ning Value S T S C VS You thought earning value was just a joke. I never thought ht he would look at that chart Leslie (Les) Dupaix USAF Software Technology Support Center les.dupaix@hill.af.mil (801) 775-2064 DSN: 775-2064 Les Dupaix - 1
Report Documentation Page Form Approved OMB No. 0704-0188 Public reporting burden for the collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington VA 22202-4302. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to a penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number. 1. REPORT DATE MAY 2011 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE ning Value vs 2. REPORT TYPE 3. DATES COVERED 00-00-2011 to 00-00-2011 5a. CONTRACT NUMBER 5b. GRANT NUMBER 5c. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER 6. AUTHOR(S) 5d. PROJECT NUMBER 5e. TASK NUMBER 5f. WORK UNIT NUMBER 7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) USAF Software Technology Support Center,Hill AFB,UT,84056 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER 9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. SPONSOR/MONITOR S ACRONYM(S) 12. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT Approved for public release; distribution unlimited 11. SPONSOR/MONITOR S REPORT NUMBER(S) 13. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES Presented at the 23rd Systems and Software Technology Conference (SSTC), 16-19 May 2011, Salt Lake City, UT. 14. ABSTRACT 15. SUBJECT TERMS 16. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF: 17. LIMITATION OF ABSTRACT a. REPORT unclassified b. ABSTRACT unclassified c. THIS PAGE unclassified Same as Report (SAR) 18. NUMBER OF PAGES 26 19a. NAME OF RESPONSIBLE PERSON Standard Form 298 (Rev. 8-98) Prescribed by ANSI Std Z39-18
Topics Lifecycles Development ning Value Stones to Pebbles Pebble Values Earning Value Communication Les Dupaix - 2
Get a Life(cycle) A Need Requirements If you don t have a life cycle, you don t know Where you are Where you are going Failures Finished System Success System Test High-Level Design Low-level Design Failures Failures Success Integration Test Success Unit Test Code Les Dupaix - 3
Lifecycles Strengths and Weaknesses Capability Pure Code- Spiral Modified Prototype Waterfall and - Fix Waterfall Poorly understood Fair to Poor Poor Excellent requirements Excellent Excellent Poor Architecture Poor Poor Excellent Fair to Excellent Highly Reliable System Excellent Poor Excellent Excellent Fair Poor to Fair System Growth Built in Excellent Poor to Fair Excellent Excellent Excellent Risk Management Poor Poor Excellent Fair Fair Predefined Schedule Fair Poor Fair Fair Poor Midcourse Correction Poor unknown Fair Fair Excellent Customer Visibility Poor Fair Excellent Fair Excellent Management Visibility Fair to Fair Poor Excellent Excellent Fair Low Management and developer skill level Fair Excellent Poor Poor to Fair Poor Low Overhead Poor Excellent Fair Excellent Fair Rapid Development (McConnell, 96) Les Dupaix - 4
The Development Triangle You can control only two sides of a triangle; The third side MUST be a free variable. Schedule Product (Functionality + Quality) Cost Les Dupaix - 5
Change Possibility 4x Effor rt\ Cos st 2x 1.5x 1.25x X.8x.67x.5x.25x RFI RFPContract Req. Design Code Award Review Review Review Phase Test Delivery Cost Models for Future Life Cycle Processes: COCOMO 2.0 (Boehm, 1995) Les Dupaix - 6
ning Value a value for each phase and task. All phases sum to the total project. All tasks sum to each phase. The planned value for each task is the percent of the value for phase. Simple measures are the best and easiest. Les Dupaix - 7
Example Task Task Cum # Description Hours Hours 1 Presentation 2 Presentation Outline 1 1 2 3 3 Create 12 15 Presentation 4 Review Presentation 3 18 5 Present 1 19 6 Postmortem 1 20 Les Dupaix - 8
Value Example Task Task Cum Cum # Description Hours Hours Value Value 1 Presentation 2 Presentation Outline 1 1 5 5 2 3 10 15 3 Create 12 15 60 75 Presentation 4 Review Presentation 3 18 15 90 5 Present 1 19 5 95 6 Postmortem 1 20 5 100 Les Dupaix - 9
Value Example with Schedule Task # Task Description Hours Cum Hours Week Value Cum Value 1 Presentation 2 Presentation Outline 3 Create Presentation 1 1 1 5 5 2 3 1 10 15 12 15 3 60 75 4 Review 3 18 4 15 90 Presentation 5 Present 1 19 5 5 95 6 Postmortem 1 20 5 5 100 Les Dupaix - 10
ning Milestones A Need What % of the whole is each phase? Finished System Requirements High-Level Design Are we planning to re-plan at the correct times? System Test Integration Test Low-level Design Unit Test Code Les Dupaix - 11
Isn t this the same guy who made us attend the ning Seminar last week? I ll go gather the requirements and come up with a design. The rest of you START CODING!! Les Dupaix - 12
Slicing Milestones to Inch Pebbles Separate Milestones into Measure-able individual task that can be accomplished Review document Identify interfaces Write test plan Identify inputs to and outputs from each task (including Critical Path) Les Dupaix - 13
ning Milestones More detailed or Re-plan If you don t know enough to plan well, plan often. System Delivery Measure-able Milestones Entire Know the critical path. Les Dupaix - 14
Example - Iterative Approach Phase I 35% ning 7.5%» Entire Project 5%» Phase 2.5% Requirements 25% Design 25% Code 30% Test 12.5% Phase II 30% ning 2.5% Requirements 25% Design 25% Code 30% Test 12.5% Phase III 30% ning 2.5% Requirements 25% Design 25% Code 30% Test 12.5% System Test 5% And during this phase... Les Dupaix - 15
Value Example Phase I Task Task Cum Cum # Description Hours Hours Value Value 1 Project 200 200 5 5 2 Phase 100 300 2.5 7.5 3 Requirements 1000 1500 25 32.5 4 Design 1000 2500 25 57.5 5 Code 1200 3700 30 87.5 6 Test 500 4200 12.5 100 Les Dupaix - 16
Detailed ned Value Example Project (part of Phase I) Task Task Cum Cum # Description Hours Hours Value Value Including Critical Path Identify 1 Resources for 8 8 4 4 each Phase 2 3 4 5 Identify Requirements Match Requirements to Phases Identify Risk Areas System Test 78 86 39 43 20 106 10 53 20 126 15 63 50 176 25 88 6 Review 20 196 10 98 7 Postmortem 4 200 2 100 Les Dupaix - 17
Duration Charts Gantt (Bar) Chart Simple Can show dependencies Tracking planned vs actual Milestone Markers showing progress Doesn t show consumption of resources Normally part of Gantt chart Zero duration Activity A Activity B Activity C Activity D Activity A Activity B Activity C Activity D Time Time Les Dupaix - 18
Critical Path Method (CPM) Network analysis technique Used to predict project duration by analyzing path with least amount of float Early dates: Forward pass calculation Late dates: Backward pass calculation Critical path The series of activities determining the earliest completion Usually defined as activities with float < or = a specified value (often zero) Les Dupaix - 19
Critical Path Method Critical Path Gantt Chart is common method of display. Can also be a pert chart. Les Dupaix - 20
Rebuilding Milestones from Inch Pebbles To make a schedule you need 3 things the estimated direct project hours a calendar of available direct hours the order in which the tasks will be done And if Charlie does not get hurt again we... You then need to estimate the hours needed for each task spread these hours over the calendar of available hours Make sure you check and recheck Critical i Path Les Dupaix - 21
Earning Value You earn value when you complete a task No schedule problems that I can see! No partial credit Les Dupaix - 22
Example Task Task Cum # Description Hours Hours Value 1 2 Identify Resources for each Phase Identify Requirements Match 3 Requirements to Phases Project (part of Phase I) Cum Value Week Actual Week Hours Hours Cum Cum Earned Value 8 8 4 4 1 1 7 7 4 78 86 39 43 4 6 96 103 43 Requirements 20 106 10 53 5 7 24 127 53 4 5 Identify Risk Areas System Test 20 126 10 63 6 50 176 25 88 8 6 Review 20 196 10 98 9 7 Postmortem 4 200 2 100 9 Only get credit on the week completed Les Dupaix - 23
Status Reporting 70 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 Status is earned 0 compared to planned When earned and plan get too far off balance Re- Remember life happens You probably never can catch up 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Actual ned Les Dupaix - 24
Communication Large-scale software requires many people - and without a process, there is little (if any) effective communication. Earned value versus planned value can be a simple sanity check Communicating with a Software Engineers is only slightly less difficult than communicating with the DEAD. Les Dupaix - 25
Questions Les Dupaix - 26