2. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Process Learning, Process Maturity and Project Closeout James R. Burns

3. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Learning vs. Maturity n Learning is very different from maturing n Learning is similar to the concepts of Lean n Learning is not measured directly, but its effects are measured by profit, cost, quality, cycle time, productivity, etc. n Maturity is measured on a scale of 0 to 5 using a maturity model

4. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Learning n Has its origins in systems thinking n Was popularized by Peter Senge in his book n THE FIFTH DISCIPLINE

5. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University The Potential of Wisdom Teams n Bill Russell’s Experience of Alignment and Synergism –His play would rise to a new level –He would be in the white heat of competition, yet not feel competitive –Every fake, cut and pass would be surprising, yet nothing could surprise him –Like we were playing in slow motion

6. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Alignment n A necessary condition for EMPOWERMENT –Empowering non-aligned individuals worsens the chaos and makes managing the team even more difficult n For Jazz musicians, it is called “being in the groove”

7. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Alignment and Synergism n Meetings will last for hours, yet fly by n No one remembers who said what, but knowing we had really come to a shared understanding n Of never having to vote (because there is so much CONSENSUS)

8. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Team Learning: A definition n The process of aligning and developing the capacity of a team to create the results its members truly desire n It builds on the capacity of shared vision n It also builds on personal mastery n Knowing how to play together n Teams are the key learning unit in organizations

9. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University The Discipline of Team Learning n The team’s accomplishments can set the tone and establish a standard for learning together for the larger organization n Has three critical dimensions

10. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Three critical dimensions n First, there is a need to think insightfully about complex issues –Teams must learn how to tap the potential for many minds to be more intelligent than one mind n Second, there is a need for innovative, coordinated action n Third, there is the role of team members on other teams on other teams –A learning team fosters other learning teams through inculcating the practices and skills of team learning

11. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University The discipline of team learning n Is a collective one n It is meaningless to say that “I,” as an individual, am mastering the discipline of team learning –In the same sense that it is meaningless to say “I am mastering the practice of being a great jazz ensemble.” n Involves mastering the practices of dialogue and discussion

12. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Dialogue and Discussion n Are potentially complementary, but most teams lack the ability to distinguish between the two n Teams must learn how to deal creatively with the powerful forces opposing productive dialogue and discussion –Argyris: defensive routines--ways of interacting that protect us from threat or embarrassment, but which also prevent us from learning

13. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Skills!! Inquiry Reflection DialogueDiscussion

14. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Defensive postures n Systems thinking is especially prone to evoking defensiveness because of its central message, that our actions create our reality n The problems we perceive are caused by our actions, not by external, exogenous forces outside of us

15. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Practice n The discipline of team learning requires practice n Teams do not practice enough, generally n A great play or great orchestra does not happen without practice n Neither does a great sports team n Such teams learn by continual movement between performance and practice

16. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University The State of Team Learning n TL is poorly understood n We cannot describe the phenomenon well--no measures n There are no overarching theories n We cannot distinguish team learning from groupthink n There are few reliable methods for building team learning

17. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Need for Team Learning n Has never been greater n Complexity of today’s problems demands it n Actions of teams must be innovative and coordinated

18. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Skills Underlying Team Learning Team Learning Personal Mastery Shared Vision Systems Thinking

19. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Werner Heisenberg n Science is rooted in conversations n Cooperation of different people may culminate in scientific results of the utmost importance n Collectively, we can be more insightful, more intelligent than we can possibly be individually

20. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University David Bohm n A leading quantum theorist n Developed a theory and method of “dialogue” when a group “becomes open to the flow of a larger intelligence” n Quantum theory implies that the universe is basically an indivisible whole

21. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Bohm’s recent research on dialogue n A unique synthesis of the two major intellectual currents –systems or holistic view of nature –interactions between our internal models and our perceptions and actions n Reminiscent of systems thinking which calls attention to how behavior is often the consequence of our own actions as guided by our perceptions

22. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Bohm on the PURPOSE OF SCIENCE n not the accumulation of knowledge, since all scientific theories are eventually proved false n Rather, the creation of mental maps that guide and shape our perception and action, bringing about a constant “mutual participation between nature and consciousness”

23. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Bohm’s most distinctive contribution n Thought is “largely a collective phenomenon” n Analogy between the collective properties of electrons vs. way our thoughts work n Leads to an understanding of the general counter productiveness of thought

24. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Bohm’s contribution, continued n “our thought is incoherent… and the resulting counter-productiveness lies at the root of the world’s problems” Prepared by James R. Burns

25. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University More Bohm n As electrons, we must look on thought as a systemic phenomena arising from how we interact and discourse with one another

26. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Dialogue and Discussion n Suspending assumptions n Seeing each other as colleagues n A Facilitator Who Holds the Context of Dialogue n Balancing Dialogue and Discussion n Reflection, Inquiry and Dialogue

27. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Dialogue and Discussion n Their power lies in their synergy n No synergy without an understanding of their distinctions n DISCUSSION--like a ping/pong game where the topic gets hit around –subject is analyzed and diagnosed from many points of view n Emphasis is on winning--having one’s view accepted by the group

28. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University More Dialogue and Discussion n A sustained emphasis on winning is not compatible with giving first priority to coherence and truth n To bring about a change of priorities from “winning” to “pursuit of the truth”, a dialogue is necessary

29. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Dialogue n From the Greek, it means “through the meaning”; “meaning passing or moving through” n Through dialogue, a group accesses a larger “pool of common meaning” which cannot be accessed individually. n “The whole organizes the parts”

30. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University More Dialogue n Purpose is not to win, but to go beyond any one individual’s understanding n In dialogue, individuals gain insights that simply could not be gained individually n In dialogue, individuals explore difficult, complex issues from many points of view n Dialogue reveals the incoherence in our thought

31. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University The Purpose of Dialogue n To reveal the incoherence in our thought-- three types of incoherence n Thought denies that it is participative n Thought stops tracking reality and just goes, like a program »We misperceive the thoughts as our own, because we fail to see the stream of collective thinking from which they arise n Thought establishes its own standard of reference for fixing problems

32. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Incoherent thought n Thought stands in front of us and pretends that it does not represent n We become trapped in the theater of our thoughts n Dialogue is a way of helping people to “see the representative and participative nature of thought” n In dialogue, people become observers of their own thinking

33. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Suspending Assumptions [HOLDING THEM IN FRONT OF YOU] [HOLDING THEM IN FRONT OF YOU] n Difficult because thought deludes us into a view that this is the way it is

34. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Seeing each other as Colleagues n Necessary because thought is participative n Necessary to establish a positive tone and offset the vulnerability that dialogue brings n Does not mean that you need to agree or share the same views

35. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Dialogue, Colleagues, and Hierarchy n Choosing to view “adversaries” as “colleagues with different views” has the greatest benefits n Hierarchy is antithetical to dialogue, yet is difficult to escape in organizations

36. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Dialogue, Colleagues, and Hierarchy n People who are used to holding the prevailing view because of their senior position, must surrender that privilege in dialogue, AND CONVERSELY n Dialogue must be playful--playing with the ideas, evaluating and testing them Prepared by James R. Burns

37. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University A Facilitator Who “Holds the Context” of Dialogue n In the absence of a skilled facilitator, our habits pull us toward discussion and away from dialogue n Carries out many of the basic duties of a good “process facilitator”

38. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University A Facilitator, Continued n But the facilitator is allowed to influence the flow of development simply through participating n As teams develop skill in dialogue, the role of the facilitator becomes less crucial Prepared by James R. Burns

39. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Balancing Dialogue and Discussion n Discussion is the necessary counterpart of dialogue n In discussion different views are presented and defended, which may provide a useful analysis of the whole situation n In dialogue, different views are presented as a means toward discovering a new view n Thesis – Antithesis, leading to Synthesis

40. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Dialog Vs. Discussion n Dialogue established the view that leads to courses of action n Discussion leads to new courses of action without establishing that new view n Teams that dialogue regularly develop a deep trust that cannot help but carry over to discussion

41. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Dealing with “Current Reality”: Conflict, and Defensive Routines n An overbearing, charismatic, and intimidating posture n Craig Bean: his experiences at TI and why TI does not today own any share in the huge personal computer business n Is there a conflict between alignment and being open to dialogue???

42. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Great Teams vs. Mediocre Teams n A team that is continually learning is the visible conflict of ideas n In great teams, conflict becomes productive, inducing the need for ongoing dialogue n Argyris: the difference between great teams and mediocre teams lies in how they face conflict and deal with the defensiveness that invariably surrounds conflict

43. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Defensive Routines n Entrenched habits we use to protect ourselves from the embarrassment and threat that come with exposing our thinking. n Form a protective shell around our deepest assumptions n Forceful, articulate, intimidating CEO’s n Cannot be seen

44. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Defensive Routines n In some organizations, to have incomplete or faulty understanding is a sign of weakness or incompetence n IT IS SIMPLY UNACCEPTABLE FOR MANAGERS TO ACT AS THOUGH THEY DO NOT KNOW WHAT IS CAUSING A PROBLEM n To protect their belief, managers must close themselves to alternative views and make themselves uninfluenceable

45. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Defensive Routines n Defensive becomes an accepted part of organizational culture n We are the carriers of defensive routines and organizations are the hosts n Defensive routines block the flow of energy in a team that might otherwise contribute toward a common vision

46. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University A Shifting the Burden Archetype Defensive Routines THREAT Learning Gap Perceived need for new understanding and behavior Need for Inquiry and change Delay Current Understanding and behavior

47. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Maturity Models n Software Quality Function Deployment n Capability Maturity Model n Project Maturity Model

48. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Quality Function Deployment Translates the “voice of the customer” into technical design requirements Translates the “voice of the customer” into technical design requirements Customer is King Customer is King Displays requirements in matrix diagrams Displays requirements in matrix diagrams First matrix called “house of quality” First matrix called “house of quality” Series of connected houses Series of connected houses

49. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Quality House Trade-off matrix Design characteristics Customer requirements Target values Relationship matrix Competitive assessment Importance 1 2 3 4 5 6

50. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Irons well Easy and safe to use Competitive Assessment Customer Requirements Customer Requirements12345 X Presses quickly9BAX X Removes wrinkles8ABX X Doesn’t stick to fabric6XBA X Provides enough steam8ABX X Doesn’t spot fabric6XAB X Doesn’t scorch fabric9AXB X Heats quickly6XBA X Automatic shut-off3ABX X Quick cool-down3XAB X Doesn’t break when dropped5ABX X Doesn’t burn when touched5ABX X Not too heavy8XAB

51. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Energy needed to press Weight of iron Size of soleplate Thickness of soleplate Material used in soleplate Number of holes Size of holes Flow of water from holes Time required to reach 450º F Time to go from 450º to 100º Protective cover for soleplate Automatic shutoff Customer Requirements Presses quickly--+++- Removes wrinkles+++++ Doesn’t stick to fabric-++++ Provides enough steam++++ Doesn’t spot fabric+--- Doesn’t scorch fabric+++-+ Heats quickly--+- Automatic shut-off+ Quick cool-down--++ Doesn’t break when dropped++++ Doesn’t burn when touched++++ Not too heavy+---+- Irons well Easy and safe to use

52. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Energy needed to press Weight of iron Size of soleplate Thickness of soleplate Material used in soleplate Number of holes Size of holes Flow of water from holes Time required to reach 450º Time to go from 450º to 100º Protective cover for soleplate Automatic shutoff - - + + +

53. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Energy needed to press Weight of iron Size of soleplate Thickness of soleplate Material used in soleplate Number of holes Size of holes Flow of water from holes Time required to reach 450º Time to go from 450º to 100º Protective cover for soleplate Automatic shutoff Units of measure ft-lblbin.cmtyeammoz/ssecsecY/NY/N Iron A 31.48x42SS27150.545500NY Iron B 41.28x41MG27150.335350NY Our Iron (X) 21.79x54T35150.750600NY Estimated impact 344454325530 Estimated cost 333343334452 Targets 1.28x53SS3030500 Design changes ******* Objective measures

54. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Capability Maturity Model n Developed in preliminary form by Watts Humphries (published in a book he wrote that appeared in 1989) n Refined by the SEI (Software Engineering Institute), a spin-off of Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh n Known as the CMM n Discussed in Larson & Gray, Ch. 16, page 575

55. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Immature Software Organizations n Processes are ad hoc, and occasionally chaotic. n Processes are improvised by practitioners ON THE FLY. n Testing, reviews and walkthroughs usually curtailed under stress. n Quality is unpredictable.

56. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Immature Software Organizations, Cont’d n Costs and schedules are usually exceeded. n Reactionary management is usually firefighting. n Success rides on individual talent and heroic effort. n Technology benefits are lost in the noise.

57. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Mature Software Organizations n Processes are defined and documented. n Roles and responsibilities are clear. n Product and process are measured. n Processes and projects finish on time and within budget n Management has time to plan, monitor, and communicate.

58. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Mature Software Organizations, Cont’d n Quality, costs, and schedules are predictable n Management committed to continuous improvement. n Technology is used effectively within defined processes.

59. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Software Process Definition n Project Planning n Project Management n Software Engineering Procedures n Software standards n Software Quality Evaluation n Software Configuration management

60. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University The Five Levels of Software Process Maturity nInINITIAL nRnREPEATABLE nDnDEFINED nMnMANAGED nOnOPTIMIZING

61. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Five Levels

62. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University 16–61 Organization Project Management in the Long Run n Capability Maturity Model (CMM) –Focuses on guiding and assessing organizations in implementing concrete best practices of managing software development projects. n Organizational Project Maturity Model (OPM3) –Is divided into a continuum of growth levels: initial, repeatable, defined, managed, and optimized.

63. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University 16–62 Project Management Maturity Model FIGURE 16.2

64. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Initial n Software processes are ad hoc, even chaotic n The software processes are not defined n Success depends on individual effort n The environment is not stable

65. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Initial, Continued n The benefits of software engineering practices are undermined n Planning is nonexistent or ineffective n Process capability is unpredictable because the software process is constantly changed or modified as the work progresses

66. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Repeatable n Basic project management policies and procedures are established n Cost, schedule and functionality (scope) are tracked by module and task n A process discipline is put in place to repeat earlier successes n Managing new projects is based on experience with similar projects

67. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Repeatable, Continued n Basic software management controls are installed n Estimations of cost and time to complete are based on history for similar projects n Problems are identified and documented n Software requirements are baselined (made tough to change)

68. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Repeatable, Continued n Project standards are defined n Project teams work with their customers and subcontractors to establish stable, managed working environments n Process is under the control of a project management system that is driven by performance on previous projects n A project performance database is defined and populated

69. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Defined n Software processes are documented n Software processes are standardized and integrated organization-wide n All projects use documented and approved versions of the organization’s processes of developing and maintaining software n A S oftware Engineering Process Group (SEPG) is created to facilitate process definition and improvement efforts

70. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Defined, Continued n Organization-wide training programs are implemented n Organization-wide standard software processes can be refined to encompass the unique characteristics of the project n A peer review process is used to enhance product quality n Process capability is stable and based on a common understanding of processes, roles, and responsibilities in a defined process

71. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Managed n Quantitative quality goals are defined n Product quality and productivity are measured and collected n Both processes and products are quantitatively understood n Both processes and products are controlled using detailed measures n A productivity and quality database is defined

72. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Managed, Continued n Projects achieve control by narrowing the variation in performance to within acceptable boundaries n Process variation is controlled by use of a strategic business plan that details which product lines to pursue n Risks associated with moving up the learning curve of a new application domain are known and carefully managed n Process capability is measured and operating within measurable limits

73. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Optimizing n Continuous process improvement is enabled by quantitative feedback n Continuous process improvement is assessed from testing innovative ideas and technologies n Weak process elements are identified and strengthened n Defect prevention is explicit

74. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Optimizing, Cont’d n Statistical evidence is available on process effectiveness n Innovations that exploit the best software engineering practices are identified n Improvement occurs from –INCREMENTAL ADVANCEMENTS IN EXISTING PROCESSES –INNOVATIONS USING NEW TECHNOLOGIES AND METHODS

75. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University How are firms doing?? n Many U.S. firms have reached the highest level, OPTIMIZING n Indian firms may be doing better

76. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Organizational Project Management Maturity Model (OPM3) 1. Ad-Hoc: The project management process is described as disorganized, and occasionally even chaotic. The organization has not defined systems and processes, and project success depends on individual effort. There are chronic cost and schedule problems. 2. Abbreviated: There are some project management processes and systems in place to track cost, schedule, and scope. Project success is largely unpredictable and cost and schedule problems are common. 3. Organized: There are standardized, documented project management processes and systems that are integrated into the rest of the organization. Project success is more predictable, and cost and schedule performance is improved. 4. Managed: Management collects and uses detailed measures of the effectiveness of project management. Project success is more uniform, and cost and schedule performance conforms to plan. 5. Adaptive: Feedback from the project management process and from piloting innovative ideas and technologies enables continuous improvement. Project success is the norm, and cost and schedule performance is continuously improving.

77. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Enter CMMI: Capability Maturity Model Integration n In 2007, the SEI asserted that it would no longer support the old SW-CMM. n On Dec 31, 2007 all SW-CMM appraisal results were expired n The purpose of the CMMI was to focus process maturity more towards project performance n Organizations must now upgrade to the CMMI n The CMMI is vastly improved over the CMM n Emphasis is on business needs, integration and institutionalization

78. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Slide 77 of 146 CMMI Staged Representation - 5 Maturity Levels Level 5 Initial Level 1 Processes are unpredictable, poorly controlled, reactive. Managed Level 2 Processes are planned, documented, performed, monitored, and controlled at the project level. Often reactive. Defined Level 3 Processes are well characterized and understood. Processes, standards, procedures, tools, etc. are defined at the organizational (Organization X ) level. Proactive. Quantitatively Managed Level 4 Processes are controlled using statistical and other quantitative techniques. Optimizing Process Maturity Process performance continually improved through incremental and innovative technological improvements.

79. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University CMMI Origins n The CMMI was derived from the 1.SW-CMM—capability maturity model for software 2.EIA/IS – electronic Industries Alliance Interim Standard 3.IPD-CMM—Capability Maturity Model for Integrated Product Development 1. CMMI architecture is open and designed to accommodate additional disciplines, like 1.CMMI-DEV – processes for development 2.CMMI-ACQ—processes required for supplier sourcing 3.CMMI-SVC—processes required for services

80. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University CMMI: cap mat model integration n Level 0: Incomplete n No goal. n Level 1: Performed n The process supports and enables achievement of the specific goals of the process area by transforming identifiable input work products to produce identifiable output work products. n Level 2: Managed n The process is institutionalized as a managed process. n Level 3: Defined n The process is institutionalized as a defined process. n Level 4: Quantitatively Managed n The process is institutionalized as a quantitatively managed process. n Level 5: Optimizing n The process is institutionalized as an optimizing process.

81. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Use of this tool has shown… n The Engineering and Construction Industries have a higher level of maturity than do the information systems and software development disciplines

82. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Completing and Terminating a Project James Burns

83. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Completing n Integration Testing –Regression methods n Final Testing n Acceptance Testing n Installation/Conversion n Training

84. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Purpose of Acceptance Testing n to get paid every dime that you are owed!! n When is the best time to write the Acceptance Test Plan n Why??? n Who dictates what those tests will consist of? n Do you think there should be at least one test for each and every defined requirement?

85. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Final, Thorough Test n Do beta testing?? n Run some old integration tests n Devise true-to-life tests n Try to overload the system n Try to break it by entering wrong inputs, out of range values, etc. n Test user documentation as well.

86. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Installation n going live

87. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Training n Usually, not enough budget is set aside for training n At the mid-market level and lower, training budgets are slim –On-line, context-sensitive help is one answer

88. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Conversion n Crash n Parallel n Pilot

89. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Customer Survey n Degree to which objectives were achieved? n Degree to which users accepted and endorsed the product n Overall satisfaction level n Best if done by an outside survey agency or firm

90. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Lessons Learned—HERE ARE SOME POSSIBILITIES n Allow enough time? n Make it fun? n Beginnings are important! n Top management support is critical! n Managing change is 50 percent of project management! n Make management reviews interactive! n Set realistic milestone dates, but stick to the schedule! n Plan at a workable level!

91. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Closing Bash n Party? n Rap song? n Actor?

92. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Practices n A walkthrough after every design phase is a good practice n Architectural design –Then a walkthrough n Medium-level design –A walkthrough n Database design –A walkthrough n Detailed design –A walkthrough

93. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Software Tools--use them n Librarians--keep track of who changed what when –also called Code Management Systems n Module Management Systems –automate the building of an entire software system –Visual Studio is one example –Eclipse is another n Performance Coverage analyzer –determines where all the computing time is being spent –traces sections of the system that were executed, their frequency and duration

94. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University More Tools n Source code analyzers –Tells you where you’re doing strange or inefficient things in the source code –Lets you find all usages of a particular variable or string n Test Manager –makes regression testing very simple n Debugger –Program stop, trace, and step through

95. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Closing n The closing process n Provide a warranty –Be willing to address any problems that crop up within a six-month period of installation

96. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Termination n Get paid n History Database n Lessons Learned –Post project review (also called a POSTMORTEM) –Write down what went well, what could have been improved, make suggestions for follow on projects, gather more statistics on actual vs. planned performance –Produce a formal report n Write follow-on proposal for next project n Sell the next project

97. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Maintenance n Should be considered as a separate project, separately funded, so you can get paid for all of the development work

98. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Checklist for Closeout & Termination Stage n New system is up and running smoothly n Conversion and cutover from any older systems is complete n End users are trained and comfortable with new system n Warranty is provided n The next project is sold n A post project review (POSTMORTEM) is held n Responsibility and method of ongoing maintenance is defined

99. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University User documentation n Run/installation manual n User’s Guide n Maintenance Guide n Training documentation

100. J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University That’s it, Folks…