Introducing CAST’s Software Analytics “BCG Matrix”

The BCG matrix is a classic planning model devised in the 1960s by the Boston Consulting Group and copied henceforth by every other advisory firm. It is typically used to help organizations decide which areas of their business deserve more resources and investment. The matrix traditionally categorizes products within a company’s portfolio according to growth rate, market share, and cash flow.
Since we’re doing a webinar with BCG, we thought we would come up with one such matrix to sort what we do for a living. CAST’s variant — the Software Analytics Matrix — outlines the four key archetypes found amongst IT analysts and the two simple variables which define them.

The Best Software Analysis and Measurement Engine Just Got Better

In this era of big data, analytics has become an invaluable tool for IT organizations to succeed. Not only for ensuring a high quality product, but also keeping your customers safe from malicious hackers and application crashes. Despite the obvious need, some executives struggle with the business case for proper software analytics and opt for skunk-work metrics that are less accurate and more expensive.
That’s why for the newest release of our Application Intelligence Platform — AIP 7.3 — we focused on making an enterprise software analysis and measurement program more streamlined, informative, and customizable. You can read more about the newest release of AIP in a release we put out this morning, but we wanted to highlight some of the most important new capabilities here on the blog.

IT Needs New Ways To Talk About Quality!

Gartner report highlights “application development managers need new ways to demonstrate and communicate the business value of software quality for innovation projects.”
Gartner’s recent report, “How to Demonstrate the Business Value of Software Quality for Systems of Innovation,” by analyst Maritess Sobejana and published July 31, 2014, attempts to tackle the longtime challenge of aligning business and application development perspectives. The most critical systems within an organizations’ portfolio — systems of innovation — are high-stakes applications for organizations and thus are good place to start.

Traditional Testing Alone Won’t Stop Software Outages & Hacks

Modern software systems have become so complex, with software components interacting across multiple application layers, there’s no way one single developer can hope to conceptualize how it all fits together. A National Research Council study found that as we demand higher levels of assurance, traditional testing cannot deliver the dependability required at a reasonable cost. At the intersection of these two realities lies the biggest problem facing software development today: architecturally complex violations.
Architecturally complex violations are structural flaws involving interactions among components that reside in different application layers. Although they constitute only 8% of the vulnerabilities in an application, they represent 52% of the repair effort, require 20 times more changes to fix, and are 8 times more likely to escape into testing and 6 times more likely to escape into operations.

Software Quality In Action Forum: Confronting IT Risk & Cost


Join CAST on Thursday, October 16th for a practitioner forum on operationalizing software analytics to confront the growing IT risk in a controlled and cost-effective manner.
The CAST Software Quality in Action forum will feature Dr. Bill Curtis, Director of the Consortium for IT Software Quality,  and Melinda Ballou, Program Director of IDC. As well as practitioner presentations from Mike Furniss of The Coca-Cola Company and Nilesh Vaidya, Head of IT Transformation, Capgemini. They will share their experience and examples in operationalizing software analytics to reduce IT cost and prevent risk in their organizations
Learn More>>

IT Experts Respond to Controversial 2014 CRASH Report: Agile Alone is Not Enough

We knew that the most recent findings from our 2014 CRASH Report would cause a stir among the software development community — especially Agile advocates — but we were pleasantly surprised by the overwhelmingly positive reception the news received.
Much of the feedback mirrored opinions we’ve heard from industry insiders, but were largely ignored by the development community who accepted ‘pure’ Agile as the epitome of development methods. Many who have worked on large business critical systems felt attention to architecture up front was necessary to avoid serious constraints or painful re-architecting later in development.

When It Comes To Code Quality: Agile, Waterfall, or Both?

Supporters of the Agile development methodology have long held that the traditional Waterfall approach to software development was slow, bloated, and unnecessary. The fast-cycle, short sprints of Agile development gave it an edge in a world that moved in Internet time. On the other hand, Waterfall advocates claimed the move to Agile was too swift and that the shorter sprint times would result in architectural weaknesses and increase coding errors. It seemed like a religious debate with no clear winner, one that would rage on for a long time.