Systems Analysis and Design ith

  Syst e m s An a lysis a n d Syst e m s An a lysis a n d

D e sign w it h UM L V e r sion D e sign w it h UM L V e r sion D e sign it h D e sign it h UM L UM L V e sion V e sion 2 .0 2 .0 Ch a pt e r 4 Pr oj e ct M a n a ge m e n t Ch a pt e r 4 Pr oj e ct M a n a ge m e n t Alan Dennis, Barbara Wixom , and David Alan Dennis Barbara Wixom and David Tegarden John Wiley & Sons, I nc. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, I nc. J h Wil & S

_{All right s reserved. Reproduct ion or t ranslat ion of t his All right s reserved. Reproduct ion or t ranslat ion of t his}

  I _{p perm ission of t he copyright owner is unlawful. py g Unit ed St at es Copyright Act wit hout t he express writ t en}

work beyond t hat perm it t ed in Sect ion 117 of t he 1976

_{t he Perm issions Depart m ent , John Wiley & Sons, I nc.}

Request for furt her inform at ion should be addressed t o

_{use only and not for redist ribut ion or resale.} The purchaser m ay m ake back up copies for his/ her own The purchaser m ay m ake back- up copies for his/ her own

_{program s or from t he use of t he inform at ion cont ained}

_{om issions, or dam ages, caused by t he use of t hese om issions, or dam ages, caused by t he use of t hese} The Publisher assum es no responsibilit y for errors, herein.

  Pr oj e ct M a n a ge m e n t Chapt er 4

Obj e ct ive s Obj t i

  Become familiar with estimation. Become familiar with estimation ■ ■ Be able to create a project workplan.

  ■ Understand why project teams use Understand why project teams use

  ■ ■ timeboxing.

  Become familiar with how to staff a project. p j ■

  

Understand how computer-aided software

■ engineering, improve the efficiency of a project.

  Understand how to reduce risk on a project.

  ■

K D fi it i Ke y D e fin it ion s

  Proj ect m anagem ent Proj ect m anagem ent is t he process is t he process of planning and cont rolling t he

developm ent of a syst em w it hin a developm ent of a syst em w it hin a

specified t im efram e at a m inim um cost wit h t he right funct ionalit y. cost wit h t he right funct ionalit y A proj ect m anager has t he prim ary responsibilit y for m anaging t he ibilit f i t h hundreds of t asks and roles t hat need t o be carefully coordinat ed. d t b f ll di t d

  

Est im a t in g a Pr oj e ct Ba se d

on I n du st r y I n for m a t ion

I d t I f t i

  _Industry Pla nning Ana lysis De sig n Im ple m e nta tio n _{Applic a tio ns Fo r We b 15% 20% 35% 30%} Sta nda rd Sta nda rd _{Re q uire d Re q uire d} Tim e _{in Pe rso n 4 4 5.33 5 33 9.33 9 33 8 8} Mo nths

F t i P i t Fu n ct ion Poin t s Est im a t e Syst e m Siz e Est im a t e Syst e m Siz e

  A funct ion point is a m easure of program size t hat is based on t he syst em ’s num ber and com plexit y of t ’ b d l it f input s, out put s, queries, files, and program int erfaces

  Est im a t e e ffor t r e qu ir e d Person Mont hs

  Est im a t e t im e r e qu ir e d Mont hs t o com plet e

  Tim e Est im a t ion Usin g a M or e Com ple x Appr oa ch M C l A h

Ge t t in g t h e Righ t N u m be r s for Est im a t ion

  Prior proj ect s Prior proj ect s Past experience I ndust ry st andards

  Det ailed analysis Det ailed analysis

Est im a t ion Tr a de offs Est im a t ion Tr a de - offs

  Size Size Funct ion point s Lines of code Li f d

  Effort Person- m ont hs People available p

  Tim e Mont hs Mont hs

C l l t F t i P i t Ca lcu la t e Fu n ct ion Poin t s

  List m aj or elem ent s of syst em List m aj or elem ent s of syst em Det erm ine t ot al num ber of each elem ent l t Specify com plexit y index of each com ponent ( low, m ed., high) g ) Tot al index m ult iplied by num ber of com ponent s ( TUFP) num ber of com ponent s ( TUFP)

  

Fu n ct ion Poin t Est im a t ion

• - - St St e p On e O
_{Description Low Medium High Total} Complexity C l i _{Outputs __x 4 __x 5 __x 7 ____}

  I I nputs __x 3 ^{3 __x 4 4 __x 6 6 ____} Q Queries i __x 3 _{Files __x 7 __x 10 __x 15 ____} ^{3 __x 4 4 __x 6 6 ____} _{I nterfaces} Program P __x 5 ^{5 __x 7 7 __x 10 10 ____} TOTAL UNADJUSTED FUNCTI ON POI NTS ____

  TUPF Ex a m ple TUPF E l

  Adj u st e d Pr oce ssin g Com ple x it y - - C l i St e p 2 S

  2

  

Fu n ct ion Poin t s Est im a t ion

• - - St St e p Fou r F

  Adjusted Project Complexity = .065 + (0.01 * Project Complexity) 065 (0 01 * P j t C l it ) Total Adjusted Function Points j = Adjusted Project Complexity * TUFP

Fu n ct ion Poin t Est im a t ion Fu n ct ion Poin t Est im a t ion

  Processing Com plexit y ( PC) : __7______ ( From St ep 2) Adj ust ed Processing Com plexit y ( PCA) Com plexit y ( PCA) = 0.65 + ( 0.001 __7_ ) 0.65 + ( 0.001 *

  7 ) Tot al Adj ust ed Funct ion Point s: Funct ion Point s: _0.72 * _338_ = 243 0 72 * 338 243 ( TUFP - - From St ep 1)

Con ve r t in g Fu n ct ion Poin t s t o Lin e s of Code

  _C Language Language LOC/ Funct ion Code Point LOC/ Funct ion Code Point _{130 C+ + JAVA} COBOL ¹¹⁰ _{50 55 Pow erBuilder Visual Basic Visual Basic} Turbo Pascal _{30 30 15} ⁵⁰ _{( e.g., Access, Excel) Packages} HTML _{10- 40} ¹⁵ Source: Capers Jones, Soft ware Product ivit y Research

Fi l St Fin a l St e p

  Mult iply funct ion point s Mult iply funct ion point s Approxim at e lines of code per f funct ion point in t he chosen t i i t i t h h language I f you chose C, t hen 243 funct ion Point s t im es 130 lines of code = 31,590 t ot al lines of code

Est im a t in g Effor t Est im a t in g Effor t

  Funct ion of size and product ion Funct ion of size and product ion rat e COCOMO m odel COCOMO d l convert s a lines- of- code est im at e int o a person- m ont h est im at e i h i For m oderat e- size proj ect s

m ult iply t housands of lines of lt i l t h d f li f

code by 1.4 t o get t he num ber of

people t o assign t o t he proj ect people t o assign t o t he proj ect

COCOM O Est im a t ion Ca lcu la t ion C l l t i

  1.4 thousands-of- * Effort = ( (in Person- lines-of-code f Months)

  Example: E l If LOC = 2000 Then... f Effort = (1.4 * 2000) = 28 Person Months

  

Est im a t in g Sch e du le Tim e Est im a t in g Sch e du le Tim e

Rule of t hum b for est im at ion Rule of t hum b for est im at ion

  Schedule Time (months) =

  3 0 * p s n m nths ^1/3 3.0 * person-months ^1/3

St ffi At t ib t St a ffin g At t r ibu t e s

  St affing levels w ill change over St affing levels w ill change over a proj ect ’s lifet im e Adding st aff m ay add m ore

overhead t han addit ional labor overhead t han addit ional labor

Using t eam s of 8- 10 report ing

in a hierarchical st ruct ure can in a hierarchical st ruct ure can

reduce com plexit y

  I n cr e a sin g Com ple x it y w it h La r ge r Te a m s it h L T

  CREATI N G TH E W ORK CREATI N G TH E W ORK PLAN

D l i W k Pl D e ve lopin g a W or k Pla n

  I dent ify t asks in t he proj ect I dent ify t asks in t he proj ect Est im at e t ask lengt h Det erm ine t ask dependencies

Specify t o whom t ask will be Specify t o whom t ask will be

assigned List deliverables

A W or k pla n Ex a m ple A W k l E l

  Work Plan I nform at ion Work Plan I nform at ion Exam ple Exam ple _{Com plet ion dat e Jan 19, 2001 St art dat e ` Jan 05, 2001} Nam e of t ask Nam e of t ask Perform econom ic feasibilit y Perform econom ic feasibilit y _{Com plet ion st at us Open Deliverable( s) Cost- benefit analysis} Person assigned g Mary Sm it h, sponsor y , p _{Est im at ed t im e 16 hours Resources needed Spreadsheet} Priorit y ^High Act ual t im e 14.5 hours

I de n t ifyin g Ta sk s I de n t ifyin g Ta sk s

  Top- dow n approach Top- dow n approach I dent ify highest level t asks as phases in t he proj ect phases in t he proj ect Break t hem int o increasingly sm aller unit s sm aller unit s

  Met hodology Using st andard list of t asks Sim ilar previous proj ect s

Top D ow n Ta sk I de n t ifica t ion I d t ifi t i

  Phases with Phases high level steps

  Wo rk Pla n De live ra b le s Estima te d Assig ne d _{ho urs To * *} * *

  W or k Br e a k dow n St r u ct u r e W k B k d S Specify high level t asks Specify high level t asks Break down each st ep int o sm aller t asks and num ber t hem in a hierarchical fashion in a hierarchical fashion WBS can be done in t wo ways

  SDLC phase SDLC h Product

W BS P bl W BS Pr oble m s

  They t end t o be specific t o t he They t end t o be specific t o t he design of t he inform at ion syst em being developed being developed

Too m any levels of det ail t oo early

on in t he SDLC for large proj ect s or on in t he SDLC for large proj ect s or t oo few for sm all proj ect s.

  Since t hey are proj ect specific, t hey Since t hey are proj ect specific, t hey are very difficult t o com pare across proj ect s.

E l t i W BS Evolu t ion a r y W BS

  organize in a st andard m anner across all organize in a st andard m anner across all proj ect s creat e in an increm ent al and it erat ive m anner first evolut ionary WBS done w it h init ial aspect s of t he proj ect aspect s of t he proj ect Lat er on m ore det ails are added t o t he WBS.

  Com parable t o earlier proj ect s based on p p j cost and schedule est im at ion

  Pr oj e ct W or k Pla n P j t W k Pl

  

STAFFI N G TH E PROJECT

K D fi it i Ke y D e fin it ion s

  The The st affing plan st affing plan describes t he kinds describes t he kinds of people working on t he proj ect The The proj ect chart er proj ect chart er describes t he describes t he proj ect ’s obj ect ives and rules A A funct ional lead funct ional lead m anages a group of m anages a group of analyst s A A t echnical lead t h i l l d oversees progress of f program m ers and t echnical st aff m em bers m em bers

M t i t i M ot iva t ion

  Use m onet ary rew ards caut iously Use m onet ary rew ards caut iously Use int rinsic rewards Recognit ion Achievem ent The work it self Responsibilit y Advancem ent Chance t o learn new skills

Con flict Avoida n ce St t i St r a t e gie s

  Clearly define roles and proj ect plans Clearly define roles and proj ect plans Hold individuals account able Proj ect chart er list ing norm s and Proj ect chart er list ing norm s and groundrules Develop schedule com m it m ent s ahead of Develop schedule com m it m ent s ahead of t im e Forecast ot her priorit ies and t heir Forecast ot her priorit ies and t heir possible im pact on t he proj ect

  Possible Re por t in g St r u ct u r e P ibl R i S

  CON TROLLI N G AN D D I RECTI N G TH E D I RECTI N G TH E PROJECT

Th e H u r r ica n e M ode l Th e H u r r ica n e M ode l

  P j t St Time Project Stage Time

  M a r gin s of Er r or in Cost a n d Tim e Est im a t e s _{Typ ic a l ma rg ins o f Erro r fo r Typ ic a l ma rg ins o f Erro r fo r}

_{Pha se De live ra b le C o st (%) time (%)}

We ll-d o ne Estima te s Pla nning Syste m Re q ue st 400 _{Pro je c t Pla n 100 25} ⁶⁰ Ana lysis Syste m Pro p o sa l _{De sig n D i S t Syste m Sp e c ific a tio n S ifi ti 25 25} ⁵⁰ _{10 10} ¹⁵ So urc e : Bo e hm e t a l. (1995) ( )

  Ga n t t Ch a r t G t t Ch t

PERT Ch t PERT Ch a r t s

  

Proj ect Evaluat ion and Review Proj ect Evaluat ion and Review

Technique ( PERT) PERT uses t hree t im e st im at es:

  Opt im ist ic O Opt im ist ic, O Most likely, M P i i t i P Pessim ist ic, P

  Tim e Est im at e = O + 4 * M + P

  Pe r t Ch a r t P t Ch t

CASE Tools CASE Tools

  Initiation Analysis Design Implementation Upper CASE Lower CASE Upper SE Lower SE I nt egrat ed CASE ( I - CASE) I nt egrat ed CASE ( I - CASE)

  CASE Com pon e n t s CASE C t

  Diagram s Diagram s Screen Screen Designs

  CASE Reposit ory P Procedural d l

  Met adat a M t d t Logic

St a n da r ds St a n da r ds

  Exam ples Exam ples

Form al rules for nam ing files

Form s indicat ing goals reached Program m ing guidelines Program m ing guidelines _–

  Can you t hink of m ore exam ples?

D ocu m e n t a t ion D ocu m e n t a t ion

  Proj ect binder Proj ect binder Table of cont ent s Cont inual updat ing

M i S M a n a gin g Scope

  Scope creep a m aj or cause of Scope creep - - a m aj or cause of developm ent problem s JAD and prot ot yping Form al change approval g pp Charging for changes

Tim e box in g Tim e box in g

  Fixed deadline Fixed deadline Make deadline possible Set by developm ent group Reduced funct ionalit y, if Reduced funct ionalit y if necessary Fewer “ finishing t ouches”

Tim e box in g St e ps Ti b i St 1. Set the date for system delivery

  1 Set the date for system delivery

  2. Prioritize the functionality that needs to be included in the system. y

  3. Build the core of the system (the functionality ranked as most important).

  

4. Postpone functionality that cannot be provided

within the time frame.

  5 Deliver the system with core functionality

  5. Deliver the system with core functionality.

  6. Repeat steps 3 through 5, to add refinements and enhancements. and enhancements.

M a n a gin g Risk M a n a gin g Risk

  Risk assessm ent Risk assessm ent Act ions t o reduce risk Revised assessm ent

Cl i M i t k Cla ssic M ist a k e s

  Overly opt im ist ic schedule Overly opt im ist ic schedule Failing t o m onit or schedule Failing t o updat e schedule Adding people t o a lat e proj ect Adding people t o a lat e proj ect

S Su m m a r y

  Proj ect m anagem ent is crit ical Proj ect m anagem ent is crit ical

t o successful developm ent of

new syst em s Proj ect m anagem ent involves Proj ect m anagem ent involves planning, cont rolling and

report ing on t im e, labor, and report ing on t im e labor and

cost s.

E di t h D i Ex pa n din g t h e D om a in

  For m ore det ail on proj ect For m ore det ail on proj ect m anagem ent , visit t he proj ect m anagem ent inst it ut e and it s d special int erest group on g inform at ion syst em s: www .pm i.org www pm i org www.pm i- issig.org