80:20 rules! - Building software smarter
Transcript of 80:20 rules! - Building software smarter
![Page 1: 80:20 rules! - Building software smarter](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051307/6279d740d2aa851bc478e19f/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
DilbertScott Adams
![Page 2: 80:20 rules! - Building software smarter](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051307/6279d740d2aa851bc478e19f/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
DilbertScott Adams
![Page 3: 80:20 rules! - Building software smarter](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051307/6279d740d2aa851bc478e19f/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
DilbertScott Adams
![Page 4: 80:20 rules! - Building software smarter](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051307/6279d740d2aa851bc478e19f/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Special Issues in Estimating ScheduleChapter 20Estimation pressure from deadlines:• Customer• Trade show• Seasonal sales-cycle• RegulatoryOther calendar-oriented deadlines
Schedule estimates produce the most “heat” in estimation discussion
![Page 5: 80:20 rules! - Building software smarter](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051307/6279d740d2aa851bc478e19f/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Basic Schedule EquationSchedule_In_Months = 3.0 StaffMonths⅓
One of the most replicated results in SWETip #98 Used to estimate schedule early in medium-to-large projects
![Page 6: 80:20 rules! - Building software smarter](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051307/6279d740d2aa851bc478e19f/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
• Effort increases in proportion to scope• Schedule increases in proportion to the cube root of effort
Assumes team size can be adjusted to the size implied by the equationNot intended for estimating small projects (when you know the names of those working on the project)
![Page 7: 80:20 rules! - Building software smarter](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051307/6279d740d2aa851bc478e19f/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Computing SchedulePast Projects formula
Estmated_Schedule = Past_Schedule (Estimated_Effort / Past_Effort) ⅓
Informal Comparison to Past Projects:Medium-to-large projects (more than 50 staff month)Smaller projects use ½
Schedule Effort Productivity(Calendar (Staff (LOC/Staff
Project Size (LOC) Days) Months) Month) CommentsA 33,842 8.2 21 1,612B 97,614 12.5 99 986C 7,444 4.7 2 3,722 Not used - too small for comparisonD 54,322 11.3 40 1,358E 340,343 24 533 639 Not used - too large for comparison
![Page 8: 80:20 rules! - Building software smarter](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051307/6279d740d2aa851bc478e19f/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Chapter 19 Effort EstimateFigure 19-2 (page 209)
65 to 100 staff months, most likely 80 staff months
Past Schedule 8.2 8.2 8.2Estimated Effort 65 80 100
Past Effort 21 21 21
Estimated Schedule 12.0 12.8 13.8
Past Past Low Nominal HighSchedule Effort Estimate Estimate Estimate(Calendar (Staff (65 Staff (80 Staff (100 Staff
Project Days) Months) Months) Months) Months)A 8.2 21 12.0 12.8 13.8B 12.5 99 10.8 11.6 12.5D 11.3 40 13.2 14.2 15.3
Averages: 12.0 12.9 13.9
Estmated_Schedule = Past_Schedule (Estimated_Effort / Past_Effort) ⅓
![Page 9: 80:20 rules! - Building software smarter](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051307/6279d740d2aa851bc478e19f/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Computing Schedules from FPLow-accuracy (low effort) schedule estimate
• Capers Jones, based on 1,000 of projects• Using the Better / Average / Worse exponents below• Example
Project estimate: 1,450 FPsBusiness system (average productivity)
Estmated_Schedule = 1,450 0.39 ≈ 17 calendar months
Kind of Sfotware Better Average WorseObject Oriented 0.33 0.36 0.39Clent server 0.34 0.37 0.40Business systems, internal intranet systems 0.36 0.39 0.42Shrink-wrapped, scientific systems, 0.37 0.40 0.43
engineering systems, public intenet systesmEmbedded systems, telecommunications, 0.38 0.41 0.44
device drivers, systems SW
![Page 10: 80:20 rules! - Building software smarter](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051307/6279d740d2aa851bc478e19f/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Using the Science of EstimationConstrux Estimate
• The “art of estimation” fails… schedules vary too much and depend on many factors
• Construx estimate:Schedule = 12.2 calendar months(with 20% to 80% range of 11.6 to 12.9 months)Using industry average data schedule = 15.8 months(with range of 13.2 to 21.5 months)
www.construx.com/estimate
![Page 11: 80:20 rules! - Building software smarter](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051307/6279d740d2aa851bc478e19f/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Adjusting the nominal schedule
• Depends on whether features can be cut (to get less work in less time)
• If feature set cannot be cut, you need more staff to do more work in less time
• What have researchers found?There is a maximum degree to which a schedule can be compressedShortening means increasing effort
12 months with 7 = 7 months with 12
![Page 12: 80:20 rules! - Building software smarter](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051307/6279d740d2aa851bc478e19f/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Schedule Compressionand
Shortest Possible Schedule
![Page 13: 80:20 rules! - Building software smarter](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051307/6279d740d2aa851bc478e19f/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Compression requires more effortReasons:• The larger the team, the more coordination & management• The larger the team, the communication needs increase• Shorter schedules require more work done in parallel
The more work that overlaps, the greater the chance that there will be integration problems… requiring rework
Tip #92Do not shorten a schedule estimate without increasing the effort estimate.
![Page 14: 80:20 rules! - Building software smarter](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051307/6279d740d2aa851bc478e19f/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
The Impossible ZoneThe LogicEstimate: 8 people needed for a 10 month projectDoes not mean:
80 people can complete the project in 1 month1,600 people can complete the project in 1 day
ConclusionThere is an Impossible Zone
A point beyond which schedule compression cannot happen
Tip #9325% compression is the limit… to keep out of the Impossible Zone
![Page 15: 80:20 rules! - Building software smarter](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051307/6279d740d2aa851bc478e19f/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Extending the project schedule
• Reduces total effort (by reducing team size), usually• The negatives associated with compression become
positives with extending the project• General rule (and answer to the question in Ch. 3.1)
“It is better to overestimate that underestimate”
![Page 16: 80:20 rules! - Building software smarter](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051307/6279d740d2aa851bc478e19f/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Effort and Schedule TradeoffsRules of Thumb (Lawrence Putnam)(for schedule compression and expansion)
Schedule Compresson/
ExpansionEffort Increase/
Reduction-15% 100%-10% 50%-5% 25%
Nominal 0%10% -30%20% -50%30% -65%
More than +30% Not practical
![Page 17: 80:20 rules! - Building software smarter](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051307/6279d740d2aa851bc478e19f/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Schedule Compression & Team SizeAgain, Putnam’s research (see bottom, page 229)
Tip #95Med. business systems projects (35,000 to 100,000 LOC) avoid increasing Team size above 7.
![Page 18: 80:20 rules! - Building software smarter](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051307/6279d740d2aa851bc478e19f/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Comparison of Different Months• Estimates vary (no apparent convergence)• Basic Schedule coefficients (2.0 to 4.0)
![Page 19: 80:20 rules! - Building software smarter](https://reader033.fdocuments.us/reader033/viewer/2022051307/6279d740d2aa851bc478e19f/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Comparison of Different Methods• Use historic data… adjusting to a range of 2.7 to 3.7
Narrows schedule range to 11.6 to 14.1 monthsConvergence is apparent
Tip #97Remove results of overly generic estimation techniques before looking for convergence.