Systems Engineering Schedule Acceleration

Transcription

1 A Modeling for Estimating Systems Engineering Schedule Acceleration Barry Boehm, Dan Ingold, Supannika Koolmanojwong, JoAnn Lane, USC CSSE NDIA SE Conference 2013 October 30, Outline Baseline: CORADMO Expedited Software Development Model RAD: Rapid Application Development Expedited ScheduleDrivers Relation to RAD Opportunity Tree Nominal Systems Engineering effort and schedule obtained from COSYSMO effort estimation model, square root effort schedule relationship RAD Opportunity Tree elements reorganized around product process project people risk project people riskfactors determined in SERC Expediting SE study Model calibrated to 12 agile project data points Case Study: From Plan Driven to Agile Current Model Status

2 RAD Opportunity Tree Also in SERC RT-20 Systems 2020 Report, Appendix B E lim in a tin g T a s k s Business process reengineering R eusing assets Applications generation D e s ig n - t o -s c h e d u le Reducing tim e per task Tools and autom ation W ork Stream linin g (80-20) Increasing parallelism Reducing risks of s in g le-p o in t failu re s Reducing failures R educin g their effects Reducing backtracking Early error elim inatio n Process anchor points Im proving process m aturity Collaboration technology A ctivity netw o rk s trea m lin in g In creasing effective w o rk w e e k M in im izing task d ep end encies Avoiding high fan-in, fan-out R educin g task variance R em o ving tasks fro m critical path 24x7 d evelo pm en t Nightly builds, testing W ee ke nd w arriors Better people and incentives Transition to learning organization Basic Expedited SE Model Form Estimate SE effort using COSYSMO Estimate nominal SE schedule as square root (SE effort) Agile software schedule = square root (effort) Estimate deviations from nominal schedule using multipliers for product, process, project, people, and risk acceptance factors Very Low, Low factor ratings slow down schedule High, Very High and Extra High factor ratings speed up schedule

3 COSYSMO Operational Concept # Requirements # Interfaces # Scenarios # Algorithms Reuse Factor Volatility Factor Size Drivers Effort Multipliers COSYSMO Effort - Application factors -8 factors - Team factors -6 factors - Schedule driver Calibration WBS guided by ISO/IEC COSYSMO Cost Drivers Application 6 3

4 Outline Baseline: CORADMO Expedited Software Development Model RAD: Rapid Application Development Expedited ScheduleDrivers Relation to RAD Opportunity Tree Nominal Systems Engineering effort and schedule obtained from COSYSMO effort estimation model, square root effortschedule relationship RAD Opportunity Tree elements reorganized around product process project people risk project people riskfactors determined in SERC Expediting SE study Model calibrated to 12 agile project data points Case Study: From Plan Driven to Agile Current Model Status Potential Critical Success Factors Areas Final Database Over 30 Interviews with Gov t/ Industry Rapid Development Organizations Over 23,500 words from interview notes Product, Process, People all in a Project Context 4

5 Product Factor Elements Product simplicity (of interfaces, legacy migration, ilities) Very Low: Extremely complex; Extra High: Extremely simple Ability to reuse product elements Very Low: None; Extra High: 90% Ability to defer low impact aspects Very Low: Never; Extra High: Anytime System definition via models vs. documents Very low: None; Extra High: 90% Technology maturity of key capabilities Very Low: >0 Level 1 2 or >1 Level 3; Extra High: All >Level Process Factor Elements Concurrency of OpCon, Rqts., Architecture, V&V Very Low: Highly sequential; Extra High: Fully concurrent Process streamlining Very Low: Heavily Bureaucratic; Extra High: Fully streamlined General SE tool support (coverage, integration, maturity: CIM) Very Low: Simpletools tools, weak CIM; Extra High: Very strong CIM

6 Project Factor Elements Collaboration support Very Low: Globally distributed; weak communications, data sharing Extra High: Largely collocated; very strong communications, data sharing Single domain models, methods, processes, tools (MMPTs) Very Low: Simple MMPTs, weak CIM; Extra High: Extensive CIM Multi domain models, methods, processes, tools (MMPTs) Very Low: Simple MMPTs, weak CIM; Extra High: Extensive CIM People Factor Elements General SE Knowledge, Skills, and Agility (KSA) Very Low: Very weak KSA; Extra High: Very strong KSA Single domain Knowledge, Skills, and Agility (KSA) Very Low: Very weak KSA; Extra High: Very strong KSA Multi domain Knowledge, Skills, and Agility (KSA) Very Low: Very weak KSA; Extra High: Very strong KSA Team compatibility Very Low: Very difficult interactions Extra High: Seamless interactions

7 Risk Acceptance Factor Risk Acceptance Very Low: Highly risk averse; Extra High: Strongly risk accepting CORADMO SE Rating Scales, Schedule Multipliers Accelerators/Ratings Very Low Low Nominal High Very High Extra High Product Factors Extremely Highly Moderately Extremely Simplicity Mod. complex Highly simple complex complex simple simple Moderate Considerate Extensive Element Reuse None (0%) Minimal (15%) Some (30%) (50%) (70%) (90%) Low-Priority Never Rarely Sometimes Often Usually Anytime Deferrals Moderate Considerate Extensive Models vs Documents None (0%) Minimal (15%) Some (30%) (50%) (70%) (90%) Key Technology >0 TRL 1,2 or 1 TRL 3 or > 1 1 TRL 4 or > TRL 5 or 1-2 TRL 6 All > TRL 7 Maturity >1 TRL 3 TRL 4 TRL 5 >2 TRL 6 Process Factors Concurrent 2 artifacts 3 artifacts All artifacts Operational Concept, Highly Mostly Fully mostly mostly mostly Requirements, sequential sequential concurrent concurrent concurrent concurrent Architecture, V&V Heavily Largely Conservative Moderate Mostly Fully Process Streamlining bureaucratic bureaucratic bureaucratic streamline streamlined streamlined General SE tool Simple tools, support CIM Considerable weak Minimal CIM Some CIM Moderate CIM Extensive CIM (Coverage, CIM integration Integration, Maturity) Project Factors Project size (peak # of Over 300 Over 100 Over 30 Over 10 Over 3 3 personnel) Globally Regionally Largely Nationally Metro-area Simple distributed distributed, collocated, Collaboration support distributed, distributed, campus, weak comm., moderate Very strong some sharing good sharing strong sharing data sharing sharing sharing Single-domain Simple MMPTs (Models, MMPTs, Considerable Minimal CIM Some CIM Moderate CIM Extensive CIM Methods, Processes, weak CIM Tools) integration Multi-domain Simple; weak Some CIM or Considerable Minimal CIM Moderate CIM Extensive CIM MMPTs integration not needed CIM People Factors General SE KSAs Moderate Very strong (Knowledge, Skills, Weak KSAs Some KSAs Good KSAs Strong KSAs KSAs KSAs Agility) Single-Domain KSAs Weak Some Moderate Good Strong Very strong Moderate or Multi-Domain KSAs Weak Some Good Strong Very strong not needed Basically Very difficult Some difficult Largely Highly Seamless Team Compatibility cooperative interactions interactions cooperative cooperative interactions interactions Risk Acceptance Factor Highly riskaversaverse Partly risk- Balanced risk Moderately Considerably Strongly risk- aversion, risk-accepting risk-accepting accepting acceptance

8 CORADMO SE Calibration Data Mostly Commercial; Some DoD Application Type Technologies Person Months Duration (Months) Duration / PM Product Process Project People Risk Multiplier Error % Insurance agency system HTML/VB VH VH H VH N % Scientific/engineering C L VH VH VH N % Compliance - expert HTML/VB VH VH H VH N % Barter exchange SQL/VB/ HTML VH H H VH N % Options exchange site HTML/SQL VH VH H VH N % Commercial HMI C L N N VH N % Options exchange site HTML VH VH H VH N % Time and billing C++/VB L VH VH VH N % Hybrid Web/client-server VB/HTML L N VH VH N % ASP HTML/VB/SQL VH VH H VH N % On-line billing/tracking VB/HTML VH VH H VH N % Palm client C/HTML N VH VH VH N % Outline Baseline: CORADMO Expedited Software Development Model RAD: Rapid Application Development Expedited ScheduleDrivers Relation to RAD Opportunity Tree Nominal Systems Engineering effort and schedule obtained from COSYSMO effort estimation model, square root effortschedule relationship RAD Opportunity Tree elements reorganized around product process project people risk project people riskfactors determined in RT 34 Model calibrated to 12 agile project data points Case Study: From Plan Driven to Agile Current Model Status

9 Case Study: From Plan Driven to Agile Accelerators/Ratings VL L N H VH H Product Factors Simplicity Element Reuse Low-Priority Deferrals Models vs Documents Key Technology Maturity Process Factors Concurrent Operational Concept, Requirements, Architecture, V&V Process Streamlining General SE tool support CIM (Coverage, Integration, Maturity) Project Factors Project size (peak # of personnel) Collaboration support Single-domain MMPTs (Models, Methods, Processes, Tools) Multi-domain MMPTs People Factors General SE KSAs (Knowledge, Skills, Agility) Single-Domain KSAs Multi-Domain KSAs Team Compatibility Risk Acceptance Factor Case Study: From Plan Driven to Agile Initial Project: Focus on Concurrent SE Accelerators/Ratings VL L N H VH H Product Factors Simplicity Element Reuse Low-Priority Deferrals Models vs Documents Key Technology Maturity Process Factors Concurrent Operational Concept, Requirements, Architecture, V&V Process Streamlining General SE tool support CIM (Coverage, Integration, Maturity) Project Factors Project size (peak # of personnel) Collaboration support Single-domain MMPTs (Models, Methods, Processes, Tools) Multi-domain MMPTs People Factors General SE KSAs (Knowledge, Skills, Agility) Single-Domain KSAs Multi-Domain KSAs Team Compatibility Risk Acceptance Factor Expected schedule reduction of 1.09/0.96 = 0.88 (green arrow) Actual schedule delay of 15% due to side effects (red arrows) Model prediction: 0.88*1.09*1.04*1.06*1.06 =

10 Case Study: From Plan Driven to Agile Next Project: Fix Side Effects; Reduce Bureaucracy Accelerators/Ratings VL L N H VH H Product Factors Simplicity Element Reuse Low-Priority Deferrals Models vs Documents Key Technology Maturity Process Factors Concurrent Operational Concept, Requirements, Architecture, V&V Process Streamlining General SE tool support CIM (Coverage, Integration, Maturity) Project Factors Project size (peak # of personnel) Collaboration support Single-domain MMPTs (Models, Methods, Processes, Tools) Multi-domain MMPTs People Factors General SE KSAs (Knowledge, Skills, Agility) Single-Domain KSAs Multi-Domain KSAs Team Compatibility Risk Acceptance Factor Model estimate: 0.88*(0.92/0.96)*(0.96/1.05) = 0.77 speedup Project results: 0.8 speedup Model tracks project status; identifies further speedup potential Current Model Status Considerable interest, experimantal use Large aerospace companies, DoD Services Also considered useful for planning Preparing, iterating data collection insrument Applying to agile software projects Mostly knowledge work