Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
which included as the “marks of professionalism” self-education, stan-
dard measures of knowledge, continuing research, a code of ethics,
and mechanisms for self-policing and disciplining practitioners.
46
The
DPMA's many national conferences, local chapter programs and semi-
nars, and DPMA publications and home-study courses were all directed
toward the self-education of individual members. The CDP program was
obviously its provision for establishing a means of “measuring a minimum
level of knowledge in the fi eld.” DPMA graduate research grants encour-
aged contributions to the “knowledge of the fi eld.” The DPMA code of
ethics was part of its original charter, and was the fi rst of such codes to
be established for the computer-related professions. Finally, although the
DPMA had no existing mechanisms for determining and punishing mis-
conduct, it promised that the association would take a leading role in
the development of an industry policing program. Although the DPMA's
original focus was on data processing supervisors, more than those of
any other aspiring professional organization its programs were aimed at
the broad computing community. Programmers and systems analysts
were clearly part of its imagined community of practitioners.
Unlike the ACM, the DPMA made every effort to reach a broad
spectrum of data processing personnel. Although originally open only to
data processing supervisors, by 1964 the national leadership was making
determined attempts to cultivate programmers within its membership.
47
The structure of the organization, which included strong regional chap-
ters, allowed for diversity, local control, and rapid expansion. Each
region had its own representative on the Executive Council who served
with several executive offi cers and implemented policy decisions from
the International Board of Directors. In addition, the DPMA's offi cial
publication, the
Data Management Journal
, encouraged submissions on
a much wider range of subjects than did the ACM's
Journal
or
Communications
. The DPMA also maintained a close association with
the editors of
Datamation
, another widely read industry journal that
focused on issues of timely concern and practical relevance.
The DPMA's inclusive approach to professional development brought
it into confl ict with competing societies, particularly the ACM. The dif-
ferences between the two organizations mirrored the larger tensions that
existed within the computing community: academic computer scientists
versus the business data processors; theory versus practice. I have already
shown how this tension affected the adoption of the DPMA's CDP
program: the ACM's obvious lack of support helped to undermine
the program's legitimacy and prevented its widespread adoption. This
