Insurance companies still spend a lot of money maintaining the infrastructure for their core legacy apps. This is an opportunity cost for them as they could have spent that money to change and innovate on other fronts like new product development, distribution channels and customer experience.
During last week’s webinar on IT Transformation featuring Marc Cecere, vice president and principal analyst for Forrester Research, many questions presented by participants went unanswered due to time constraints. Because these questions are likely being asked by many in the IT arena, we asked Marc’s webinar co-host, Pete Pizzutillo of CAST to provide answers to the three most frequently asked questions.
What does it mean to institute software quality and velocity in large IT set-ups? Many organizations have IT teams that diverge into two separate groups. One group works in the “Scrum” — following the speed of the business, adapting new technologies, and pushing innovation. The second group is still in the traditional waterfall-driven operational and process management IT model. How would you address the velocity vs. quality tradeoff when bridging both opens the door for software issues?
The term ‘technical debt’ and the challenges it can bring are becoming more widely understood and discussed by IT and business leaders alike. But many organizations are still struggling with how to mobilize a plan to eliminate technical debt and fix related issues.
Whether you are taking steps toward putting a technical debt reversal strategy in place or simply want to learn more about what it may mean for your organization, register now for our upcoming webinar to hear David Sisk and Scott Buchholz, directors for Deloitte Consulting LLP’s U.S. Technology Practice discuss how technical debt may be the origin of your software system issues.
We just finished up the 30-minute webinar where Dr. Bill Curtis, our Chief Scientist, described some of the findings that are about to be published by CAST Research Labs. The CRASH (CAST Research on Application Software Health) report for 2014 is chock full of new data on software risk, code quality and technical debt. We expect the initial CRASH report to be produced in the next month, and based on some of the inquiries we’ve received so far, we will probably see a number of smaller follow-up studies come out of the 2014 CRASH data.
This year’s CRASH data that we saw Bill present is based on 1316 applications, comprising 706 million lines of code – a pretty large subset of the overall Appmarq repository. This means the average application in the sample was 536 KLOC. We’re talking big data for BIG apps here. This is by far the biggest repository of enterprise IT code quality and technical debt research data. Some of the findings presented included correlations between the health factors – we learned that Performance Efficiency is pretty uncorrelated to other health factors and that Security is highly correlated to software Robustness. We also saw how the health factor scores were distributed across the sample set and the differences in structural code quality by outsourcing, offshoring, Agile and CMMI level.
Register now to hear CAST SVP & Chief Scientist, Dr. Bill Curtis, discuss the current state of the IT software industry and it’s impact on your software risk management strategy.
Every week CIOs are seeing the staggering costs and business consequences of software problems in their critical applications. Consequently they are placing greater emphasis on their software risk management strategy.
Did the switch to Agile reduce defects and cost of ownership? Should we stick with our existing outsourcer? Is there a quality difference between domestic and offshore development? And, lastly, did we reduce our technical debt overall?
This Mark Twain quote comes back to me whenever I think about the central role that ERP platforms play in the innovation efforts of many organizations. How long has it been since we first started to hear that ERP was dead?
It was well over 10 years ago that the inflexibility of ERP systems led naysayers to predict that it would be phased out and replaced by more modular and adaptable applications that would be better equipped to support the many unique aspects of each enterprise. More recently, the cloud/SaaS/subscription model pundits began the charge again.