1. Information Technology Project Management – Third Edition
By Jack T. Marchewka
Northern Illinois University
Copyright 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. all rights reserved. Reproduction or translation of this work beyond that permitted in Section 117 of the 1976 United States Copyright Act without the express permission of the copyright owner is unlawful. Request for further information should be addressed to the Permissions Department, John Wiley & Sons, Inc. The purchaser may make back-up copies for his/her own use only and not for distribution or resale. The Publisher assumes no responsibility for errors, omissions, or damages caused by the use of these programs or from the use of the information contained herein.

2. The Work Breakdown Structure and Project Estimation
Chapter 6

3. Project Time Management PMBOK®
Activity definition
Identifying what activities must be completed to produce the project scope deliverables
Activity sequencing
Determining whether activities can be completed sequentially or in parallel and any dependencies that may exist among them
Activity resource estimation
Identifying the type of resources (people, technology, facilities, etc.) and the quantity of resources needed to carry out project activities
Activity duration estimation
Estimating the time to complete each activity
Schedule development
Based on the availability of resources, the activities, their sequence, and time estimates, a schedule for the entire budget can be developed
Schedule control
Ensuring that proper processes and procedures are in place in order to control changes to the project schedule

4. Work Breakdown Structure (WBS)
The WBS represents a logical decomposition of the work to be performed and focuses on how the product, service, or result is naturally subdivided.
It is an outline of what work is to be performed
Provides a link between the project’s scope and detailed project plan
Once the activities are defined, the next step is to estimate the duration of each activity
Estimation is not an exact science but the estimates improve as more details about the project are uncovered

5. Work Package
The WBS subdivides the project into smaller components and more manageable units of work called work packages
Enables the development of a project plan schedule, budget and subsequent monitoring of the project’s progress
Each phase should provide at least one specific deliverable (a tangible and verifiable piece of work)
Activities or tasks are identified in order to produce the project’s deliverable

6. Work Package

7. Deliverables versus Milestones
Tangible, verifiable work products
Reports, presentations, prototypes, etc.
Milestones
Significant events or achievements that provides evidence that the deliverable has been completed or that a phase is formally over
Focuses on the achievement, not the deliverable
Deliverable – prototype
Milestone – stakeholder’s formal acceptance of the user interface
Smaller, shorter term deliverables keep the team focused
Cruxes (proof of concepts)
Successfully use a piece of software for the first time on small set of data, validates proof of concept for expanding to full blown database
Quality control
No user acceptance, no moving forward. The deliverable must be done right.

8. Developing the WBS
A work package is developed for each of the phases and deliverables defined in the Deliverable Structure Chart (DSC)
Focus on Testing box with deliverable of Test Plan and Test Results

9. Deliverable: Test Results Report
Logical Activities to produce the test results document:
Review the test plan with the client so that key stakeholders are clear as to what will be tested, how the tests will be conducted, and when the tests will be carried out.
Carry out the tests as outlined in the plan.
Once the test results are collected, we need to analyze them.
The results should be summarized in the form of a report and presentation to the client.
If all goes well, the client will sign-off or approve the test results and then we can move on to the implementation phase of the project. If not, then we need to address and fix any problems.

10. Example Work Breakdown Schedule

11. The WBS Should Follow the Work Package Concept

12. The WBS… Should be “deliverable-oriented”
May require a number of iterations to be accomplished
Should support the project’s MOV
100% rule – The next level decomposition of a WBS element (child level) must represent 100% of the level of the work applicable to the next higher (parent) element
Have enough detail to support planning and control
Level of detail should support the development of the project plan as well as allow the PM to monitor and compare the project’s actual progress to the original plan’s schedule and budget. Not too much detail and not to little

13. The WBS… Should involve those who will be doing the work
The experience and expertise of those involved will ensure that the level of detail will be appropriate
Learning cycles and lessons learned can support the development of a WBS
Focus on what they know (facts), what they think they know (assumptions) and what they need to find out (research) in order to develop a more useful WBS.
Lessons learned help keep the project plan realistic and complete.

14. Estimation Questions
What are you going to estimate?
Where do you start?
How do you estimate?

15. Estimation Techniques - Traditional Project Management Approaches
Most difficult and critical activity in project management
Time to complete an activity impacts cost due to resource(s) needed – the project budget is thus impacted
Guesstimating
Delphi Technique
Time Boxing
Top-Down
Bottom-Up
Analogous Estimates (Past experiences)
Parametric Modeling (Statistical)

16. Guestimating
Estimation by guessing or just picking numbers out of the air is not the best way to derive a project’s schedule and budget.
Unfortunately, many inexperienced project managers tend to guesstimate, or guess at the estimates, because it is quick and easy.
When put on the spot to give an estimate, give a range of time and cost and say that more research will enable a more confident estimate

17. Delphi Technique Involves multiple, anonymous experts
Each expert makes an estimate
Estimates compared
If close, can be averaged
If not, do another iteration until consensus is reached
Can take longer than most other estimation methods, but can be very effective and provide reasonable assurance

18. Time Boxing
A “box” of time is allocated for a specific activity, task, or deliverable
May be based on a requirement that can’t be changed
Can focus a team if used effectively
Can demoralize a team if not used effectively
May result in long hours and pressure
May not succeed

19. Top-Down
Mandate from above has predetermined the time and cost of the project (competitor, satisfy client)
Top & middle managers determine overall project schedule &/or cost
Lower level managers are expected to breakdown schedule/budget estimates into specific activities (WBS)
Previous project experience can help in allocating time to activities

20. Top-Down
When top-down estimation is done by people independent of the project it may be overly optimistic or overly aggressive
Death March project
Project schedule has been compressed 50% or more
Staff has been reduced by 50% or more
Budget and resources have been reduced by 50% or more
Functionality, features or other requirements are twice what they should be under typical circumstances
Can force the PM to examine the project's risks more closely so that a specific budget or schedule target can be achieved

21. Bottom-Up Schedules & budgets are constructed from WBS
Starts with people who will be doing the work
Schedules & budgets are the aggregate of detailed activities & costs
Analogous estimation - use information from previous, similar projects as a basis for estimation
BUT – is everything else the same?

22. Estimates are made for each activity in the WBS
6.2 Test Results Report
6.2.1 Review test plan with client 1 day
6.2.2 Carry out test plan 5 days
6.2.3 Analyze results 2 days
6.2.4 Prepare test results report and presentation 3 days
6.2.5 Present test results to client 1 day
6.2.6 Address any software issues or problems 5 days
How did we come up with these estimates? Using a technique,
or combination of techniques, with the exception of guestimating!

23. Estimating Techniques - Software Engineering Approaches
Lines of Code (LOC)
Function Points
COCOMO
Heuristics
Software engineering techniques focus on estimating the size of
the system to be developed

24. Software Engineering Metrics
Software engineering focuses on processes, tools and methods for developing a quality approach to developing software
Metrics provide the basis for SE and refers to a broad range of measurements for objectively evaluating computer software
The greatest challenge for estimating an IT project is estimating the time and effort for the largest deliverable of the project – the application system
True for maintenance projects and installation of packaged software as well
Trying to estimate something that is not well defined until the later stages of the project life cycle
The complexity and technical challenges are unknown or optimistically glossed over in the early stages of the project

25. Software Engineering Metrics
Size
Application Estimate
Complexity
Constraints & Influences

26. Lines of Code (LOC)
Counting lines of code is a widely used software metric, but it is also very controversial
What counts as LOC
comments? Could be inflated but could be important documentation
variable declaration?
more experienced programmers write more efficient code in fewer lines
programming language is important variable (assembler vs C++)
programmers could write less efficient code is being measured by LOC

27. Function Point Analysis
Developed to address the inadequacies of LOC
Proposed by Allan Albrecht of IBM in 1979
It is a synthetic metric much as hours, kilos and Celsius are
Focuses on the functionality and complexity of the application
Independent of the Technology
Avoids the program of different programming languages or technology platforms
FP analysis is reliable in the sense that two analysts trained in FP analysis will obtain the same results within a margin of error
Two main organizations oversee the rules, guidelines, standards and certification for FP analysis
IFPUG ( and UFPUG

28. Function Point Analysis
A FAP is done early on based on the project’s scope followed by a more detailed analysis during the analysis and design stage
FAP is based on an evaluation of five data and transactional types that define the application boundary
5 Primary Elements
Inputs
Outputs
Inquiries
Logical Files
Interfaces

29. The Application Boundary for Function Point Analysis

30. Function Point Analysis
Internal Logical File (ILF) – AN ILF is a logical file that stores data within the application boundary.
For example, each entity in an E-R diagram would be considered an ILF. The complexity of an ILF can be classified as low, average, or high based on the number of data elements and subgroups of data elements maintained by the ILF.
An example of a sub-group would be new customers for an entity called customer.
Examples of data elements would be customer number, name, address, phone number, and so forth. In short, ILFs with fewer data elements and subgroups will be less complex than lLFs with more data elements and subgroups.
External interface file (EIF)——An EIF is similar to an ILF; however, an EIF is a file maintained by another application system. The complexity of an EIF is determined using the same criteria used for an ILF.
External input (El)—An El refers to processes or transactional data that originate outside the application and cross the application boundary from outside to inside. The data generally are added, deleted, or updated in one or more files internal to the application (i.e., internal logical files).
A common example of an EI would be a screen that allows the user to input information using a keyboard and a mouse.
Data can, however, pass through the application boundary from other applications.
For example, a sales system may need a customer’s current balance from an accounts receivable system. Based on its complexity, in terms of the number of internal files referenced, number of data elements (i.e., fields) included, and any other human factors, each EI is classified as low, average, or high.

31. Function Point Analysis
External output (EO)—Similarly, an EO is a process or transaction that allows data to exit the application boundary.
Examples of EOs include reports, confirmation messages, derived or calculated totals, and graphs or charts. This data could go to screens, printers, or other applications. After the number of EOs are counted, they are rated based on their complexity, like the external inputs (El).
External inquiry (EQ)——An EQ is a process or transaction that includes a combination of inputs and outputs for retrieving data from either the internal files or from files external to the application.
EQs do not update or change any data stored in a file. They only read this information.
Queries with different processing logic or a different input or output format are counted as a single EQ. Once the EQs are identified, they are classified based on their complexity as low, average or high, according to the number of files referenced and number of data elements included in the query

32. Function Point Analysis
Once all of data and transactional types are counted and their relative complexities rated, an unadjusted function point (UAF) count is determined
The following has been determined after reviewing the application system
ILF: 3 low, 2 average and 1 complex
EIF: 2 average
EI: 3 low, 5 average and 4 complex
EO: 4 low, 2 average and 1 complex
EQ: 2 low, 5 average and 3 complex
The next step is to compute a Value Adjustment Factor (VAF)
It is based on the Degrees of Influence (DI), often called Processing Complexity Adjustment (PCA)
Derived from the 14 General Systems Characteristics (GSC)
To determine the total DI, each GSC is rated based on the following
0 = not present or no influence
1 = incidental influence
2 = moderate influence
3 = average influence
4 = significant influence
5 = strong influence

33. Function Point Analysis
After reviewing the application, the Total Adjusted Function Points (TAFP) is computed to be 210
That number can be transformed into development estimates
Productivity – how many function points can a programmer produce in a given period of time
Can be based on lessons learned from prior project experience
LOC – convert function points into lines of code based on the programming language
Backfiring – technique which allows for direct conversion from source code to a function point count
Accuracy not high due to individual programming styles but can be use to create a FP inventory of an organization’s project portfolio

34. Internal Logical Files (ILF) _3 x 7 = 21 _2 x 10 = 20 _1 x 15 = 15 56
Complexity
Low
Average
High
Total
Internal Logical Files (ILF)
_3 x 7 = 21
_2 x 10 = 20
_1 x 15 = 15 56
External Interface Files (EIF)
__ x 5 = __
_2 x 7 = 14
__ x 10 = __ 14
External Input (EI)
_3 x 3 = 9
_5 x 4 = 20
_4 x 6 = 24 53
External Output (EO)
_4 x 4 = 16
_2 x 5 = 10
_1 x 7 = 7 33
External Inquiry (EQ)
_2 x 3 = 6
_5 x 4 = 20
_3 x 6 = 18 44
Total Unadjusted Function Points (UAF)
200
General System Characteristic
Degree of Influence
Data Communications 3
Distributed Data Processing 2
Performance 4
Heavily Used Configuration
Transaction Rate
On-line Data Entry
End User Efficiency
Online Update
Complex Processing
Reusability
Installation Ease
Operational Ease
Multiple Sites 1
Facilitate Change
Total Degrees of Influence 40
Value Adjustment Factor
VAF = (TDI * 0.01) + .65
VAF = (40 * .01) = 1.05
Total Adjusted Function Points = FP = UAF * VAF
FP = 200 * 1.05 = 210

35. COCOMO (COnstructive COst MOdel)
Developed by Barry Boehm in 1981in his book Software Engineering Economics
Based on LOC estimates, used to estimate cost, effort and schedule
Open model (all equations, assumptions, definitions, etc. are freely available)
It is a parametric model because it uses dependent variables such as cost or duration, based upon one or more independent variables that are quantitative indices of performance and/or physical attributes of the system
Has been extended to COCOMO II

36. COCOMO Models (Effort)
First determine the type of the project
Organic – Routine
Technology, processes and people are expected to all work together smoothly
Person Months = 2.4 * KDSI1.05
Embedded – Challenging
System to support a new business process or new ground for the organization
People may be less experienced and the processes and technology less mature
Person Months = 3.6 * KDSI1.20
Semi-Detached – Middle
Not simple or straightforward but the organization feels confident that the processes, people and technology are adequate to meet the challenge
Person Months = 3.0 * KDSI1.12
Person month = 152 hours KDSI = Thousands of delivered source instructions i.e., LOC

37. COCOMO – Effort Example
Semi-Detached
200 total adjusted function points
Using Table 6.3 we know Java averages 53 SLOC per FP
200 FP * 53  10,600 Java LOC
Assuming the project is of medium difficulty, we use the semi- detached equation to compute the effort
Person Months = 3.0 * KDSI1.12
= 3.0 * (10.6) 1.12
= 42.21
Having computed effort, we can now determine duration using the following formulas
Organic Duration = 2.5 * Effort0.38
Semi-Detached Duration = 2.5 * Effort0.35
Embedded Duration = 2.5 * Effort0.32

38. COCOMO Duration Example
Duration = 2.5 * Effort0.35
= 2.5 *(42.21)0.35
= 9.26 months
People Required = Effort / Duration
= / 9.26
= 4.55

39. COCOMO Intermediate COCOMO Advanced COCOMO COCOMO II SLIM
Estimates the software development as a function of the size and a set of 15 subjective cost drives that include attributes of the end product, the computer used, the personnel staffing and the project environment
Advanced COCOMO
Includes all the characteristics of intermediate COCOMO but with an assessment of the cost driver’s impact over four phases of development: product design, detailed design, coding/testing and integration/testing
COCOMO II
More suited for projects developed using 4GLs (VB, Delphi, Power Builder)
SLIM
Uses LOC to estimate the project’s size and 22 questions to calibrate the model

40. Heuristics (Rules of Thumb)
The same base activities will be required for a typical s/w development project and these activities will require a predictable percentage of the overall effort
Use knowledge gained from previous project experience when scheduling a software task:
30% Planning
20% Coding
25% Component test and early system test
25% System test, all components in hand

41. Heuristics (Rules of Thumb)
T. Capers Jones provides these heuristics
Creeping user requirements will grow at an average rate of 2% per month from design through coding phases
FPs raised to the 1.25 power predict the approximate defect potential for new s/w projects
Each formal design inspection will find and remove 65% of the bugs present
Maintenance programmers can repair 8 bugs per staff month
FPs raised to the 0.4 power predict the approximate development schedule in calendar months
FPs divided by 150 predict the approximate number of personnel required for the application
FPs divided by 750 predict the approximate number of maintenance personnel required to keep the application updated
Rules of thumb are easy, but they are not always accurate

42. The seeds of major software disasters are usually sown in the first three months of commencing the software project. Hasty scheduling, irrational commitments, unprofessional estimating techniques, and carelessness of the project management function are the factors that tend to introduce terminal problems.
Once a project blindly lurches forward toward an impossible delivery date, the rest of the disaster will occur almost inevitably.
T. Capers Jones, 1988 Page 120

43. Brooks’ Law
Adding manpower to a late software
project makes it later.

44. The Man Month Months Months People People
Time versus number of workers
perfectly partitionable task – i.e.,
No communication among them
e.g., reaping wheat.
When a task that cannot be partitioned
because of sequential constraints, the
application of more effort has no
effect on the schedule.

45. Adding People Increases the total effort necessary
The work & disruption of repartitioning
Training new people
Added intercommunication

46. What can cause inaccurate estimates?
Scope changes
Overlooked tasks
Poor developer-user communication
Poor understanding of project goals
Insufficient analysis
No (or poor) methodology
Changes in team
Red tape
Lack of project control
Not identifying or understanding impact of risks

47. Other Factors to Consider When Estimating
Rate at which requirements may change
Experience & capabilities of project team
Process or methods used in development
Specific activities to be performed
Programming languages or development tools to be used
Probable number of bugs or defects & removal methods
Environment or ergonomics of work space
Geographic separation of team across locations
Schedule pressure placed on the team

48. How can estimates be improved?
Experience!
Lessons learned
Best Practices
Revision
Monitor
Focus on deliverables
Control