> Establishing this theory requires a stable process! Without a stable process, you cannot make deliberate, systematic changes and observe how it affects outcom

> Establishing this theory requires a stable process! Without a stable process, you cannot make deliberate, systematic changes and observe how it affects outcomes. shrug Welcome to software engineering. Enjoy your stay. If anyone has figured out how to make deliberate systemic changes that add value, they really need to publicise it because I'm not aware of many approaches that aren't absurdly basic (things like get release and get fast feedback). There are lots of examples of companies like Google, Microsoft, AWS, etc that generate huge amounts of value from early on in their life cycle them then coast on that while experiments with processes never really move the needle all that much. Google has been search and ads for 20 years and none of their experiments with software quality since then have been all that impressive. It isn't even all that clear from a customer perspective that the quality and quantity of software is improving. If anything, they need to slow the programmers down, write less code and dedicate more resources to maintaining platforms and pushing them to succeed. SPC won't help with that though, because measuring "nothing happening" isn't what SPC is targeted at. In fact, open source projects where there is usually no QAQC in sight are vast wealth and productivity fountains, we have people like Hipp over at SQLite who just tests everything to within an inch of its life. Good luck replicating that level of productivity with SPC. No systemic process has come close to matching the productivity one madman with a love of databases and stability. We have no idea how to make that repeatable; because the fundamental process that creates value isn't stable.