Jan 7
2013
First in a Series
By Bill Scherlis
Chief Technology Officer, Acting
The Department of Defense (DoD) has become deeply and fundamentally reliant on software. As a federally funded research and development center (FFRDC),
the SEI is chartered to work with the DoD to meet the challenges of
designing, producing, assuring, and evolving software-reliant systems in
an affordable and dependable manner. This blog post—the first in a
multi-part series—outlines key elements of the forthcoming SEI Strategic
Research Plan that addresses these challenges through research and
acquisition support and collaboration with DoD, other federal agencies,
industry, and academia.
Read more...
Dec 17
2012
By Troy Townsend,
Senior Analyst
SEI Innovation Center
The
majority of research in cyber security focuses on incident response or
network defense, either trying to keep the bad guys out or facilitating
the isolation and clean-up when a computer is compromised. It’s hard to
find a technology website that’s not touting articles on fielding better
firewalls, patching operating systems, updating anti-virus signatures,
and a slew of other technologies to help detect or block malicious
actors from getting on your network. What’s missing from this picture is
a proactive understanding of who the threats are and how they intend to
use the cyber domain to get what they want. Our team of
researchers—which included Andrew Mellinger, Melissa Ludwick, Jay McAllister, and Kate Ambrose Sereno—sought
to help organizations bolster their cyber security posture by
leveraging best practices in methodologies and technologies that provide
a greater understanding of potential risks and threats in the cyber
domain. This blog posting describes how we are approaching this
challenge and what we have discovered thus far.
Read more...
Nov 19
2012
By Linda Parker Gates
Senior Member of the Technical Staff
Acquisition Support Program
Organizational
improvement efforts should be driven by business needs, not by the
content of improvement models. While improvement models, such as the Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) or the Baldrige Criteria for Performance Excellence,
provide excellent guidance and best practice standards, the way in
which those models are implemented must be guided by the same drivers
that influence any other business decision. Business drivers are the
collection of people, information, and conditions that initiate and
support activities that help an organization accomplish its mission.
These drivers should be the guiding force behind performance improvement
because they represent key factors or influences that matter to an
organization’s success. But how do we identify these drivers? This blog
posting, the latest in a continuing series on the SEI’s work on strategic planning,
describes how we are using integrated strategic planning and the
associated information framework to derive the most vital business
drivers for performance improvement.
Read more...
Oct 8
2012
By Suzanne Miller,
Senior Member of the Technical Staff
Acquisition Support Program
All
software engineering and management practices are based on cultural and
social assumptions. When adopting new practices, leaders often find
mismatches between those assumptions and the realities within their
organizations. The SEI has an analysis method called Readiness and Fit
Analysis (RFA) that allows the profiling of a set of practices to
understand their cultural assumptions and then to use the profile to
support an organization in understanding its fit with the practices’
cultural assumptions. RFA has been used for multiple technologies and
sets of practices, most notably for adoption of CMMI practices. The method for using RFA and the profile that supports CMMI for Development adoption is found in Chapter 12 of CMMI Survival Guide: Just Enough Process Improvement. This blog post discusses a brief summary of the principles behind RFA and describes the SEI Acquisition Support Program’s
work in extending RFA to support profiling and adoption risk
identification for Department of Defense (DoD) and other
highly-regulated organizations that are considering or are in the middle
of adopting agile methods.
Read more...
Sep 24
2012
By Don Firesmith
Senior Member of the Technical Staff
Acquisition Support Program
Engineering
the architecture for a large and complex system is a hard, lengthy, and
complex undertaking. System architects must perform many tasks and use
many techniques if they are to create a sufficient set of architectural
models and related documents that are complete, consistent, correct,
unambiguous, verifiable, usable, and useful to the architecture’s many
stakeholders. This blog posting, the second in a two-part series, takes
a deeper dive into the Method Framework for Engineering System Architectures (MFESA), which is a situational process engineering framework for developing system-specific methods to engineer system architectures.
Read more...
Recent Comments