Details of this Paper

1 page




5 points: posting your own discussion;5 points: replying to the discussion of 1 other student in the class;---------------------------;In this area discuss the following: For the past six months you have worked on a project to develop a transportation- related software program for the city of Agropolis, a project designed to make some much needed improvements to Agropolis's system of public transportation. You and your team of programmers have worked very hard on this project, but you have encountered difficulties that could not possibly have been anticipated in the original design plan, these difficulties have put your project significantly behind schedule. The city transportation planners are nervous, because they depend on the software from your company to get the new transportation system up and running. And the management at your company is very uncomfortable because it signed a contract to deliver the required software on time. Although the software is not yet foolproof, testing thus far reveals that it works about 99% of the time. The new glitches that remain apply only to the transportation system's backup code, which arguably would be needed in only the most severe emergencies. Residents of the city are also eager to have the new transportation system in place. A decision is made by the management of your company and by the mangers of the city transportation system to go ahead and implement the software as it is. They base their decision on the probability that a backups system would not be needed for several months (at which time the remaining bugs should be fixed). A decision was also made by management on both sides not to announce publically that the software still has few bugs. You and few of your workers believe that the bugs are more dangerous than management is willing to admit. What would you do in this case? Would you be willing to blow the whistle? Defend your position.;Reply to this post;In response to the discussion question, if the bugs were severely dangerous, I would blow the whistle. I think that if the public would truly be in immediate danger if our company were to release the system before all the bugs were worked out, I would have to blow the whistle on the project. Personally, I would rather do that than have a lot of people be hurt. The flip side of this argument though is that if I didn?t think the public was in immediate danger and that our team could get the bugs worked out in a couple months without having to use the emergency system, I may just go with the flow seeing as we have deadlines and contracts that our company has to abide to. Whether I stop the project would be fully dependent on how much danger our company was putting people in.;should be 2 parts in this 1 page assignment;part1: your own post;part2: reply to the others post;and make 2 parts seperately


Paper#65829 | Written in 18-Jul-2015

Price : $22