Potential Difficulties in Managing Safety-Critical Computing Projects: a Sociological View

  • Margaret Tierney


The paper reviews the emergence of project management frameworks in commercial computing environments. It suggests that there is a tension between “scientific” and “industrial” solutions to controlling software development, and that most strategies for dealing with the management of the software labour process, and of relations with users and the rest of the organisation, are shaped by the latter set of concerns. In contrast, certain kinds of safety-critical software development depend heavily on a “scientific” commercial environment and labour process — formal methods, and their practitioners, being a case in point. After reviewing some of the work practices of formal methodists in high-integrity computing, the paper concludes with some research questions about the special difficulties facing project managers of safety-critical projects.


Software Development Formal Method Labour Process Software Production Computing Project 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [Baker and Mills73]
    Baker FT and Mills HD: “Chief Programmer Teams.” in Datamation, December, pp. 58–61, 1973Google Scholar
  2. [Bergl and8l]
    Bergland GD: “A Guided Tour of Program Design Methodologies.” in Computer, October, pp. 13–37, 1981Google Scholar
  3. [Bloomfield et al.91]
    Bloomfield R, Froome P, and Monahan B: “Formal Methods in the Production and Assessment of Safety-Critical Systems” in Reliability Engineering and Systems Safety Vol 31 No 1–2 pp. 51–66, 1991Google Scholar
  4. [Brady et al.92]
    Brady T, Tierney M and Williams R: “The Commodification of Industry-Application Software.” in Industrial and Corporate Change, Winter, 1992Google Scholar
  5. [Braverman74]
    Braverman H: Labor and Monopoly Capital. Monthly Review Press, New York, 1974Google Scholar
  6. [Brooks75]
    Brooks FP: The Mythical Man-Month. Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass., 1975Google Scholar
  7. [Brooks86]
    Brooks FP: “No Silver Bullet - Essence and Accidents of Software Engineering.” in H-J Kugler (ed) Information Processing 86. Elservier Science Publishers (North Holland), 1986Google Scholar
  8. [Buxton 90]
    Buxton JN: “Software Engineering–20 Years On and 20 Years Back.” in Journal of Systems Software Vol 13 pp. 153–155, 1990Google Scholar
  9. [Child84]
    Child J: “New Technology and Developments in Management Organisation.” in OMEGA: International Journal of Management Science. Vol 12 No 3, 1984Google Scholar
  10. [Coleman90]
    Coleman D: “The Technology Transfer of Formal Methods: What’s Going Wrong?” paper presented to the Workshop on Industrial Use of Formal Methods, Nice, March, 1990Google Scholar
  11. [Collins85]
    Collins H: Changing Order: Replication and Induction in Scientific Practice. Sage, 1985Google Scholar
  12. [Dahl et al.72]
    Dahl O-J, Dijkstra EW and Hoare CAR: Structured Programming. Academic Press, London, 1972MATHGoogle Scholar
  13. [Dijkstra69]
    Dijkstra EW: “On the Interplay between Mathematics and Programming.” in Program Construction, Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer, New York pp. 35–46, 1969Google Scholar
  14. [DoD85]
    Department of Defense: Trusted Computer System Evaluation Criteria. Department of Defense, December, 1985Google Scholar
  15. [Douglas86]
    Douglas M: Risk Acceptability according to the Social Sciences. Routledge, 1986Google Scholar
  16. [Fleck and Tierney9l]
    Fleck J and Tierney M: “The Management of Expertise: Knowledge, Power and the Economics of Expert Labour.” Edinburgh PICT Working Paper, No. 29, 1991Google Scholar
  17. [Friedman 89]
    Friedman A: Computer Systems Development: History, Organisation and Implementation. John Wiley & Sons, 1989Google Scholar
  18. [Friedman and Greenbaum84]
    Friedman A and Greenbaum J: “Wanted: Renaissance People.” in Datamation. September, 1984Google Scholar
  19. Greenbaum 79] Greenbaum J: In the Name of Efficiency. Temple, Philadelphia, 1979Google Scholar
  20. [Ha1190]
    Hall A: “Seven Myths of Formal Methods.” in IEEE Software, September, 1990Google Scholar
  21. [Harding and Gilbert9l]
    Harding S and Gilbert N: “Taking Up Formal Methods.” paper presented to the SPRU/CICT Workshop on Policy Issues in Systems and Software Development, July, Science Policy Research Unit, Brighton, 1991Google Scholar
  22. [Ince and Andrews90]
    Ince D and Andrews D (eds): The Software Life-Cycle. Butterworths, 1990Google Scholar
  23. [Jackson89]
    Jackson M: “Formal Methods and Critical Software Development” in SafetyNet 89 Conference Proceedings, RSRE, on Industrial Experience of Formal Methods. SafetyNet, Worcester, 1989Google Scholar
  24. [Kraft 77]
    Kraft P: Programmers and Managers: The Routinization of Computer Programming in the United States. Springer, New York, 1977Google Scholar
  25. [Lucas 84]
    Lucas H: “Organisational Power and the Information Services Department.” in Communications of the ACM. Vol 27 No 1, January, 1984Google Scholar
  26. [MacKenzie 90]
    MacKenzie D: Inventing Accuracy: A Historical Sociology of Nuclear Missile Guidance. MIT, 1990Google Scholar
  27. [Macro and Buxton87]
    Macro A and Buxton J: The Craft of Software Engineering. Addison-Wesley, 1987Google Scholar
  28. [MoD91]
    Ministry of Defence: “Interim Defence Standard 00–55–The Procurement of Safety-Critical Software in Defence Equipment.” MOD, April 1991Google Scholar
  29. [Naur and Rande1169]
    Naur P and Randell B (eds): Software Engineering. Report on a conference sponsored by the NATO Science Committee, Garmisch, Germany, 7–11 Oct 1968. Scientific Affairs Division, NATO, Brussels, 1969Google Scholar
  30. [Newman and Rosenberg85]
    Newman M and Rosenberg D: “Systems Analysts and the Politics of Organisational Control.” in N Piercy (ed) The Management Implications of New Technology. Croom Helm, 1985Google Scholar
  31. [Pelaez88]
    Pelaez E: A Gift from Pandora’s Box: the Software Crisis. PhD Thesis, Edinburgh University, 1988Google Scholar
  32. [Sommerville89]
    Sommerville I: Software Engineering. 3rd Edition. Addison-Wesley, 1989Google Scholar
  33. [Tierney9l]
    Tierney M: “The Formation and Fragmentation of Computing as an Occupation: A Review of Shifting Technical Expertise.” Edinburgh PICT Working Paper, No. 25. Edinburgh University, 1991Google Scholar
  34. [Tierney 92]
    Tierney M: “Formal Methods of Software Development: Painted into the Corner of High-Integrity Computing?” in Ryan P and Sennett C (eds) FM91 Workshop Proceedings, Springer, 1992Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Limited 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • Margaret Tierney
    • 1
  1. 1.Research Centre for Social SciencesEdinburgh UniversityEdinburghUK

Personalised recommendations