A Project Manager’s View of Safety-Critical Systems

  • Thomas Docker
Conference paper


This paper presents a project manager’s view that safety-critical systems are not a special case or category of product development, but is one dimension that is a requirement in increasingly more systems. As with any product development, the degree to which a safety-critical product is tested or proved should be based on ‘cost of failure’ that, in the final analysis, is a commercial decision based on benefits and business risk. It is argued that with the emphasis on cost of failure, project teams can be more effective in producing safer products, particularly in terms of focusing testing. With effectiveness in mind, an approach to linking benefits to products is described, along with how this relates to requirements and acceptance criteria. Possible impacts of the use of standards in a project are also discussed. Case studies are used to reinforce concepts and highlight concerns.


Product Development Acceptance Criterion Destructive Testing Safety Case Data Flow Diagram 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. APM (2006) Body of knowledge, 5th edn. Association for Project Management, High Wycombe, UKGoogle Scholar
  2. Bell R (2010) Introduction and revision of IEC 61508. SIAS 2010, Tampere, FinlandGoogle Scholar
  3. Bishop P, Bloomfield R (1998) A methodology for safety case development. In: Redmill F, Anderson T (eds) Industrial perspectives of safety-critical systems. SpringerGoogle Scholar
  4. Docker TWG (1979) Some aspects of computer simulation modelling. In: Computer performance evaluation – a professional development seminar. New Zealand Computer Society, HamiltonGoogle Scholar
  5. Docker TWG (1998) Successful requirements management. Requir Eng 3:66-68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Docker TWG (2007) Here’s to the next 50 years! In: BCS at 50 IT past, present and future. British Computer Society, LondonGoogle Scholar
  7. Fagan ME (1986) Advances in software inspections. IEEE Trans Softw Eng-12:744-751Google Scholar
  8. Goldratt EM (1984) The goal. North River PressGoogle Scholar
  9. Kelly T (2003) A systematic approach to safety case management. Proc SAE World CongressGoogle Scholar
  10. Leveson NG (2009) The need for new paradigms in safety engineering. In: Dale C, Anderson T (eds) Safety-critical systems: problems, process and practice. SpringerGoogle Scholar
  11. OGC (2009) Managing successful projects with PRINCE2, 2009 edn. Office of Government Commerce, LondonGoogle Scholar
  12. OUP (2010) Safety-critical. Oxford Dictionaries. http://oxforddictionaries.com. Accessed 10 September 2010
  13. Parsons M, Hunter C (2010) Patterns in safety-related projects. In: Dale C, Anderson T (eds) Making systems safer. SpringerGoogle Scholar
  14. Royce WW (1970) Managing the development of large software systems: concepts and techniques. In: Technical papers of western electronic show and convention (IEEE WesCon), Los Angeles, USAGoogle Scholar
  15. Tschürtz H, Schedl G (2010) An integrated project management life cycle supporting system safety. In: Dale C, Anderson T (eds) Making systems safer. SpringerGoogle Scholar
  16. Ward J, Daniel E (2005) Benefits management: delivering value from IS and IT investments. John Wiley and Sons, Chichester, UKGoogle Scholar
  17. Ward J, Taylor P, Bond P (1996) Evaluation and realization of IS/IT benefits: an empirical study of current practice. Eur J Inf Syst 4:214-225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Wikipedia (2010) Life-critical systems. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life-critical. Accessed 10 September 2010

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Limited 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Thomas Docker
    • 1
  1. 1.CITI LimitedNewport PagnellUK

Personalised recommendations