Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
software development corresponded nicely with contemporary construc-
tions of the root causes of the burgeoning software turmoil. This was
also known as the “Chinese Army” approach, at least until the phrase
became unpopular in the early 1950s.
Faced with a shortage of experienced programmers, SDC embarked
on an extensive programming of internal training and development.
Most of its trainees had little or no experience with computers; in fact,
many managers at SDC preferred it that way. Like many corporations
in the 1950s, SDC believed that “it is much easier to teach our personnel
to program than it is to teach outside experienced programmers the
details of our business.”
17
In any case, in the period between 1956 and
1961 the company trained seven thousand programmers and systems
analysts. At a time when all the computer manufacturers combined could
only provide twenty-fi ve hundred student weeks of instruction annually,
SDC devoted more than ten thousand student weeks to instructing its
own personnel how to program.
18
The apparent success that SDC achieved in mass-producing program-
ming talent reinforced the notion that a hierarchical approach was the
suitable model for large-scale software development. If large quantities
of programmers could be produced on demand, then individual pro-
grammers were effectively anonymous and replaceable. A complex
system like SAGE could be broken down into simple, modular compo-
nents that could be easily understood by any programmer with the
appropriate training and experience. The principles behind the approach
were essentially those that had proven so successful in traditional manu-
facturing: replaceable parts, simple and repetitive tasks, and a strict
division of labor.
The hierarchical model of software development was adopted by a
number of other major software manufacturers, particularly those
involved in similarly large military or government projects. It is not clear
how direct the connection was between SDC and these other manufac-
turers. SDC certainly had a role in training a large number of program-
mers and EDP managers. “We trained the industry!” boasted SDC
veterans: “Whatever company I visit, I meet two or three SDC alumni.”
19
The labor historian Philip Kraft attributes much of what he refers to as
the “routinization” of programming labor to the “degrading” infl uence
of military-industrial organizations such as SDC. He describes the SDC
so-called software factories as “the fi rst systematic, large-scale effort on
the part of EDP users to transform the highly idiosyncratic, artisan-like
occupation” of computer programming into “one which more closely
