Balanced Measurement Sets: Criteria for Improving Project Management Practices

www.eng.it
ISSRE 2014 – 25° IEEE International Symposium. on Software Reliability
Naples (Italy), November 5 2014
Criteria for Improving Project Management Practices
Balanced Measurement Sets
Luigi Buglione
Gabriele Ruffatti
Sergio Oltolina
Daniele Gagliardi
Engineering Group - Italy
Fulvio Frati
Ernesto Damiani
Dipartimento di Tecnologie dell’Informazione
Università degli Studi di Milano – Italy

www.eng.it
Engineering At a glance
www.eng.it
ISSRE 2014 – Naples (Italy), Nov 5, 2014

www.eng.it
3
SESAR Lab
Università degli Studi di Milano
http://sesar.di.unimi.it

www.eng.it
4
Goals of the presentation
 G1. Measurement is not Project Management with its own costs but also revenues  ROM (Return on Measurement)!
 G2. Need for determining Metrics Patterns against each phase of the project lifecycle
 G3. Propose how an OSS based-solution could help in managing a multidimensional performance management framework
 G4. Discuss some possible improvement for achieving higher ROMs

www.eng.it
5
Agenda
•Introduction
–A bit of humor…
–Measurement: Process, Value, Return, Plans
•Our Open Source Solution
–QEST  QEST nD LIME (models)
–Spago4Q platform
•Improvement points
–Sets of measures
–Metrics Patterns
–Proposed Methodology
•Spago4Q: a Case Study
–Description, Results
–Next implementations
•Conclusions & Next Steps
•Q & A

www.eng.it
6
Introduction
A bit of humour…
URL: www.dilbert.com

www.eng.it
7
What to measure? ISO/IEC 25010:2011 (NFR)
Introduction

www.eng.it
8
Introduction
Some initial questions…
QQ: How much does is it cost to measure? And what about your ROM (Return on Measurement)?
QQ: Is Measurement a separate process from Project Management?

9 ISSRE 2014 – Naples (Italy), Nov 5, 2014 www.eng.it
Measurement SSwwEEnngg – CMMI-DEV v1.2
URL: www.sei.cmu.edu/cmmi
CL FOCUS ACR. KPA
5 Continuous Process OID Organizational Innovation & Deployment
Improvemment CAR Causal Analysis & Resolution
4 Quantitative Management OPP Organizational Process Performance
QPM Quantitative Project Management
RD Requirements Development
TS Technical Solution
PI Product Integration
VAL Validation
OPF Organizational Process Focus
OPD Organizational Process Definition
OT Organizational Training
IPM Integrated Project Management
RSKM Risk Management
DAR Decision Analysis & Resolution
3 Process Standardisation
VER Verification
RM Requirements Management
PP Project Planning
PMC Project Monitoring & Control
SAM Supplier Agreement Management
MEA Measurement & Analysis
PPQA Process and Product Quality Assurance
2 Basic Project Management
CM Configuration Management
1 Initial - -
• ML: 5
• PA: 22
• N.min PA : ML1 (0)
• N.max PA : ML3 (13)
• Measurement is in…
 Measurement & Analysis (ME)  ML2
DDEEVV_Development

www.eng.it
10
Measurement
SwEngSwEng – ISO/IEC 15504 (SPICE)
•Evidences
3 main lifecycle process groups (primary, organizational, supporting)
 9 process groups
oPrimary (ACQ, SPL, ENG, OPE)
oOrganizational (MAN, PIM, RIN, REU)
oSupporting (SUP)
 48 processes
oPrimary (22)
oOrganizational (16)
oSupporting (10)
URLURL: http://www.spiceusergroup.org
•Measurement is in…
 MAN.6 – Measurement

www.eng.it
11
Measurement
ISO/IEC 15939:2007
• Specific ISO standard on the Measurement process
 1° Ed: 1999, 2° Ed: 2007
• ‘Explodes’ the ones in ISO 12207, 15288 or 15504 process models
• Adopt the VIM (Int. Vocabulary of Metrologogy) terms and glossary

www.eng.it
12
Agenda
•Introduction
–Spago4Q platform
–Sets of measures
–Metrics Patterns
–Proposed Methodology
•Spago4Q: a Case Study
–Description, Results
–Next implementations
•Q & A

www.eng.it
13
Our OS Solution
Main goals
Source: Buglione L. & Abran A., QEST nD: n-dimensional extension and generalisation of a Software Performance Measurement Model, International Journal of Advances in Engineering Software, Elsevier Science Publisher, Vol. 33, No. 1, January 2002, pp.1-7
Our work is aimed at showing the integration of:
•QEST nD model, a conceptual framework for measuring process performance based on multiple analysis dimensions (e.g. economic, social, and technological dimensions) by its extension to lifecycle phases, called LIME
www.semq.eu/leng/modtechqlm.htm
•Spago4Q, the open source platform to measure, analyze and monitor quality of products, processes and services
www.spago4q.org

www.eng.it
14
Our OS Solution
QEST model
Source: Buglione L. & Abran A., QEST nD: n-dimensional extension and generalisation of a Software Performance Measurement Model, International Journal of Advances in Engineering Software, Elsevier Science Publisher, Vol. 33, No. 1, January 2002, pp.1-7
Method: Performance is expressed as the combination of the specific ratios selected for each of the 3 dimensions of the quantitative assessment (Productivity - PR) and the perceived product quality level of the qualitative assessment (Quality - Q)
Performance = PR + Q
Model: QEST (Quality factor + Economic, Social & Technical dimensions) is a “structured shell” to be filled according to management objectives in relation to a specific project
Such a model has the ability to handle independent sets of dimensions without predefined ratios and weights - referred to as an open model

www.eng.it
15
Our OS Solution
QEST model –– Geometrical Indicators
It is possible to measure performance considering at least 3 distinct geometrical concepts:
• Distance between the tetrahedron base center of gravity and the center of the plane section along the tetrahedron height – the greater the distance from 0, the higher the performance level;
• Area of the sloped plane section – the smaller the area, the higher the performance level;
• Volume of the lowest part of the truncated tetrahedron – the greater the volume, the higher the performance level.
Target: measuring project performance (p) using 3 distinct viewpoints
Input Data: list of weighted ratios for each dimension and quality questionnaires
Output Data: an integrated normalized value of performance

Our OS Solution QEST model –– Key Features
• Integrated quantitative and qualitative evaluation from 3
concurrent organisational viewpoints
• A 3D geometrical representation at a single project phase (usually
after the project is completed)
• Use of de facto and de jure standards (e.g. ISO/IEC 9126 for the
Quality Factor)
• Performance Measurement Model to use for consolidating
Balanced Scorecard (BSC) measurement outcomes
• Extension of the original 3D model to n possible dimensions-perspectives
 QEST nD through the ssiimmpplleexx as the mechanism to
solve the problem from the 4th dimension on

www.eng.it
17
Our OSS Solution
Spago4Q Platform
Spago4Q (SpagoBI for Quality) is:
•An open source platform for the continuous monitoring of software quality (www.spago4q.org)
•A vertical adaptation of SpagoBI, the Open Source Business Intelligence suite (www.spagobi.org)
•Pure open-source (no commercial version), with commercial support by Engineering Group
•Several adopters in Italy and Abroad (e.g. European Commission – Directorate General for Regional Policy, DG-REGIO)
Main features
 Multi-process multi-project monitoring
 Data Collection run in a fully, transparent way
Equipped with extractors specific of most-common software process environments (IDE, workflow management, text editing, …)

www.eng.it
18
Our OSS Solution
Spago4Q Structure

www.eng.it
19
Spago4Q Case Study
Background, Goals, Improvement actions
•Application Management (AM) services
Software Maintenance (Corrective, Adaptive, Perfective, Preventive) for a large mission-critical system in a Finance Institute
•Services started in 2006 (analysis period : January 2008 – June 2010)
Verify QEST nD applicability and results in a context of AM Services
Define a QEST nD model aligned to the AM services goals
Monitor the effectiveness of improvement action with specific goals and metrics
• Goals
EC-G3 Reduce the rework (intended as impact of defects in UAT or production environment)
TE-G1 Improve the deploy process
TE-G5 Improve effectiveness of peer reviews
 Improvement actions
Deploy process automation and automatic analysis of source code
Progressively increasing of the number of peer reviews on critical work products
Specific tasks were included in Impact analysis phase at the aim to:
Classify and identify critical Work Products to be reviewed
Assign an owner to solve complex defects impacting on different development streams
Root-cause analysis of the recurring defects

www.eng.it
20
QEST Model - Dimensions && Metrics
The model defined for the case study take into account four analysis dimensions and goals (following the Goal-MetricGoal-Question-Metric paradigm):
1.Economical (EE)
E.G1 Reduce the effort of corrective maintenance
E.G2 Improve the number of delayed deliverables
E.G3 Reduce the rework (intended as impact of defects in UAT or production environment)
2.Technical (TT)
T.G1 Improve the deploy process
T.G2 Reduce the resolution time for defects and technical issues
T.G3 Improve quality of documents and source code
T.G4 Reduce the rework (intended as impact of defects during development phase)
T.G5 Effectiveness of peer reviews
T.G6 Improve non-regression test
3.Resource Usage (RSRS)
RS.G1 Reduce impact of human resource management issues
RS.G2 Improve hardware system availability
4Customer Satisfaction (CSCS)
CS.G1 Improve user satisfaction about training courses and application services
Spago4Q Case Study

www.eng.it
21
QEST Model - Dimensions && Metrics
Dimension
Metric Description
Formula
Economical (EE)
Incidence of Corrective Maintenance Effort w.r.t. maintained code size
Corrective Maintenance Effort/ KLOC
Ratio Corrective Maintenance Effort - Adaptive Maintemance Effort
Corrective Maintenance Effort/ Adaptive Maintenance Effort
Incidence of Delayed Deliverables w.r.t. total number of Deliverables
no. Delayed Deliv. / no. Deliv.
Incidence of Defects after system test w.r.t. total number of Defects
no. Defects in UAT or production / total no. of Defects
Resource Usage (RSRS)
Human Resources management issues w.r.t. total number of issues admitted for working group size
no. HR issues / no. Issues for group size
Hardware System Availability
Percentage System Availability
Technical (TT)
Technical management issues w.r.t. total number of issues admitted
no. Technical issues / no.issues admitted
Issues Mean Resolution Time
Total Res. Time / no. Issues
Document quality: respect of document quality standard
Percentage of positive response to a checklist
Software Complexity
Results of automatic static code analysis
Coding rules non-conformity level
Software Maintenability
Incidence of Peer Reviews w.r.t. total number of Deliverables
no. Peer reviews / no. Deliverables
Number of Defects discovered by peer reviews w.r.t. total number of Defects
no. Peer review defects / total no. defects
no. Defects / FP
Incidence of Defects Due to Design Phase w.r.t. total number of Defects
no. Defects(Design phase) / Total no. Defects
for any phase p
Test coverage w.r.t. Requirements
no. Test Cases / no. Requirements
Production Defects Mean Resolution Time
Total Res. Time / no. defects
Customer Satisfaction (CSCS)
Training Services
Questionnaire results
User Satisfaction
Questionnaire results
Spago4Q Case Study

www.eng.it
22
Results - QEST dashboard
Spago4Q Case Study

www.eng.it
23
Results – Dimensions trend analysis
Trend for each dimension
Last results for each dimension
Spago4Q Case Study

Spago4Q Case Study Results – Global and technical % increasing

www.eng.it
25
Detailed Analysis Results (exampleexample)
[AM-EC-M.04] Defects reduction in UAT and production environment
[AM-TE-M.11] Defects mean resolution time reduction
Spago4Q Case Study

www.eng.it
26
[AM-TE-M.01] Technical issues reduction: specifically related to deployment process
[AM-TE-M.02] Technical issues mean resolution time
Spago4Q Case Study

www.eng.it
27
[AM-TE-M.07] Number of peer reviews actually executed vs. number of critical Work Products
[AM-TE-M.08] Defects or potential defects discovered during peer reviews
[AM-TE-M.09] Incidence of defects due to design phase
Spago4Q Case Study

www.eng.it
28
Agenda
•Introduction
–Spago4Q platform
–Spago4Q: Case Study
–Sets of measures
–Metrics Patterns
–The proposed methodology
•Q & A

www.eng.it
29
Improvement Points
Coming back to questions…
QQ: Are we applying a suitable and balanced set of measures?
QQ: Is such set fitting with a specific SLC phase? Or not?

www.eng.it
30
Improvement Points
Plan of Measures vs Measurement Plan
Measurement Plan
• Proposed improvements to ISO 15939
• Refinement to the current measurement process
• Introduction of concept of ‘coordinated’ and ‘balanced’ set of measures for the measurement plan
• Refinement of the MIM (Measurement Information Model)
• Content for a Measurement Plan (App. F)  5W’s+2H (Who, Why, What, Where, When, How, How Much)
• …
Plan of Measures

www.eng.it
31
LIME (LIfecycle MEasurement) model represents the extension of QEST features to a dynamic context as the SLC is.
SLC model selected: generic 6-steps Waterfall model
Logic adopted: the same than in the ETVX (Entry-Task-Validation-eXit) process notation
Our OS Solution
LIME model –– Extending QEST to lifecycle

www.eng.it
32
Improvement Points
Sets of Measures
•Set of measures (by SLC phase, Common Issue Areas, …)
Several sources: e.g. ISO/IEC 9126-x, PSM, …

www.eng.it
33
Improvement Points
Metrics Patterns
•Metrics Patterns
1.Start with a BMP (Balancing Measurement Perspective) analysis
2.Refine the measures analyzing any potential counter-effect
3.1+1 = …3!  ROM (Return on Measurement)
Source: L.Buglione & A.Abran, Multidimensional Project Management Tracking & Control - Related Measurement Issues, Proceedings of SMEF 2005, Software Measurement European Forum, 16-18 March 2005, Rome (Italy), pp. 205-214

www.eng.it
34
Improvement Points
The proposed methodology
•What to do…
1.Group projects by similarity (cluster analysis)
2.Determine frequencies for measures by SLC
3.Suggest set of measures by SLC
4.Implement Spago4Q by SLC phase (using the LIME extension)

www.eng.it
35
Agenda
•Introduction
–Spago4Q platform
–Spago4Q: Case Study
–Sets of measures
–Metrics Patterns
–The proposed methodology
•Q & A

www.eng.it
36
(Some) Conclusions & Next Steps
•Need for Process Improvement tools
 Huge attention from Management for low-cost technical solutions for a better monitoring & control both at the project and organizational level  OSS
 The right combination should include both methods and tools
•QEST nD+ LIME
QEST is multidimensional performance model taking into account several perspectives from interested stakeholders
QEST can be exploited also at the SLC level with LIME (see www.semq.eu)
•SPAGO4Q
Spago4Q is a flexible platform for software process/product monitoring applicable to any SPI activity, freely downloadable, not commercial versions: www.spago4q.org
•Case study - Provided evidence
Clear Benefits on measurement process with proven effectiveness for peer reviews
•Difficulties in achieving process improvements
 Time pressure
 Workload and urgent activities disqualify the team to provide sufficient effort to SPI activities
 SPI is usually considered as a low priority process even if…continuous commitment is needed
•Next Steps – Spago4Q Implementation for…
…the Metrics Pattern Calculator (MPC)
…Automatic/Dynamic (re)calculation of KPI thresholds from historical data
Analyze facts and talk through data
(Kaoru Ishiwaka, TQM guru)

www.eng.it
37
Lessons Learned...

www.eng.it
38
Q && A
Grazie l’attenzioneGrazie per l’attenzione!!
Thanks attentionThanks for your attention!!

www.eng.it
39
Our Contact Data
L.Buglione, S.Oltolina, G.Ruffatti, D.Gagliardi
Engineering Ingegneria Informatica/ETS{luigi.buglione|sergio.oltolina|gabriele.ruffatti|daniele.gagliardi} @eng.it
E.Damiani, F.Frati
Univ Milan /SESAR Lab{ernesto.damiani | fulvio.frati} @unimi.it

Balanced Measurement Sets: Criteria for Improving Project Management Practices

More Related Content

What's hot (20)

Similar to Balanced Measurement Sets: Criteria for Improving Project Management Practices (20)

More from Luigi Buglione (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Balanced Measurement Sets: Criteria for Improving Project Management Practices