements is no
longer an adequate yard stick. They say that software users
are tolerant of defects but relatively intolerant of poor
response in addressing these defects. In other words, users
'define quality according to their experience with the technical
support center'. Also, the authors suggest another dimension
to software quality, which is the development of new and innovative
features at a constant rate. Users perceive high quality in
software that is continuously evolving to provide more benefits
over more platforms and operating environments.
These trends have great significance for organizations like
Aricent. Which is why we organized a session recently where one
of the authors, Prof. M. S. Krishnan of the University of
Michigan School of Business, addressed senior executives on
the implications of his work. With the significant thrust
that we are making in the area of software products we find
it critically important to ensure quality in all its emerging
dimensions. And keeping in touch with the thought leaders
in this area, and building on their insights, is the best
way of making this happen.
- BACK -
Last updated : February 2, 2004
|
