What CM Does for Program Mgt

Technical & Management Consultants

What Configuration
Management Does for
Program Managers

© ARTIS Professionals, LLC DCN: AP07-97-00002_Rev01
1

Program Management
Requirements must lead and physical items must conform… Technical & Management Consultants

Program management is a four-
step closed-loop cycle for
managing acquisitions.
It begins with a work breakdown
structure (WBS) and extends
into a critical path network of
finite schedules and workloads.
It’s two cycles: A requirements
management cycle coexists with
a physical item cycle.
4 Steps: Plan, Do, Study, Act

© ARTIS Professionals, LLC
2

Requirements Mgt
Never be afraid to ask, “Where is that written?” Technical & Management Consultants

If you can't describe what you are doing as a process, you don't know
what you are doing. W. Edwards Deming (Founder of TQM)

If you don't document your process, you're not formally communicating
it to others. Vincent C. Guess (Founder of CMII)

A Requirement Without Documentation…
…Is A Rumor

3

Configuration Mgt
CM maintains the integrity of approved baselines… Technical & Management Consultants

Without CM, program managers
cannot formally communicate policy
requirements – this means wading thru
hearsay, legacy data, redundant
meetings and endless fact-finding.

4

A Little CM Not Enough

The BP Gulf Oil Rig Disaster

4 Steps: Plan, Do, Study, Act

5

Executive Baseline Mgt
Especially for organizational growth towards partnerships… Technical & Management Consultants

Oil Spill: BP Had Wrong Diagram to Close Blowout Preventer
Maria Recio, Dave Montgomery and Mark Washburn | McClatchy Newspapers
June 14, 2011 07:52:28 AM

WASHINGTON — In the days after an oil well spun out of control in the Gulf of Mexico, BP engineers tried to activate a huge
piece of underwater safety equipment but failed because the device had been so altered that diagrams BP got from the
equipment's owner didn’t match the supposedly failsafe device's configuration, congressional investigators said Wednesday.
Who ordered the alterations in the blowout preventer, the 500,000-pound mass of gears and hydraulic valves that sits atop
and underwater well and is intended to snap the pipe if disaster threatens, was the subject of dispute at Wednesday's hearing.

Transocean, the owner of the blowout preventer and of the sunken Deepwater Horizon rig, said any
alterations would have come at BP's instigation; BP, which owns the well and hired Transocean to drill it, said
it had never sought the changes.

Rep. Bart Stupak, D-MI, chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee’s Subcommittee on Oversight and
Investigations, said the changes prevented BP's engineers from activating a "variable bore ram" intended to close tight around
the pipe and seal it. "When they investigated why their attempts failed to activate the bore ram," Stupak said of BP
engineers, “they learned that the device had been modified.” A useless test ram – not the variable bore ram – had been
connected to the socket that was supposed to activate the variable bore ram.

"An entire day’s worth of precious time had been spent engaging rams that closed the wrong way.” Stupak said that BP officials
told subcommittee investigators that “after the accident, they asked Transocean for drawings of the blowout
preventer. Because of the modifications, the drawings they received didn’t match the structure on the ocean
floor,” Stupak said. “BP said they wasted many hours figuring this out.”

A failed pressure test caused [Congress] to question the work of a third company, Halliburton, which was contracted to pour
concrete around the well's pipe and cap it. Frank Patton, a drilling engineer for the government's Mineral Management Service,
which oversees offshore drilling, told a separate inquiry in Kenner, LA, that drilling mud "is the most important thing in safety
for your well.” He said that any alteration to the blowout preventer would have required both BP and MMS approval.

6

CM Importance Shrouded
Savings hidden when disasters (small or otherwise) never materialize… Technical & Management Consultants

When investigators look to ascribe blame, CM / QA
processes and practices are the first to be audited…

Proper CM Would Have Prevented :
 Eleven (11) People From Dying
 BP’s $7 Billion Rig Loss and Cleanup Costs
 BP’s $40 Billion Lawsuit Against Transocean
 BP’s Corporate Black Eye
 President Obama’s Political Black Eye
 BP’s Tainted Reputation
 BP Chairman’s Replacement
 Gulf Coast Businesses Destroyed
 Gulf Wildlife and Marshland Destroyed

7

Baseline Traffic Cops
Executives must institute core-business discipline for downstream… Technical & Management Consultants

Three Ways to Instill Enterprise Discipline:
1. Configuration Management
If you don’t pay CM for product lifecycle management (PLM)…

2. Quality Assurance
If you don’t pay QA for total quality management (TQM)…

3. Legal
You will pay lawyers and plaintiffs in a court of law.

8

Paper Drives Parts
Not the other way around... Technical & Management Consultants

The one constant in life is Change.

Reliability, Maintainability and Availability (RMA) for parts
needs Configuration Management (CM) processes on paper.

9

Baseline Traceability
CM links configuration items to requirements… Technical & Management Consultants

© ARTIS Professionals, LLC Graphics: © Institute of Configuration Mgt
10

A Configuration Baseline
Simplest definition… Technical & Management Consultants

A baseline is the currently approved (or
documented) configuration items making up
a product or system.

11

A Configuration Item
Simplest definition… Technical & Management Consultants

A configuration item (CI) is any entity that
needs to be uniquely identified for
purposes of tracking or revising in time.

12

Two Hierarchies of CIs
Configuration items make up baselines… Technical & Management Consultants

CMII recognizes two (2) separate hierarchies of configuration items (CIs)
throughout a program or organization. CMII adopts the following model for
identifying CIs, which are parts, software, documents, forms, and records.

13

CI Unique Identification
CM ensures documents are traceable and retrievable… Technical & Management Consultants

Standardized naming and numbering conventions are used to identify and
describe physical items and control interchangeability.

Proper relationships between the physical items, software, documents,
forms and records are displayed in the following illustration.

14

Verifying Baselines
Typical SE model for baseline verification… Technical & Management Consultants

The Segment / System Specification (SSS) is typically finalized following the Systems Requirements Review
(SRR). The functional baseline (FBL) is established at the Systems Functional Review (SFR). The Allocated
Baseline (ABL) is typically established at the Preliminary Design Review (PDR). The government may choose
to take control of the ABL which would normally occur following a system Functional Configuration Audit
(FCA) or the System Verification Review (SVR).

The Development Baseline (DBL) is initiated at the Critical Design Review (CDR), sometimes known as “Pilot
Production.” The Acquirer certifies the Product Baseline (PB) following the Physical Configuration Audit
(PCA), which verifies a Technical Data Package (TDP) and accompanies the transfer of Configuration Control
Authority (CCA) to the Acquirer for all changes.

15

Concur vs. Approve
During development: Class II concurrence; Class I approval… Technical & Management Consultants

Performing Activity Tasking Activity

Program Mgr CL1 Program Mgr
Contractor Acquirer

Contractor’s CM Plan Acquirer’s CM Plan

CRs
CM CM
Team Team
CL2 CM
CL1
CM
Closed-Loop Closed-Loop

CTR CCB ACQ CCB
CRs ECPs
Dev Lifecycle Dev Lifecycle

CCB = Configuration Control Board
Field CR = Change Request
Mod CTR = Contractor
ECP = Engineering Change Proposal

16

Current Authority
Verbatim per MIL-HDBK-61A(SE)… Technical & Management Consultants

SOWs - Contracts states who controls changes and when:
6.1.1.1 Current Authority
On the micro-level, if an ECP proposing a change to a product impacts several
documents, the change proposal, evaluation, and implementation must
consider:
• Who is the contractual authority to approve an ECP? This is the product
configuration control authority (CCA)
• Who has the right to approve revision of each document affected by an
ECP? This is the current document change authority (CDCA).
• Is a related ECP required from a CDCA organization before the CCA for
the product can approve an ECP for the product?
• Are there other Government or industrial activities involved because
the product has multiple users? If so, these are “application activities.” Is
one designated the “lead” application activity?

17

Configuration Control Authority

Who approves certain changes in various lifecycles?
6.1.1.1a Configuration Control Authority
The contractual configuration control authority (CCA) approving the implementation of a change to
a product (system or CI) may initially reside with a Contractor or with the Acquirer. It may transfer
from the Contractor to the Acquirer, or may continue to reside with the Contractor throughout the
life cycle of the CI. This authority is technically responsible for the performance of the product as
well as fiscally responsible for funding changes to the product. The level of Acquirer configuration
control is generally determined as part of CI selection.

During an acquisition program, it is the levels at which the Acquirer specifies, contracts for, accepts
and plans to logistically support the individual components of a system or CIs. Acquirer
configuration control always addresses the functional baseline and the allocated baselines
established for lower level CIs whose specifications have been issued by, or approved by the
Acquirer. Similar and related Contractor configuration control practices also apply to CIs and
component parts below the level of Acquirer configuration control.

The contractual configuration control authority addresses the total set of documents that are
baselined for the product controlled by that authority for a specific contract. This authority can be
the Current Document Change Authority (CDCA), described in Part b, for individual documents that
require change (e.g., a system or CI performance specification). If it is not the CDCA for a given
document, it does not have the authority to approve a proposed change to that document, and
therefore must solicit ECP approval from the applicable CDCA, or select an alternate design.

18

Current Doc Change Authority

Who controls the contents of a document?
6.1.1.1b Current Document Change Authority
The concept of current document change authority is an expression of a relationship that
has always existed. Before the need to manage configuration documentation with an
automated information system this concept was not clearly articulated but was embodied
in the terms “Originating Design Activity” and “Current Design Activity.” [Ref: ASME-
Y14.100.] However, the definition of those terms refer specifically to design documents,
e.g., engineering drawings, as opposed to all documentation, and they also include
custodial as well as design responsibility.

The CDCA on the other hand, pertains to specifications or any other type of document and
is independent of the organization that physically maintains and stores the document. The
CDCA is the organization that has decision authority over the contents of the document,
reflecting proprietary or data rights to the information that the document contains. The
CDCA may be a Government activity or a Contractor, and the authority may be transferred.
However, there is only one CDCA for a document at a time.

19

CDCA Scenarios

Six (6) scenarios illustrate the logic of CDCA designation:

20

CDCA Scenarios

21

Identify Change Responsibility

Contracts should identify responsibility for ECP dispositions…

MIL-HDBK-61A(SE) Section 6.2.1.4

Review and Dispositioning ECPs
In order to facilitate dispositioning ECPs affecting documents for which the
government is the CDCA, Contracts should identify the government
representative(s) responsible for dispositioning both Class I and Class II ECPs.

Where the government is an Application Activity (AA), or in a performance
based acquisition, where the government is not CDCA for the design
documentation, contracts should clearly specify government and contractor
responsibilities for Class I ECPs and RFDs affecting government-baselined
performance specifications.

This can be accomplished by incorporating a special configuration control
clause in the contract similar to the example on the next page.

22

Sample Contract Language

CONFIGURATION CONTROL PROCEDURES FOR ENGINEERING CHANGES:
(a) Any Engineering Change Proposal (ECP) or any Request for Deviation (RFD) affecting an item being acquired under this
contract shall be in accordance with attachment [XXXXX], contract statement of work (SOW) paragraph(s) [XXX].
Quantities and distribution, or electronic delivery/access, shall be as stated on DD Form 1423 (Contract Data
Requirements List) or distribution list attached hereto.
(b) No Class I engineering change shall be implemented until authorized by the Contracting Officer (CO).
(c) Each Class II engineering change shall be submitted to the cognizant Administrative Contracting Officer (ACO), or in
the absence of such ACO, by __________________ for concurrence in classification.
-Or –
Each Class II engineering change shall be dispositioned by the Contractor.
(d) No major or critical deviation shall be effective until authorized in writing by the CO.
(e) Minor deviations, requested prior to manufacture, shall be authorized, (or disapproved) by the ACO, or in the absence
of such ACO, by _________________________.
-Or -
Minor deviations, requested prior to manufacture, shall be dispositioned by the contractor
(f) Minor deviations to manufactured items shall be granted (or disapproved) by the local Material Review Board (MRB)
when properly constituted, or in the absence of such ACO by ___________________.
(As used in paragraphs (b) and (d) of the foregoing clause, the term “Contracting Officer (CO)” means the “Procurement
Contracting Officer (PCO)” or the “Administrative Contracting Officer (ACO)” if the contract provides that orders may be
issued and priced by the ACO. The PCO or ACO may authorize only Class I engineering changes and major deviations
which have been approved by the Procuring Activity Change Control Board (CCB). The PCO and ACO may authorize only
critical deviations involving safety that have been approved by Procuring Activity Change Control Board (CCB) and by the
Program Mgt Office.

23

Technical Data Packages

Contracts should include contractual language for the Acquirer to receive a Technical Data Package (TDP)
as a deliverable, prior to system acceptance, which contains hardware and software artifacts for a
Product Baseline. This is in case the Acquirer and Contractor part ways, or the Contractor or
subcontractor go out of business. Otherwise, the Acquirer will lose the capacity to own or change
drawings for Operations & Maintenance.

Here’s a sample of SOW language to prevent that from happening:
Any end-item artifacts or data items (drawings, documents, software code, bill of materials, parts lists,
vendor data sheets, etc.) created, revised, or used in the identification or traceability of program
requirements, configuration items or baselines, is to be documented by the Contractor and is subject to
review, concurrence and/or approval by the Acquirer prior to acceptance or deployment. [See CDRL XXXX]

These data items shall:
 Support the installation, fabrication and/or production of the system, product or CI
 Fully document CIs and their relationship to next higher assemblies
 Be available in the following formats:
 For 2D as-built (production) drawings, AutoCAD, Rev. 14 or higher
 Separate bills-of-material (BOMs), using MS Excel v2003 or higher
 Vendor data sheets (web/catalog data) for COTS end-items
 Level III production (as-built) drawings per MIL-DTL-31000C
 Be delivered in a technical data package (TDP) on electronic media consisting of working
AutoCAD files (.cad), working Microsoft files (.doc, .xls, .ppt, .mdb), in addition to electronic
copies of those same files via Acrobat files (.pdf).

24

Generic Contract Language
Select embedded file for SOW language… Technical & Management Consultants

The embedded file below is for Statements of Work (SOW) regarding
Configuration Management (CM) contractual language, and includes the following:
1.Identification of Baseline Configuration Items (CIs)
2.Configuration Control Authority (CCA)
3.Current Document Change Authority (CDCA)
4.Class II ECP Concurrences
5.Class I ECP Approvals
6.CM Definitions
7.CM Acronyms CM SOW Language
8.CM Samples – Completed DID Forms
9.CM Samples – Contractor Deliverables
10.Technical Data Packages prior to Acceptance
11.Level III Production Drawings
12.Verification of Baselines (FCAs, PCAs, SVRs)

25

Class I Changes

6.2.1.4a Dispositioning Class I ECPs
Class I ECPs (see Table 6-2) must be dispositioned (approved or disapproved) for
implementation by a properly constituted government Configuration Control Board (CCB).
After the CCB direction is issued, it is important to proceed expeditiously with the
"definitization" process (obtaining a pricing proposal, auditing, fact finding, and negotiating
the final price) for this change and issuing a supplemental agreement. Until the contract
modification is received and bi-laterally agreed to by the Government and the contractor, the
contractor is not authorized to proceed with the implementation of the proposed change.

The contractual approval or disapproval of an ECP should not be confused with the
acceptance and approval of the ECP as a data deliverable. Approval of the ECP data delivery
required by CDRL / DD-Form-1423 signifies only that the ECP satisfies the requirements of the
ECP DID and is considered acceptable for government processing. Acceptance of the data
deliverable does not signify "technical approval" of the change proposed by the ECP and
should not be interpreted as authorizing the performing activity to proceed with the work
proposed by the ECP.

26

Class II Changes

6.2.1.4b Dispositioning Class II ECPs
Unless otherwise specified by contract (e.g., as part of the Single Process Initiative), the
government administrative contracting officer or plant representative serves as the dispositioning
authority for Class II ECPs. The default action required on Class II changes is concurrence / non-
concurrence in classification only, unless the contract requires approval or disapproval.
Government concurrence in Class II ECP classification normally allows the contractor to
incorporate the change in the applicable CI and update its configuration documentation without
any further government action or authorization being required. A non-concurrence in
classification will normally result in the Class II ECP being canceled or reclassified to a Class I ECP.
[See CM Note (Not in MIL-HDBK-61A(SE)]
The government should require approval/disapproval of class II ECPS only when the Government
is the CDCA for the original drawings, or data files, and compliance with the specific detailed
design is a requirement of the contract. If there is a government ACO or plant representative
available, the Government tasking activity may elect to have the ACO or representative review the
proposed class II changes for concurrence in classification before they are submitted to the
government tasking/procuring activity (that is the CDCA) for approval.

CM Note: This is a two-edged sword, because a Class I change normally forces the government’s hand regarding a
Contract Modification, with budgetary and scheduling changes in the Contractor’s favor. The lesson learned here:
Never micromanage Class II changes once concurrence is given. If government wants to micromanage development
of any CI not previously agreed-upon, by all means push for a reclassification, but be ready to pay for it.

27

Review & Disposition

28

ECP Guidance

MIL-HDBK-61A(SE), Table 6-2 states:
1. The first criteria for ECP (both Class I and Class II) is that it is an engineering change; it must affect
approved configuration documentation.
2. Furthermore an ECP is limited to a change to approved configuration documentation that is under
Government configuration control; it must require a change to a document for which the Government
(tasking activity) is the current document control authority (CDCA) or which is cited in a contract.
a. The Government becomes the CDCA in several ways:
• Provide the document as a Government document with Government CAGE code identification
• Approve a contractor document and assume control by transferring CDCA and adding a
Government CAGE code to the document.
b. The Government cites a configuration document in the contract in several ways:
• Specifically addressing it, as in “Provide the system in accordance with Specification
Performance Specification number __________________.”
• Defining in the SOW or CDRL, that the system performance specification, allocated
performance specifications for specific CIs, and where applicable (e.g., in a design based
acquisition) the product configuration documentation, shall be submitted for Government
approval and configuration control.
• Adding specific documents to the SOW by contract modification

29

ECP Guidance
Continued… Technical & Management Consultants

MIL-HDBK-61A(SE), Table 6-2 states:
3. Items (1), (2), and (3) amplify the criteria by providing specific evaluation factors to use in judging
whether a proposed change to any document must be processed as a Class I or Class II ECP:
Item (1) Since there are both contractor-approved and Government-approved configuration
documents, any change to contractor approved requirements must be examined to determine if
it also impacts Government approved (CDCA or contractually cited) configuration documentation.
Item (2) This item concerns a change to Government controlled configuration documents, which
if it did not impact cost, warranties, or milestones would not otherwise be class I. A change to
contractor-controlled configuration documentation which might also affect cost, warranties or
milestones, does not require a class I ECP because it is not a Government configuration control
issue – it is treated like a commercial item, i.e., the contractor is obligated to the contract
provisions but can change the design of the product so long as it meets the specified performance
requirements. If the contractor’s design change makes the end product more or less costly, the
contractor either absorbs the increase or benefits from the savings. The Contractor must initiate
contractual change action, outside the scope of configuration control, in order to change the
contract cost, warranties or milestones.
Item (3) Provides some factors to evaluate when examining a proposed change to Government-
controlled product configuration documentation. Many of these factors are specified by
requirements in functional and allocated configuration documentation, covered by Item (1). A
proposed change to PCD must be examined to see it impacts functional or allocated
requirements.

30

Class I Definition
Anything else is a Class II… Technical & Management Consultants

MIL-HDBK-61A (SE) Table 6-2):
A “Class I” ECP proposing a change to approved configuration baselines for which the Government is the
Current Document Change Authority (CDCA) that has been included in the Contract or Statement of Work
by the Tasking Activity, and:
(1) Affects any physical or functional requirement in approved functional or allocated configuration
documentation, or
(2) Affects any approved functional, allocated or product configuration documentation, and cost, warranties
or contract milestones, or
(3) Affects approved product configuration documentation and one or more of the following:
(a) government furnished equipment,
(b) safety,
(c) compatibility, interoperability, or logistic support,
(d) delivered technical manuals for which changes are not funded,
(e) will require retrofit of delivered units,
(f) preset adjustments or schedules affecting operating limits or performance to the
extent that a new identification number is required,
(g) interchangeability, substitutability, or replacing items in a non-repairable subassembly
(h) sources on a source control drawing,
(i) skills, manning, training, biomedical factors or human engineering design.

31


Background Slides

32

A History of CM
The military created CM to replicate weapons systems… Technical & Management Consultants

DoD CM Standards and Specs were released…

MIL-HDBK-61A

33

Configuration Items

Configuration items (CIs) were first used by the Department of Defense in the
late 1960s, early 1970s. The most explicit instructions on how they were to be
used, and how they relate to other CM practices, were provided in the
following MIL Standards:

MIL-STD-483A
Configuration Management
Practices for Systems, Equipment,
Munitions and Computer Programs
4 June 1985

MIL-STD-480B
Configuration Control for
Engineering Changes,
Deviations and Waivers
15 July 1988

34

MIL-STD-480 Definitions

Baseline
Baselines, plus approved changes, constitute the current approved configuration.
For CM purposes, there are 3 baselines established sequentially, as follows:
• Functional Baseline (high-level system)
• Allocated Baseline (separate developmental segments or CIs)
• Product Baseline (as produced)

Configuration Identification
The selection of documents to comprise the baseline for the system and CIs and the
numbers and other identifiers affixed to items and documents.
Configuration Control
The systematic proposal, justification, evaluation, coordination, approval or disapproval of
proposed changes in the configuration of a CI after formal establishment of its baseline.
Configuration Management
A discipline applying technical and administrative direction and surveillance to
(a) identify and document the physical and functional characteristics of CIs,
(b) audit CIs to verify conformance to documented requirements,
(c) control changes to CIs and their related documentation and
(d) record and report the status of proposed changes and the implementation status
of approved changes.

35

MIL-STD-483 Definitions

Part Number
All discrete parts, assemblies and units shall be identified by part numbers
in accordance with DOD-STD-100. MIL-STD-483A, Appendix IX
Configuration Item Identification Numbers
A family of like-units of a configuration item that individually satisfies prescribed functional
requirements shall (in addition to a part number) be identified by an unchanging base
number such as a CI identification number or a type-model-series designator. The CI
number…
a. Shall establish a base for serializing individual units of a CI;
b. Shall not change when the unit is modified;
c. Shall remain the same even though the CI may have more than
one application or be reprocured from different contractors;
d. Shall be composed of seven digits of alpha-numeric characters.
MIL-STD-483A, Appendix IX

Serial and Lot Numbers
A single unit or lot in a family of like-units of a CI shall be permanently and uniquely
identified by a serial or lot number. The serial or lot number shall not exceed 15 digits of
alpha-numeric characters. It shall be assigned sequentially and shall be numeric in the last
four digits. MIL-STD-483A, Appendix IX

36

CI Guidelines

Configuration Item (CI)
An aggregation of hardware, firmware, software or any of its discrete portions, which satisfies
an end use function and is designated for configuration management. Any item required for
logistic support and designated for separate procurement is a CI. MIL-STD-480B, Page 6
Level of Government Control
The CI selection process separates the elements of a system into individually identified subsets
for the purpose of managing their development. CI selection reflects an optimum management
level during acquisition. The contracting agency contracts at this level. MIL-STD-483A, Page 13
Logistics and Life Cycle Considerations
The CI selection should be determined by a need to control a CIs inherent characteristics or its
interface with other CIs. Selection is normally accomplished through the systems engineering
process in conjunction with Configuration Mgt and the participation of Logistics. Choosing too
many CIs increases the cost of control. Choosing too few runs the risk of too little control. CI
selections are made accordingly. MIL-STD-483A, pgs 113, 114
Common Subsystem Considerations
On development programs that are common to more than one system, the basic CI should
be that which is common to all applications. MIL-STD-483A, Page 113
Interfaces
Interfaces among CIs should be simple. Functions that are highly interdependent
should be allocated to the same CI. MIL-STD-483A, Page 115

37

Computer Software CIs
ITIL: Information Technology Infrastructure Library… Technical & Management Consultants

IT systems and software developers define CIs differently:
"A configuration item (CI) is any component of an IT infrastructure, including a documentary item
such as a service level agreement or a request for change, which is (or is to be) under the control
of configuration management and therefore subject to formal change control. The lowest level CI
is normally the smallest unit that will be changed independently of other components. CIs may
vary widely in complexity, size and type, from an entire service (including all its hardware,
software, documentation, etc.) to a single program module or a minor hardware component. All
existing or potential service problems will be capable of being linked to one or more CIs.”
Guidelines for selecting CIs Per SEI’s CMMI guidelines are:
• Work products that may be used by 2 or more groups
• Work products that are expected to change over time
• Work products wherein a change to one causes others to change
• Work products that are critical for the project.
The following work products are examples of CIs per CMMI:
Process descriptions Test Results
Requirements Interface Descriptions
Design Code / Module
Test plans and procedures Tools (i.e., compliers)

38

CM Reference Material
Software Configuration Management Patterns: Effective Teamwork, Practical Integration,
Steve P. Berczuk, Brad Appleton, Addison Wesley, 2002, ISBN 0201741172
CMII for Business Process Infrastructure, Vincent C. Guess, Holly Pub., 2002, ISBN 0972058206
Practical CM: Best Configuration Management Practices for the 21st Century (with CD-Rom),
David D. Lyon, Raven Pub Co, 2002, ISBN 0966124820
Managing the Change: Software Configuration & Change Management,
Michael Haug, Eric W. Olsen, Springer Verlag, 2001, ISBN 3540417850
Developing and Managing Engineering Procedures: Concepts and Applications,
Phillip A. Cloud, William Andrew Publishing, LLC, 2000, ISBN 0815514484
Engineering Documentation Control Handbook: Configuration Management in Industry,
Frank B. Watts, Second Edition, William Andrew Publishing, 2000, ISBN 0-8155-1446-8
Configuration Management: The Missing Link in Web Engineering, Susan Dart, Artech House, 2000, ISBN 1580530982
A Guide to Software Configuration Management, Alexis Leon, Artech House, 2000, ISBN 1580530729
Software CM Strategies and Rational ClearCase: A Practical Introduction (TheADDP9 Object Technology Series),
Brad A. White, Geoffrey M. Clemm, Addison Wesley Professional, 2000, ISBN 0201604787
Engineering Procedures Handbook, Phillip A. Cloud, Noyes Publications, 1998, ISBN 0815514107
Bills of Material : Structured for Excellence, Dave Garwood, Dogwood Publishing Co. Inc., 1997, ISBN 0062111899
Practical Software Configuration Management: The Latenight Developer's Handbook (Book /CD-ROM),
Tim Mikkelsen, Susan Pherigo, Prentice Hall PTR, 1997, ISBN 0132408546
Engineering Documentation Control Practices & Procedures, Ray E. Monahan, Marcel Dekker, 1995, ISBN 0824795741
Implementing Configuration Management, Fletcher J. Buckley, IEEE Press, 1993, ISBN 0-7803-0435-7
Software Configuration Management (Wiley Series in Software Engineering Practice),
H. Ronald Berlack, John Wiley & Sons, 1991, ISBN 0471530492
Fundamentals of Configuration Mgt, Thomas T. Samaras, Frank L. Czerwinski, Wiley-Interscience, 1971, ISBN 0-471-75100-6
39

Contact Information

Timothy R. Ferguson, CMIIP
Sr. Configuration and Data Manager

ARTIS Professionals, LLC
5877 Little Road
Lothian, Maryland 20711
Cell: 410-259-6873
ConfigurationManager@Live.com
DUNS: 078571297 CAGE: 6ALJ4

© ARTIS Professionals, LLC “CMIIP” Trademark, Institute of Configuration Mgt
40

What CM Does for Program Mgt

Recomendados

Recomendados

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Mais procurados

Mais procurados (10)

Semelhante a What CM Does for Program Mgt

Semelhante a What CM Does for Program Mgt (20)

Último

Último (20)

What CM Does for Program Mgt