14 CROSSTALK The Journal of Defense Software Engineering February 2008

We often hear that CMMI® wasn’t builtfor small companies so it will not work for

them, or some variant of this sentiment.Many people find the CMMI book/tech-nical report intimidating to think aboutusing it. Although it is true that CMMIwas not explicitly built for small compa-nies, it is also true that it was not explic-itly built for large companies [1]. Theexperience we obtained from the CMMIfor Small Business pilot indicates thatCMMI, when applied in a way thatresponds to the business realities of asmall business, can provide small compa-nies with utility.

Small Pilot Company Profiles Two small companies from Huntsville,Alabama were selected to participate inthe pilot:• Analytical Sciences, Incorporated

(ASI) specializes in management andtechnical services with a focus on sys-tems engineering/program manage-ment, information technology, engi-neering and scientific services, andprofessional and organizational devel-opment.

• Cirrus Technologies, Incorporated(CTI) specializes in manufacturingand support services with a focus onlogistics, engineering, manufacturing,test and evaluation, information tech-nology, security, and intelligence.

At the time of the pilot, each companyhad around 200 employees. The projectsselected for the pilot ranged in size from aone-person project to a 22-person project.CMMI v1.1 SE/SW was used as the refer-ence model for the project.

Key Challenges in ProcessImprovement for SmallBusinessWe saw several challenges during theadoption pilot in Huntsville. Some were

challenges that we had hypothesized,some were new insights. Although thepilot was not designed to address all ofthese challenges, we list them here in thefollowing as a reference to underscore thatwe acknowledge that there are a diverseset of challenges for CMMI adoption in asmall setting:• Affordability of process improvement

is a major challenge.

• Small businesses need to realize payoffquickly.

• Small businesses do not have staffdedicated solely to process improve-ment implementation: Customerrequirements take priority and cancause delays.

• There is minimal structure to leveragefrom in a small business.

• The customer rules. Many small organiza-tions adopt/adapt their business prac-tices directly from their customers orprime contractor.

• If a quality system is either not alreadyin place or is not well-functioning,

process definition efforts are muchmore challenging.

• CMMI is generally perceived as intim-idating, both in size and scope.

Motivation for the Pilot The AMRDEC SED is one of three LifeCycle Software Engineering Centers in theArmy. Established in 1984, the SED is arecognized leader in supporting the acqui-sition, research, development, and sustain-ment of some of the nation’s mostsophisticated weapon systems. The mis-sion of the SED is to provide mission crit-ical computer resource expertise to sup-port weapon systems over their life cycle.This mission is carried out by a staff ofapproximately 900 government and con-tractor employees housed in the Army’sonly facility designed specifically for tacti-cal battlefield automated systems support.

Like many federal organizations, theSED relies heavily upon a contract work-force for the fulfillment of its mission.The two primary SED contract vehiclesconsist of many companies categorized assmall businesses. Currently, more than 75percent of the companies contracted forengineering services with the SED aresmall businesses. Since these companiesare increasingly involved in the develop-ment of significant components for soft-ware-intensive systems, their usage of reli-able engineering and management prac-tices has become increasingly critical tothe delivery of quality products for theDepartment of Defense (DoD) warfight-er.

Pilot Process Overview The CMMI for Small Business pilot start-ed in July 2003 and culminated in May2004 with a Standard CMMI-basedAppraisal Method for Process Improve-ment v1.1 (SCAMPISM) Class A appraisalof each of the two pilot companies. Theoverall process is summarized in Figure 1.Gaps between the organizations’ internalprocesses and CMMI were identified by

Is CMMI Useful and Usable in Small Settings?One Example

The Software Engineering Directorate (SED) of the U.S. Army Aviation and Missile Research, Development andEngineering Center (AMRDEC) in Huntsville, Alabama, acquires software-intensive systems and has more than 250small companies in its supply chain. In order to determine the appropriateness of using Capability Maturity Model Integrated(CMMI®) as supplier requirements, members of AMRDEC SED teamed with the Software Engineering Institute (SEI)to perform a technical feasibility study in 2003-2004. This article presents the motivation, the processes used, and the majorresults of the CMMI for Small Business pilot from the perspective of the team that worked on the pilot.

Jacquelyn LanghoutTechnical Management Directorate

Sandra CepedaCepeda Systems and Software Analysis, Inc.

Suzanne GarciaSoftware Engineering Institute

“Ensure that seniormanagement

understands how tointerpret appraisal

results, both in terms ofwhat they are likely to

mean in terms ofperformance and how

they can be appropriatelyused in marketing

concepts.”

SM SCAMPI is a service mark of Carnegie Mellon University.

Report Documentation Page Form ApprovedOMB No. 0704-0188

Public reporting burden for the collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering andmaintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information,including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, ArlingtonVA 22202-4302. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to a penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if itdoes not display a currently valid OMB control number.

1. REPORT DATE FEB 2008

2. REPORT TYPE N/A

3. DATES COVERED -

4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE Is CMMI Useful and Usable in Small Settings? One Example

5a. CONTRACT NUMBER

5b. GRANT NUMBER

5c. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER

6. AUTHOR(S) 5d. PROJECT NUMBER

5e. TASK NUMBER

5f. WORK UNIT NUMBER

7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) AMRDEC SED AMSRD-AMR-BA-SQ Hackberry RD BLDG 6263Redstone Arsenal,AL 35898

8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATIONREPORT NUMBER

9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. SPONSOR/MONITOR’S ACRONYM(S)

11. SPONSOR/MONITOR’S REPORT NUMBER(S)

12. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT Approved for public release, distribution unlimited

13. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES CROSSTALK The Journal of Defense Software Engineering February 2008

14. ABSTRACT

15. SUBJECT TERMS

16. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF: 17. LIMITATION OF ABSTRACT

SAR

18. NUMBEROF PAGES

5

19a. NAME OFRESPONSIBLE PERSON

a. REPORT unclassified

b. ABSTRACT unclassified

c. THIS PAGE unclassified

Standard Form 298 (Rev. 8-98) Prescribed by ANSI Std Z39-18

Is CMMI Useful and Usable in Small Settings? One Example

February 2008 www.stsc.hill.af.mil 15

engaging in a collaborative sessionbetween the pilot team consultants andthe practitioners from the pilot companiesthat was similar to a SCAMPI C appraisal.Based on the results of this analysis, thepilot companies developed and imple-mented an action plan and updated exist-ing processes to close the gaps found.Where necessary, the pilot companies alsodeveloped new processes. Though we ini-tially did not intend to perform SCAMPIA appraisals, the progress made by bothcompanies was such that in January of2004 we defined appraisal scopes in con-junction with the pilot companies, and inMay 2004 we performed SCAMPI v1.1 Aappraisals using the continuous represen-tation of CMMI-SE/SW v1.1 at both sites[2]. Both companies achieved their targetlevel profiles, as follows:• ASI: Capability Level 2 for project

planning, requirements management,and measurement and analysis, andCapability Level 3 for organizationprocess focus and organizational train-ing.

• CTI: Capability Level 1 for projectplanning, requirements management,and project monitoring and control(given some of the other businesschallenges that CTI was facing at thetime of the pilot, establishing Level 1processes in these areas was a signifi-cant achievement).

Lessons Learned From thePilot There are several competencies in processimprovement that provide a useful frame-work for looking at lessons learned fromthe pilot study. Four of these are includedhere as a way to organize lessons learned[3]:• Establishing and sustaining sponsor-

ship.• Developing infrastructure/defining

processes.• Deploying new processes into the

intended use environment.• Managing an appraisal life cycle.

We have included an additional catego-ry of lessons learned in this section:lessons about the CMMI model itself.Those readers who are experienced inprocess improvement consulting in a vari-ety of settings may recognize our primarycompetencies as categories that also applyto larger organizations. However, the par-ticular lessons that have been includedhere are those that we believe are eitherunique to the small settings environmentor are particularly important for a smallcompany to be successful in theirimprovement efforts.

Establishing and SustainingSponsorshipObtaining and sustaining the executivesponsorship necessary to make applyingresources to process improvement activi-ties feasible• Lesson 1: Focus CMMI implementa-

tion in areas where the connectionbetween the model’s content and theChief Executive Officer’s (CEO) busi-ness goals are clearest.

In a small company, sponsorshipoften means getting the attention ofthe owner and/or CEO of the compa-ny. In this setting, the focus of theCEO is often on a combination ofcash flow management and develop-ment of the growth of the company.This implies that any process improve-ment efforts that are presented mustbe aligned with the particular financialenvironment and growth goals of thecompany.

• Lesson 2: Even if you do not havestrong quantitative results right away,make sure that the senior managementgets periodic progress reports thatinclude the qualitative benefits of theimprovement effort.

• Lesson 3: Ensure that senior manage-ment understands how to interpretappraisal results, both in terms of whatthey are likely to mean in terms of per-formance and how they can be appro-priately used in marketing contexts.

Developing Infrastructure/DefiningProcessesProviding enabling infrastructure tomake definition and use of new processeseffectiveExamples of activities that fit in this cate-gory include the following:

° Establishing/managing a pro-cess asset library.

° Establishing/managing a mea-surement repository.

° Establishing/maintaining stan-dards, approaches, and accept-ed methods for writing processguidance.

° Establishing/managing the or-ganization’s curriculum for pro-cess improvement.

° Establishing points of contactor specific groups (e.g., an engi-neering process group [EPG])for various aspects of theimprovement.

• Lesson 4: Even though a formal EPGmay be infeasible for small companies,some focal point for coordination isparticularly needed to coordinateinfrastructure development and sus-tainment.

• Lesson 5: When a well-functioningquality management system is alreadyin place (e.g., based on InternationalOrganization for Standardization[ISO] 9001), take advantage of it! Theexistence of a well-functioning ISO9001-based quality management sys-tem provided a bootstrap for processguidance standards and several otherelements of process improvementinfrastructure. On the other hand, ifthere had been no quality systemalready in place, some time would havebeen needed to establish and set upprocedures for using some kind ofmechanism for storing, controlling,and distributing process assets createdas part of the improvement effort.

• Lesson 6: The tools and practices ofthe accounting system have a greatinfluence on what is considered doable

Site KickoffMeeting

koffng

Gap AnalysisSession

lysison

Action PlanImplementation

Plantation

Execute NewProcesses

Newses

AppraisalPreparation

saltion

Appraise PilotProjects

Close Interaction Between Pilot and Consultants

Figure 1: Pilot Process Overview

Small Projects, Big Issues

16 CROSSTALK The Journal of Defense Software Engineering February 2008

in terms of collecting and using mea-surements. A small company typicallydoes not have the resources availableto create a parallel metrics collectionsystem from their mainstreamaccounting system, so, at least at thebeginning, what is considered feasiblein terms of measurement is con-strained by what can be collected/aggregated by the tools in use.

Deploying New Processes Into theIntended Use EnvironmentEnsuring that the new CMMI-informedprocesses are available to all relevantusers and that their successful adoption isassociated with appropriate training andjob aids. This is where much of what wetraditionally call organization changemanagement occurs• Lesson 7: Simple CMMI-based

improvements can have a significantimpact in small organizations.

In one case, just adding meetingminutes for the weekly meeting andpublicizing them to the customer andproject participants (not more thanfive people total) contributed to moreefficient monitoring of the project andimproved communication between thecustomer and the project team. Itsounds simple, and it is: The modelprovided an incentive to try somethingso there would be records of deci-sions/status progress. However, theeffect was much greater than the pro-ject participants anticipated, both interms of scope of effect and magni-tude – the change not only providedan effective tool for monitoring but italso resulted in improved communica-tion with the customer, which greatlyimproved the performance of the pro-ject as a whole.

Seeing unanticipated benefitsfrom small changes was a great moti-vator for continuing on the path ofimprovement and being willing, a littlelater in the process, to try largerchanges. In small companies, theeffects of small changes can often beseen much more quickly and the dis-persal of knowledge throughout thecompany about the effects of a changeis also faster.

Managing an Appraisal Life CycleSelecting a method of measuringprogress against a model (i.e., appraisalmethod) and then planning and executingthe tasks associated with the selectedmethod• Lesson 8: Use a focused, collaborative

appraisal method (e.g., SCAMPI B or

C) for the initial gap analysis. Greatbenefit is realized by using this sessionas an opportunity to interpret themodel and gain a better understandingof how it applies to the organization.

• Lesson 9: Ensure someone in theorganization has a good understandingof Appraisal Requirements for CMMIClass A, B, and C appraisal methodsand set expectations [4]. This greatlyincreases the potential for achievingthe appraisal objectives defined by theappraisal sponsor.

• Lesson 10: Collect evidence that willbe useful in the appraisal as you gousing automation support as much aspossible. Interact with the leadappraiser during evidence collectionand mapping to CMMI practices toensure that a complete, well-organizedset of evidence is available for theappraisal. This does not need to bedays and days of billable interaction. Itmay just take the form of e-mailingtemplates for evidence collection toget an idea of how they fit with thelead appraiser’s expectations.

Although this is one of thelessons that is also equally applicable ina larger setting, the effects if this isNOT done are much greater in a smallsetting in terms of the percentage ofstaff time that has to be used torework material that has been preparedfor the appraisal.

• Lesson 11: Introduce generic prac-tices once specific practices are clearlyunderstood but prior to the definitionand documentation of processes.Misinterpretation of generic practices is amajor cause for appraisal failures. This isan area where investing in a smallamount of external consulting couldpay big benefits. In the case of thepilot projects, we held a generic prac-tices workshop to help the pilot par-ticipants get a better understanding ofthe linkages between generic practicesand the process areas they were work-ing with.

• Lesson 12: Quick looks (e.g., SCAMPIB and SCAMPI C) significantlyimprove the chances for achieving theobjectives of a SCAMPI A.

CMMI Model• Lesson 13: Overall, we saw that judi-

cious use of the elements of CMMIthat relate to the business contextprovided a set of useful practicesfrom which small businesses can ben-efit, though not always in predictedways.

• Lesson 14: Using the continuous rep-

resentation of the model allowed thepilots to focus on improvements thatthey perceived as having the highestpayoff for the company.

• Lesson 15: Changing the practices inthe model is not necessary in mostcases; finding alternative practices isoften relevant. In addition, work prod-ucts generated as a result of practiceimplementation rarely match one-to-one to what is suggested in the model.

• Lesson 16: Smallness was not as muchof an issue for model interpretationas the focus of the business.Although both organizations had amore traditional product develop-ment project included in their pilot,they also had more pure service deliv-ery contexts (give me a team of Npeople who can do X for 25 hours permonth for the next six months) thatthey wanted to explore because ser-vice delivery is the heart of their busi-ness. Sometimes those services aredelivered in the context of a project,but they often are not. The model wasmore difficult to interpret in areas ofthe pilot involved in service deliverythan in the small product develop-ment projects. The SEI is involved inan effort led by Northrop Grummanto develop a CMMI for Services(SVC) constellation that may provemore useful in this context.Information on CMMI-SVC can befound on the CMMI Web site at<www.sei.cmu.edu/cmmi>.

A Toolkit to Help You StartYour Own CMMI-BasedImprovement EffortAs a major product of the pilots, the teamproduced a Web-based toolkit that pro-vides details on the processes and assetsused in the pilot. (The draft of the toolkitcan be found at <www.sei.cmu.edu/cmmi/publications/toolkit/>. It is a draftthat was not fully completed due to bud-get constraints. It may get incorporatedinto the Implementing Process Improve-ment in Small Settings [IPSS] Field Guide,in which case it would be updated.) Inaddition to process descriptions, it pro-vides copies of the actual presentations,templates, and other documents used tosupport the pilot. It should be treated asan anecdotal set of assets that might beuseful in supporting a model-basedimprovement effort, rather than a canoni-cal set that defines what should be used.Having said that, we believe that the toolk-it can help people working on improve-ment in the following small settings:

Is CMMI Useful and Usable in Small Settings? One Example

February 2008 www.stsc.hill.af.mil 17

• Focus their improvement efforts.• Figure out how and where to get start-

ed.• Tie their improvements to business

goals.• Educate their staff in areas where they

may need to improve their knowledgeand skills.

• Realize payoffs (mostly qualitative)early in the improvement effort.

• Improve their ability to prepare forappraisals.The feedback to date that we have

received on the toolkit has been very pos-itive and fairly broad in terms of globalaccess (people from Argentina, Israel,United Kingdom, Mexico, and Chile, aswell as the U.S. and Canada have accessedthe toolkit).

In thinking about using the toolkit, wehave a few recommendations for thosewho are working in small settings current-ly and are planning to use it to supportyour improvement effort:• Think of this as one resource to help

you, but not the only one. Everymonth there are new publicationsrelated to CMMI; some of them arelikely to offer different insights thanthe toolkit but they may be valuable toyou.

• Be sure to read the What’s Missing sec-tion of the toolkit to see if any of thethings we talk about in that sectionapply to you. If they do, then youknow you will need resources beyondwhat we used to get you started and besuccessful.

• For those of you who are in the DoDsupply chain, think about getting men-toring from the larger companies thatwork with you and have ongoingimprovement efforts; they should havea vested interest in your success.

• Keep up with the assets in the CMMIadoption area (<www.sei.cmu.edu/cmmi/adoption>); that is where youwill see emerging work on CMMI insmall settings in particular and otherresources that may be of value to you.

• Explore at a reasonable pace. Unlessyou have some business investmentriding on achievement of some partic-ular status related to CMMI, do not tryto do too much at once until you haveestablished what benefits you canaccomplish in your own environment.

Next Steps SED’s Plans for Follow-On ActivitiesThe CMMI small business pilot has beenone of the most beneficial endeavors ofthe SED/SEI strategic partnership. We

are pleased that the AMRDEC SED-sponsored pilot provided the stimulus forthe establishment of the IPSS project atthe SEI. One of the early events of thisproject was an International ResearchWorkshop in this topic area that was heldat the SEI in October 2005 and resultedin an SEI Technical Report summarizingthe workshop and containing the paperssubmitted to the workshop. This report isavailable for download in the publicationssection of the SEI Web site [5].

As the SED/SEI partnership contin-ues, we will start to gain insight into theuse of some other SEI technologies with-in the SED setting. These include theinsertion of Personal Software ProcessSM/Team Software ProcessSM technology in anArmy pilot program to provide the acqui-

sition organization with greater insightinto development metrics. Additionally,the SED/SEI partnership serves an inte-gral role in providing acquisition processimprovement support to many of ourlocal Army program managers.

SEI’s Plans for Supporting CMMI forSmall SettingsThe pilot project in Huntsville, Alabamaemphasized to the SEI the need forappropriate guidance materials for usingCMMI in small settings. In response, theSEI has chartered the IPSS project withinthe International Process ResearchConsortium initiative. Seed funding result-ed in the International Research Work-shop mentioned earlier, and initial spon-sors are supporting the prototyping of anIPSS Field Guide that reflects many of thelessons cited here. Contact CarolineGraettinger, the IPSS project manager, fordetails, at <cpg@sei.cmu.edu>.

ConclusionWe hope you will find this informationbeneficial as you embark on your ownimprovement journey and you willbecome a member of the burgeoningcommunity of practice for CMMI in smallsettings. Stay tuned with ongoing SEIwork in small settings at <www.sei.cmu.edu/iprc/ipss.html>. This endeavoris discussed more on page 27.u

References1. Chrissis, Mary Beth, Mike Konrad, and

Sandy Shrum. CMMI: Guidelines forProcess Integration and ProductImprovement. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley, 2003 <www.sei.cmu.edu/cmmi/publicat ions/cmmi-book.html>.

2. Members of the Assessment MethodIntegrated Team. Standard CMMIAppraisal Method for Process Im-provement, Ver. 1.1: Method Defini-tion Document. CMU/SEI-2001-HB-001. Pittsburgh, PA: SEI CMU, 2001<www.sei.cmu.edu/publications/documents/01.reports/01hb001.html>.

3. Garcia, Suzanne, and Richard Turner.CMMI Survival Guide: Just EnoughProcess Improvement. Boston, MA:Addison-Wesley, 2006.

4. CMMI Product Team. AppraisalRequirements for CMMI, Version 1.1(ARC, V1.1). CMU/SEI-2001-TR-034. Pittsburgh, PA: SEI CMU, 2001<www.sei.cmu.edu/publications/ doc-uments/01.reports/01tr034.html>.

5. Garcia, Suzanne, Caroline Graettinger,and Keith Kost. Proc. of the FirstInternational Research Workshop forProcess Improvement in SmallSettings. CMU/SEI-2006-SR-01.Pittsburgh, PA: SEI CMU, 2006.

AcknowledgementsMany people contributed significantresources to this pilot. The CMMI in SmallSettings Toolkit Repository fromAMRDEC SED Pilot Sites Web site, locat-ed at <www.sei.cmu.edu/ttp/publications/toolkit>, contains an acknowledg-ments table that we hope covers most ofthe people to whom we owe gratitude. Wewould, however, particularly like toacknowledge the ASI Team and the CTITeam. Without their dedication, this pilotwould not have been possible, let alonesuccessful. We are also grateful to GeneMiluk, of the SEI, and Mary Jo Staley, ofCSC, who were consultants for the pilotand now have moved on to other endeav-ors. Their ideas and hard work during thepilot made possible much of the learningreflected here.

“For those of you whoare in the DoD supply

chain, think about gettingmentoring from the

larger companies thatwork with you and haveongoing improvement

efforts; they should havea vested interest in

your success.”

Small Projects, Big Issues

18 CROSSTALK The Journal of Defense Software Engineering February 2008

About the Authors

Suzanne (SuZ) Garciais a senior member ofthe technical staff at theSEI CMU, working in theIntegrating SW-IntensiveSystems group. Her cur-

rent research is focused on synthesizingeffective practices from research andindustry into effective techniques for useby the software and systems engineeringcommunities working in a system of sys-tems context. Garcia worked in theTechnology Transition Practices group,with a particular focus on the technolo-gy adoption issues related to small set-tings. Her early SEI career focused onauthoring, managing, and reviewingCMMs, followed by three years as thedeployments manager for Aimware,Incorporated’s U.S. customers. Garciaalso spent 12 years in multiple improve-ment-related roles at Lockheed Missileand Space Co. She has a bachelor’sdegree and a master’s degree in systemsmanagement.

SEI CMUPittsburgh, PA 15213-3890Phone: (412) 268-9143E-mail: smg@sei.cmu.edu

Sandra Cepeda, Presi-dent and CEO of Ce-peda Systems and Soft-ware Analysis, Inc., is aCMMI consultant, anSEI-authorized lead ap-

praiser for SCAMPI, an SEI-authorizedCMMI Instructor, and an SEI VisitingScientist. Her company provides engi-neering services to the Army’s Aviationand Missile Research Development andEngineering Center, SED. Cepeda’s 21years of experience in complex systemsdevelopment has spanned all aspects ofthe life cycle, with a particular focus onVerification and Validation (V&V) andProcess Improvement. She was a mem-ber of the CMMI 1.1 and CMMI 1.2 andSCAMPI 1.2 author teams, and was oneof the lead consultants for the CMMIfor Small Business pilot in Huntsville.Cepeda's has a bachelor’s and master’sdegrees in computer engineering fromAuburn University.

AMRDEC SEDAMSRD-AMR-BA-SQHackberry RDBLDG 6263Redstone Arsenal,AL 35898Phone: (256) 876-0317E-mail: sandra.cepeda@us.

army.mil

Jacquelyn (Jackie)Langhout is currentlythe deputy director ofthe Technical Manage-ment Directorate at theAMRDEC at Redstone

Arsenal, AL. During the time of thepilot, Langhout served as the lead of theEngineering Process Group atAMRDEC’s SED. In that role, Langhoutwas the focal point for all the SED-SEIstrategic partnership efforts as well asoverseeing the SED’s process improve-ment program. Her past assignmentsinclude leading software V&V projects,software development and maintenanceprojects, and providing software supportto program offices. Langhout began hercareer with the Army in 1986 and is amember of the Army Acquisition Corp.She has a bachelor of science in mathe-matics from Samford University, a bach-elor’s degree from Auburn University,and a master’s degree from theUniversity of Alabama in Huntsville.

AMRDEC AMSRD-AMR-TMBLDG 5400 RM S142Redstone Arsenal,AL 35898Phone: (256) 876-4182E-mail: jackie.langhout@us.

army.mil

20th Anniversary IssueAugust 2008

Submission Deadline: March 14, 2008

Application SecuritySeptember 2008

Submission Deadline: April 18, 2008

Development of Safety Critical SystemsOctober 2008

Submission Deadline: May 16, 2008

Please follow the Author Guidelines for CrossTalk, available on the Internetat <www.stsc.hill.af.mil/crosstalk>. We accept article submissions on software-relatedtopics at any time, along with Letters to the Editor and BackTalk. We also provide a

link to each monthly theme, giving greater detail on the types of articles we'relooking for at <www.stsc.hill.af.mil/crosstalk/theme.html>.

CALL FOR ARTICLESIf your experience or research has produced information that could beuseful to others, CrossTalk can get the word out. We are specificallylooking for articles on software-related topics to supplement upcomingtheme issues. Below is the submittal schedule for three areas of emphasiswe are looking for:

Pleat <wwtopics

lin

we are look