[SystemSafety] Bounded rationality or ignorance?

[Peter Bernard Ladkin]

On 2018-10-11 14:59 , Olwen Morgan wrote:
> 
> 
> Here's an example of .....: A project has decided to use MCDC coverage as the test
> coverage domain to be used in unit testing. The aim is to get 100% MCDC coverage of developed code
> units. Owing to slippage, a manager decides that to make up for lost time, the project will stop
> unit testing when 80% MCDC coverage has been achieved.
> 
> Here we have (typically), a manager who does not realise the risks involved in settling for only 80%
> coverage. Is this a "cognitive limitation" or just ignorance? 

What about a case of acting on confirmation bias? There are only risks if you believe that the
software is going to fail tests and you are trying to find the tests it will fail.

But a manager is unlikely to believe the software is going to fail tests. The manager has seen the
inspections and what they achieved, believes in hisher prowess, experienced the progress of the
project in terms of apparently-working LOC, seen individual unit tests, believes the software more
or less works because heshe has seen what effort has gone into it and what has come out (working SW,
at some level). It works, doesn't it? And it's HISHER project, what heshe is paid to do.

Testing is an overhead; no more "product" (= LOC) is thereby produced. But you have to do some (due
diligence; besides acceptance testing is in the contract). But surely not more than "necessary" ...

PBL

Prof. Peter Bernard Ladkin, Bielefeld, Germany
MoreInCommon
Je suis Charlie
Tel+msg +49 (0)521 880 7319  www.rvs-bi.de





-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.techfak.uni-bielefeld.de/mailman/private/systemsafety/attachments/20181011/ac5be15c/attachment.sig>