A Technical History of the SEI

promulgate use of modern techniques and methods throughout the mission-critical systems community.”
(Subsequent sponsoring agreements shortened the mission statement to “provide leadership
in advancing the state of practice of software engineering in support of DoD systems.”)
Both the blue ribbon panel and the joint task force recognized that while technology developments
from the research community offered promise, those developments needed refinement to
make them applicable for practicing engineers, who in turn would need training and further tools
support. They also recognized that DoD program managers and their defense industry counterparts
were reluctant to adopt a new technology until the supporting infrastructure was in place.
That infrastructure included not just training but also support tools offered by commercial companies
that would maintain the tools and be available to provide support when needed. The joint task
force proposal was for 60 percent of SEI line 5 work to involve technology transition, and noted
that this component of the SEI charter was the raison d’etre. When the Deputy Secretary of Defense—who
was the source selection authority for the acquisition—received the final briefing
from the selection team, the technology transition component of the mission was the deciding factor
for him. 6
The proposal also recognized that to stay abreast of technology, the SEI must be an active participant
in the research community. It is not possible to stay abreast of advances in technology and
engineering simply by reading the literature. Active participants have their ideas shaped by colleagues.
They publish peer-reviewed papers in top conferences and journals, are invited to conferences
during which new ideas are tested, are invited to be on program committees where papers
are reviewed, and become reviewers for publications where they have the opportunity to see new
ideas long before they are published. For these reasons, the proposal was for the SEI to spend 10
percent of its line effort in research.
Likewise, the task force recognized, and the panel affirmed, that an important issue for the DoD
and the defense industry was the availability of properly educated software engineers. They recognized
that software engineering requires a different set of knowledge and skills than conventional
computer science or electrical engineering, the traditional sources of software developers.
They proposed that the SEI allocate 10 percent of its line effort to defining and promoting software
engineering education.
Finally, the task force recognized that the SEI must have a deep understanding of DoD software
issues. This understanding can only be maintained by direct participation in defense systems software
development, without competing with defense industry. The proposal was for the SEI to allocate
20 percent of its line effort to direct support.
While the charter clearly stated that the SEI was expected to improve the practice of software engineering
on behalf of the mission-critical community, the task force and blue ribbon panel were
both clear that unless the SEI accepted the challenge of helping improve the state of the practice
in the broader defense and supporting commercial industries, the SEI would not be truly successful.
Conversely, while success depended on the SEI’s ability to influence the broader software
5 The terms line or core have been used to refer to work funded by the Congressional line item established
by the DoD to provide the base funding for the SEI.
6 Private recollection, Bob Kent, Source Selection Board chairman and first SEI program manager.
CMU/SEI-2016-SR-027 | SOFTWARE ENGINEERING INSTITUTE | CARNEGIE MELLON UNIVERSITY 5
Distribution Statement A: Approved for Public Release; Distribution is Unlimited