Firms accept there is a problem with quality but say users must
share the blame
The debate over software quality continues to rage in the user
community amid accusations of suppliers releasing too many
poor-quality products that have not been sufficiently tested.
IT directors and industry bodies such as Tif and the British
Computer Society's Elite group have called on suppliers to conduct
more testing to iron out bugs and glitches before releasing
software and listen more closely to users' needs and grievances.
Not surprisingly, software suppliers are reluctant to shoulder all
the blame for the perceived lack of software quality, although they
accept it is an issue.
"Nobody makes perfect software," said Andy Cobbold, customer
support director for the UK and Northern Europe at software
supplier BMC. "It is a nice concept but it would be too expensive.
You can only test so far."
Software firm Serena, for example, said it tries to look at 80% of
the problems that could arise from its products as it believes that
aiming for 100% would be neither feasible or popular with users.
"The software would not be there to meet users' time needs and it
would be hopelessly expensive," said Chuck Henderson, director of
product marketing at Serena Software.
"There is a balance that needs to be met between customer
expectations for complete flawlessness and timeframes and
price."
However, Clive Grummett, vice-chairman of the testing group at IT
supplier association Intellect said it was "outrageous" for
suppliers to say they cannot do more to reduce the number of faults
in their software.
"Insufficient emphasis is given to testing products before they are
released and far too many faults find their way into software
products," said Grummett. "Our industry has suffered too much from
faulty software."
Grummett believes users underestimate the damage poor-quality
software causes. "I think many users are unaware of how much these
faults cost them - they tend to view it in terms of irritation," he
said.
Some suppliers, including Microsoft, accept that they need to do
more. "I agree that customers should demand the highest quality
software; I also agree that as an industry we have a major problem
with patch management at the moment," said Stuart Okin, chief
security officer at Microsoft. "As an industry, we need to do a
much better job than we have done in the past."
Okin said there needs to be a more symbiotic relationship between
users and suppliers.
"It is something we need to work together on and we need to raise
the bar," he said. "It is a truism that there is no such thing as a
perfect system or perfect code but you cannot hide behind that.
There are acceptable and unacceptable levels of software quality."
Peter Robertshaw, director of marketing at SAP UK, said the
software industry should be constantly focused on improving
quality, so criticism from users should be "taken on the
chin".
To improve the quality of its own software, SAP is working more
closely with its customers in the development phase. Another focus
is making products easier to use. "Often what is seen as a quality
problem is in the usability," said Robertshaw.
BMC has set up a team within its customer support division that has
the ability to block products if it is not happy with their quality
and robustness. "We have adopted a proactive approach to stop
problems before the software goes out the door," said Cobbold.
However, some suppliers are keen to point out that users need to
accept some of the responsibility for the situation. "It is not an
issue that can be entirely placed in the lap of the suppliers, we
do the best we can to supply the software customers ask for in the
timeframe and price range they ask for," said Henderson.
Henderson said users can sometimes cause problems through heavily
customising software, inadequate training, poor change management,
and buying the wrong product for the job. "Software quality is a
very broad term and is sometimes used for a product that doesn't
work the way the user wants it to," he said.
The bottom line is that while "perfect" software may be
unattainable, more needs to be done to improve software quality and
users and suppliers need to work together - trading insults and
passing the buck is unlikely to rectify the situation.
Daniel Dresner, standards manager at the National Computing Centre,
said, "There is a toolbox of existing standards built on lessons
learnt from the successes and failures experienced by software
engineers worldwide. We all need to be prepared to negotiate the
balance of time/quality/content/cost. We must not just chant the
quality mantra of 'plan-do-check-act' but to realise it too."