Process-savvy organizations highlight non-functional attributes of software and have provided process tools to help organizations consider software beyond its features. But are all these non-functional (or quality) goals created equal?
When it comes time to think about each quality goal, different activities are optimal. Performance takes a different knowledge set than maintainability. Tools that help with code vulnerabilities operate very differently than tools that probe code for performance bottlenecks.
Where can practitioners think about quality goals as a whole and at what level of process does each quality goal demand its own attention? when will development get benefit from generic methods such as QAW, ARID, and ATAM, and where will they need specific activities (such as RUP's CLASP) and knowledge?
This talk will directly address these questions through the speaker's experience.