1. © McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004 Information Systems Project Management—David Olson 7-1

2. © McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004 Information Systems Project Management—David Olson 7-2 Chapter 7: Estimation project planning - what to do project control make sure it’s done right estimation of detailed system design

3. © McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004 Information Systems Project Management—David Olson 7-3 Planning Process determine requirements from objectives specify work activities plan project organization develop schedule develop resource plan and budget establish control mechanisms each project unique

4. © McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004 Information Systems Project Management—David Olson 7-4 Determine Requirements Specify work activities STATEMENT OF WORK: –product descriptions –constraints –schedule requirements –budget limits –roles & responsibilities

5. © McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004 Information Systems Project Management—David Olson 7-5 WORK DEFINITION once objectives set, TRANSLATE INTO WORK ELEMENTS what needs to be done –easy to overlook some, or duplicate WORK BREAKDOWN STRUCTURE –divide project into major work categories subdivide

6. © McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004 Information Systems Project Management—David Olson 7-6 Work Breakdown Structure

7. © McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004 Information Systems Project Management—David Olson 7-7 Work Breakdown Structure level 1 - overall project level 2 - category –major project subelement level 3 - task –subelement of category level x - subtask level bottom - WORK PACKAGE –specific activity

8. © McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004 Information Systems Project Management—David Olson 7-8 Detailed Task List WBS can be focused on –PRODUCT –FUNCTION –etc. when work packages identified, –estimate requirements by resource –WHAT IS NEEDED –WHEN –WHAT MUST PRECEDE

9. © McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004 Information Systems Project Management—David Olson 7-9 Work Breakdown Structure needs to be checked, approved provides –good definition of work –how long it will take –resources required –estimated costs planning & control –assignments, budget, basis for control

10. © McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004 Information Systems Project Management—David Olson 7-10 Work Packages chunk of required work relatively small cost and short duration includes –summary of work –inputs required (predecessors) –manager responsible –product specifications –resources required (including budget, dates) –deliverables

11. © McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004 Information Systems Project Management—David Olson 7-11 list of work packages (activities) system design activitypredecessortime A2 identify req’d infoA110 days A31 basic softwareA23 days A32 data access req’dA21 day A33 vendor softwareA21 day

12. © McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004 Information Systems Project Management—David Olson 7-12 Work Packages need to identify start and finish events for each work package related tasks without definable end results (overhead & management; inspection; maintenance) should be included as task-oriented work packages for COST purposes

13. © McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004 Information Systems Project Management—David Olson 7-13 Project Organization identify resources required by work package RESPONSIBILITY MATRIX –which functions do what work packages –cost account structure start & finish date budget responsibilities

14. © McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004 Information Systems Project Management—David Olson 7-14 Project Management System lists activities on one axis lists people on other axis shows who is –primarily responsible –also involved –has approval authority –must be notified

15. © McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004 Information Systems Project Management—David Olson 7-15 Scheduling BASIS for –RESOURCE ALLOCATION –ESTIMATED COST –plan for monitoring & control EVENTS or MILESTONES –when activity completed (or started) –INTERFACE EVENT when responsibility passes

16. © McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004 Information Systems Project Management—David Olson 7-16 Kinds of Schedules project schedules –project master schedule - top management –overview rather than detail task schedules –specific activities required –more detail

17. © McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004 Information Systems Project Management—David Olson 7-17 Resource Plans & Budgets Activities often compete for the same resources –hire more –reschedule Resource plans show critical resource schedules –bottlenecks around which schedule is built

18. © McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004 Information Systems Project Management—David Olson 7-18 Charts visual aids Gantt Charts –plan - activities by time (work in outline) –implement - fill in as work done –doesn’t show relationships well –very good at seeing where things are (IF ACCURATE) Expense Charts - cumulatively graph $ spent

19. © McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004 Information Systems Project Management—David Olson 7-19 Recap Planning - key to accurate bidding need to know what it will cost in order to know how to price need to know resources required, complex projects take a long time MIS projects –activities, predecessor relations, resource use

20. © McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004 Information Systems Project Management—David Olson 7-20 Software Estimation The Mythical Man-Month: Essays on Software Engineering Frederick P. Brooks, Jr. (U N. Carolina) Addison-Wesley: 1975

21. © McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004 Information Systems Project Management—David Olson 7-21 Programming Products Program –usable by author Programming System –usable by anyone Programming Product –tested, documented, maintained –3 times the effort of a program Programming System Product

22. © McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004 Information Systems Project Management—David Olson 7-22 causes of project failure LACK OF CALENDAR TIME the most common –estimating techniques are poor –assume that effort = progress you can’t just throw people at a problem –poor monitoring of progress SCHEDULING –tendency to assume all will go well

23. © McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004 Information Systems Project Management—David Olson 7-23 impact of adding people partitionable project –marginal contribution declines non-partitionable project –no benefit at all from adding people complex interactions must separately coordinate each task with all others –first few have declining marginal contribution –after some number, adding people slows down project

24. © McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004 Information Systems Project Management—David Olson 7-24 software project activities testing is the activity most difficult to predict –planning1/3 of project –coding1/6 of project –component testing1/4 of project –system testing1/4 of project most projects are on schedule UNTIL TESTING Brooks’s Law: Adding manpower to a late project makes it later

25. © McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004 Information Systems Project Management—David Olson 7-25 programmer productivity there is wide variation in productivity between good and fair programmers Brute force failures –costlyOS/360TSS –slowExec 8SAGE –inefficientScope 6600 –nonintegrated systemsMultics

26. © McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004 Information Systems Project Management—David Olson 7-26 impact of adding programmers if a 200 person project has its best 25 people as managers –fire the 175 –make the 25 managers programmers shouldn’t have more than 10 people on a team OS/360 had 1000 working on it, 5000 man-years small teams infeasible; use surgical teams

27. © McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004 Information Systems Project Management—David Olson 7-27 surgical team surgeonchief programmer copilotshare thinking, evaluation administratorboring details editorreferences, documentation secretaries (2) program clerktechnical records toolsmithediting, debugging testerdevelop test cases language lawyerexpert on language

28. © McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004 Information Systems Project Management—David Olson 7-28 conceptual integrity better to reflect one set of design ideas than to add independent and uncoordinated features & improvements purpose of programming system is to make computer easy to use simplicity & straightforwardness come from conceptual integrity

29. © McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004 Information Systems Project Management—David Olson 7-29 conceptual integrity example OS/360 –architect manager: said his 10 person team could write specifications in 10 months (3 months late) –control program manager: his 150 people could get it done in 7 months, & if his people didn’t do this, they would have nothing to do –architect manager: control program people would take 10 months, do a poor job –Brooks gave to control program group –took 10 months, plus added year to debugging

30. © McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004 Information Systems Project Management—David Olson 7-30 estimating programming time duration is exponential (bigger jobs take more than proportionally longer) –analogous to sprint 100 yards, running 1 mile effort = K x (number of instructions) 1.5 one manager noted programming taking twice as long as estimate –only getting 20 hours of work/week –machine down, divert to emergencies, meetings, paperwork, sick

31. © McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004 Information Systems Project Management—David Olson 7-31 programming estimation the more interactions, the less productivity –interaction = coordination with others high level languages increase productivity –now tools should almost eliminate the programming component, but there are other activities (the more unpredictable ones)

32. © McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004 Information Systems Project Management—David Olson 7-32 (prototyping) in most projects, the first system built is barely usable PLAN THE SYSTEM FOR CHANGE –modularization –subroutining –interfaces –documentation of interfaces –high-level languages

33. © McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004 Information Systems Project Management—David Olson 7-33 software estimation Charles R. Symons Software Sizing and Estimating: Mk II FPA Wiley [1991]

34. © McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004 Information Systems Project Management—David Olson 7-34 software production cycle DESIGN DEVELOPMENT productionnot hard MAINTENANCE recognized as a difficult task

35. © McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004 Information Systems Project Management—David Olson 7-35 software production cycle SYSTEM SIZE a variable in –DESIGN –DEVELOPMENT –MAINTENANCE components of system size –amount of information processed –technical requirements –performance drivers (objectives)

36. © McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004 Information Systems Project Management—David Olson 7-36 objectives COSTminimization TIMEminimization QUALITYassure that product performs to specifications

37. © McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004 Information Systems Project Management—David Olson 7-37 size measures source lines of code + concrete measure - what lines? - logical or physical? - housekeeping? - different across languages most commonly used some economy of scale

38. © McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004 Information Systems Project Management—David Olson 7-38 Albrecht’s Function Point Analysis Method AIMS –consistent measure –meaningful to end user function points should be easier to understand than lines of code –rules easy to apply –Can estimate from requirements specification –independent of technology used

39. © McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004 Information Systems Project Management—David Olson 7-39 Albrecht’s system count –external user inputs –enquiries –outputs –master files delivered (internal & external) get points for every useful activity function points= information processing size x technical complexity adjustment

40. © McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004 Information Systems Project Management—David Olson 7-40 Albrecht’s System complexity tables –data elements referenced 1-4 5-15 16 or more –file types referenced 0 or 1 2 3 or more table of SIMPLE, AVERAGE, COMPLEX

41. © McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004 Information Systems Project Management—David Olson 7-41 Albrecht complexity

42. © McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004 Information Systems Project Management—David Olson 7-42 Albrecht functional multipliers SIMPLE AVERAGE COMPLEX external inputx 3x 4x 6 external outputx 4x 5x 7 logical internal filex 7x 10x 15 ext interface filex 5x 7x 10 external inquiryx 3x 4x 6 add up, get total unadjusted function points

43. © McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004 Information Systems Project Management—David Olson 7-43 Albrecht Technical Complexity Adjustment 14 general application characteristics data communicationson-line updatedistributed functions complex processingperformancere-useability heavily used configurationinstallation easetransaction rate operational easeon-line data entrymultiple sites end user efficiencyfacilitate change not present= 0average influence= 3 insignificant influence= 1significant influence= 4 moderate influence= 2strong influence= 5 TCA = 0.65+(0.01x(total degree of influence))

44. © McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004 Information Systems Project Management—David Olson 7-44 Symons’ complaints Albrecht method –alternative counting practices –weights used are questionable –large systems under-weighted (XEROX 1985: rapid drop in productivity with increasing system size) –range of points too narrow but MUCH BETTER THAN SLOC

45. © McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004 Information Systems Project Management—David Olson 7-45 Mk II Function Point Analysis modification of Albrecht use same Technical Complexity Adjustment extend general application characteristics to 19 or more weights adjusted Information Processing Size changed the most

46. © McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004 Information Systems Project Management—David Olson 7-46 logical transactions logical transaction = –unique input/process/output combination triggered by unique event of interest to the user –or need to retrieve information create a customer update an account enquiry produce monthly summary report

47. © McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004 Information Systems Project Management—David Olson 7-47 unadjusted function points UFPs =W I x # input data element types +W E x # entity types referenced +W O x # output data element types weights determined by calibration determine UFPs for system by adding UFPs for all system logical transactions assumes work directly proportional to # of data elements; size of process proportional to # data entries; weights meaningful, obtainable

48. © McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004 Information Systems Project Management—David Olson 7-48 complexity adjustment Albrecht’s method with 2 modifications: –extend general application list to 19 interfaces to other applications special security features direct access requirement for third parties special user training facilities documentation requirements TCA = 0.65 + C x (total degree of influence) where C is obtained by calibration

49. © McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004 Information Systems Project Management—David Olson 7-49 calibration by CALIBRATION Symons means fit the company’s data regress industry averages: W I 0.58 W E 1.66 W O 0.26

50. © McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004 Information Systems Project Management—David Olson 7-50 Mk II FPA summary obtain general understanding of the system construct a model of primary entities identify logical transactions score degree of influence of all 19 general application characteristics (plus client specific) obtain total project work-hours, calibrate calculate function points

51. © McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004 Information Systems Project Management—David Olson 7-51 comparison SLOCAlbrechtMk II FPA accepted standard noyesyes claritypotentiallysome subjectiveobjective structured?nonoyes easy to use?yesnono automatable?yesnoyes use for estimating?sometimesyesyes

52. © McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004 Information Systems Project Management—David Olson 7-52 Estimation Example SLOC Function Point

53. © McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004 Information Systems Project Management—David Olson 7-53 Source Lines of Code NEED DATABASE of past experience AVERAGESeffort33 months cost$361 (thousand) documentation1194 pages errors201 defects52 people4 KLOC20.543

54. © McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004 Information Systems Project Management—David Olson 7-54 Implementing LOC Estimate structured lines of code10,000 averages proportional to LOC 10/20.543 = 0.487 effort33 months  0.487 =16 cost$361 thou  0.487 =$177,000 documentation1194 pages  0.487 = 581 pp. errors201  0.487 =98 defects52  0.487 = 25 people4  0.487 =2 people

55. © McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004 Information Systems Project Management—David Olson 7-55 Function Point Calculation 1 - get count-total number of features times complexity 2 - get F i rate 14 factors (0-5), total 3 - FP = count-total  [0.65 + 0.01   F i ] 4 - multiply historical averages (623) per FP by this FP

56. © McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004 Information Systems Project Management—David Olson 7-56 1 - get count total Complexity Weighting simple average complexproduct # user inputs__  3 + __  4 + __  6= ___ # user outputs__  4 + __  5 + __  7= ___ # user inquiries__  3 + __  4 + __  6= ___ # files__  7 + __  10+__  15= ___ # external interfaces__  5 + __  7 + __  10= ___

57. © McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004 Information Systems Project Management—David Olson 7-57 1 - get count-total Bank accounts record system involving 36 user inputssimple complexity 5 user outputsaverage complexity 20 user inquiriessimple complexity 40 files accessedsimple complexity 3 external interfacesaverage complexity

58. © McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004 Information Systems Project Management—David Olson 7-58 1 - get count-total Complexity Weighting simple average complexproduct 36 user inputs36  3 + __  4 + __  6= 108 5 user outputs__  4 + 5  5 + __  7= 25 20 user inquiries20  3 + __  4 + __  6= 60 40 files40  7 + __  10+__  15= 280 3 external interfaces__  5 + 3  7 + __  10= 21 TOTAL 494

59. © McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004 Information Systems Project Management—David Olson 7-59 2 - get F i F1require reliable backup & recovery?Significant 4 F2data communications required?Moderate 2 F3distributed processing functions?Significant 4 F4performance critical?Average 3 F5run on existing, heavily utilized environment?Essential 5 F6require on-line data entry?Essential 5 F7on-line data entry from multiple operations?Incidental 1 F8master files updated on-line?No influence 0 F9inputs, outputs, files, or inquiries complex?Incidental 1 F10 internal processing complex?Incidental 1 F11 code designed to be reusable?Average 3 F12conversion and installation included in the design?Average 3 F13system designed for multiple installations in different orgs?No influence 0 F14application designed to facilitate change and ease of use?No influence 0  = 32

60. © McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004 Information Systems Project Management—David Olson 7-60 3- Calculate FP FP = count-total  [0.65 + 0.01   F i ] = 494  [0.65 + 0.01  32 ] = 479.18

61. © McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004 Information Systems Project Management—David Olson 7-61 4- Multiply by Historical Estimated FP479.18 averages proportional to avg 479.18/623 = 0.77 effort33 months  0.77 =25.4 cost$361 thou  0.77 =$278,000 documentation1194 pages  0.77 = 918 pp. errors201  0.77 =155 defects52  0.77 = 40 people4  0.77 =3 people

62. © McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004 Information Systems Project Management—David Olson 7-62 Scheduling “Coding is 90% finished half of the coding time” “Debugging is 99% complete most of the time” MILESTONES: concrete events studies of government projects estimates carefully updated every 2 weeks before activity starts rarely change during activity, overestimates drop underestimates don’t change until into activity

63. © McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004 Information Systems Project Management—David Olson 7-63 Control When delay is first noticed, the tendency is to not report it STATUS INFORMATION what is going on ACTION INFORMATION learning this causes something to be done KEY: know when which case applies

64. © McGraw-Hill/Irwin 2004 Information Systems Project Management—David Olson 7-64 Summary Estimation of duration & cost key to sound project decision making Estimating software development very difficult –Can improve by Keeping records Using productivity-enhancing methods Use more off-the-shelf software –Estimation methods can become accurate if systematically applied