Definition of a COTS Integration Process Steve Nelson Raytheon Presented to ASEE 5 March, 2002

Agenda Introduction Why COTS? COTS Advantages The Problems SEI Lessons Learned The Solutions The Process Summary

COTS-Based Systems COTS-Solution Single vendor Pre-Integrated e.g. Payroll ‘Turn Key’ COTS-Integration Usually different vendors Multiple Components ‘Glue Code’

Why COTS? Single Customer Expense Inflexible and unable to easily capitalize on technical advances Historically – field 10-year old technology Increased availability ‘Silver Bullet’

COTS Advantages Reduced Costs Availability Shortened Schedule (no ‘development’ & test) Reduced Risk Improved Quality (more users ‘testing’) Maintenance transferred to vendor updates

The Problems To gain benefits, COTS must be used ‘as is’ Most COTS is not designed to work together Lack of true integration experience & product expertise Constant, asynchronous product updates Problems Percolate Market driven upgrades (no control) COTS unique aspects (upgrades, licensing, etc.) No development process Attitudes (‘plug-n-play’, home computers)

SEI Lessons Learned COTS acquisition started after contract award COTS source-code changed to meet customer requirements I&T uncovered further business practice differences COTS Schedule = Custom Development COTS requirements & selection pre-contract award No COTS modifications! Requirements flexibility Early customer and vendor involvement Contracting officer won award!

The Solutions Vendor and customer cooperation EARLY! COTS Evaluation/Domain Groups Standards Gurus Training Investment Historical Data  COTS Product Database  COTS Procedures Database (install, config, & integration) PROCESS

See first page of ‘ProcessA0.doc’

See second page of ‘ProcessA0.doc’

SUMMARY Process – early involvement, early COTS, iterative, emphasis on learning from previous COTS Product Database COTS Procedures Database Support from Domain and Standards Gurus Trained Engineers It’s an investment in the future