This post will consist of me answering two questions from chapter 10 of Sommerville's 9th edition of Software Engineering
A multimedia virtual museum system offering virtual experiences of ancient Greece is to be developed for a consortium of European museums. The system should provide users with the facility to view 3-D models of ancient Greece through a standard web browser and should also support an immersive virtual reality experience. What political and organizational difficulties might arise when the system is installed in the museums that make up the consortium?
The creators of the system are likely to run into a number of issues with this software. The following write-up assumes that not all museums are included in the consortium. Museums themselves will be likely to lose revenue that they would normally rake in even though this is, what I would consider, revolutionizing museums. Some museums are funded by external sources (taxes, subsidies, etc.), but not all of them. Others may sell concessions to maintain themselves as well as charging a minor fee for entering the museum. Now the museums within the consortium are going to make more money, or at least not lose any money, but that is pretty impertinent when considering difficulties. Additionally, a lot of what happened in ancient Greece is not exactly G-rated. There are bound to be parent groups that would pull the severely uptight parent card and become infuriated that their elementary-student child was studying Greece and stumbled upon a 3-D model of a nude statue or a mildly gory painting depicting Alexander's armies in action. Granted this issue may arise just because of the museum itself, but I have a feeling that the people complaining about these innovations are not exactly the most rational. Also, guides within museums may lose their importance because of the existence of a virtual tour guide through the museum (and more!). This could lead to issues because when workers at your establishment are not happy, then problems can arise. The problems could be as innocuous as a complaint or as bad as a strike. Regardless, the software will be blamed as the cause and that is no good.
You are an engineer involved in the development of a financial system. During installation, you discover that this system will make a significant number of people redundant. The people in the environment deny you access to essential information to complete the system installation. To what extent should you, as a systems engineer, become involved in this situation? Is it your professional responsibility to complete the installation as contracted? Should you simply abandon the work until the procuring organization has sorted out the problem?
I am going to start this off by saying I hope I am never in a situation like this. I would say that as a systems engineer I would be extremely involved in this situation. Redundancies in a financial system could have serious legal implications as numbers may not be up to date in certain places, resulting in misinformation that could exacerbate other problems, creating a terrible spiral for the person involved and the financial company. This falls under the responsibility of the systems engineer because of the need to comply with external regulations. So not only is it the 'right' thing to do, but it is also the 'legal' action to take. It would be laughable if someone thought the best solution would be to abandon work and not help at all. You are involved in the development of this system and oftentimes you have to step outside your comfort zone. Even if you were not responsible whatsoever to be involved in this situation you would still have an obligation because you still are a part of the project. It may not be encapsulated in your job title or description, but, as a team member, it falls down on you as much as everyone else.
Music listened to while blogging: Pharell, alt-j, & Blink-182
No comments:
Post a Comment