J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Process Learning, Process Maturity and Project Closeout James R....
-
Upload
brianne-fitzgerald -
Category
Documents
-
view
214 -
download
0
Transcript of J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University Process Learning, Process Maturity and Project Closeout James R....
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
Process Learning, Process Maturity and Project Closeout
Process Learning, Process Maturity and Project Closeout
James R. Burns
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
Learning vs. MaturityLearning vs. Maturity
Learning is very different from maturing Learning is similar to the concepts of Lean Learning is not measured directly, but its
effects are measured by profit, cost, quality, cycle time, productivity, etc.
Maturity is measured on a scale of 0 to 5 using a maturity model
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
LearningLearning
Has its origins in systems thinking Was popularized by Peter Senge in his book THE FIFTH DISCIPLINE
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
The Potential of Wisdom TeamsThe Potential of Wisdom Teams
Bill Russell’s Experience of Alignment and Synergism–His play would rise to a new level
–He would be in the white heat of competition, yet not feel competitive
–Every fake, cut and pass would be surprising, yet nothing could surprise him
– Like we were playing in slow motion
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
AlignmentAlignment
A necessary condition for EMPOWERMENT–Empowering non-aligned individuals worsens the
chaos and makes managing the team even more difficult
For Jazz musicians, it is called “being in the groove”
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
Alignment and SynergismAlignment and Synergism
Meetings will last for hours, yet fly by No one remembers who said what, but
knowing we had really come to a shared understanding
Of never having to vote (because there is so much CONSENSUS)
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
Team Learning: A definitionTeam Learning: A definition
The process of aligning and developing the capacity of a team to create the results its members truly desire
It builds on the capacity of shared vision It also builds on personal mastery Knowing how to play together Teams are the key learning unit in
organizations
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
The Discipline of Team LearningThe Discipline of Team Learning
The team’s accomplishments can set the tone and establish a standard for learning together for the larger organization
Has three critical dimensions
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
Three critical dimensionsThree critical dimensionsThree critical dimensionsThree critical dimensions
First, there is a need to think insightfully about complex First, there is a need to think insightfully about complex issuesissues– Teams must learn how to tap the potential for many minds to be Teams must learn how to tap the potential for many minds to be
more intelligent than one mindmore intelligent than one mind
Second, there is a need for innovative, coordinated actionSecond, there is a need for innovative, coordinated action Third, there is the role of team members Third, there is the role of team members
on other teamson other teams– A learning team fosters other learning teams through A learning team fosters other learning teams through
inculcating the practices and skills of team learninginculcating the practices and skills of team learning
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
The discipline of team learningThe discipline of team learning
Is a collective one It is meaningless to say that “I,” as an
individual, am mastering the discipline of team learning– In the same sense that it is meaningless to say
“I am mastering the practice of being a great jazz ensemble.”
Involves mastering the practices of dialogue and discussion
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
Dialogue and DiscussionDialogue and Discussion
Are potentially complementary, but most teams lack the ability to distinguish between the two
Teams must learn how to deal creatively with the powerful forces opposing productive dialogue and discussion–Argyris: defensive routines--ways of interacting
that protect us from threat or embarrassment, but which also prevent us from learning
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
Skills!!Skills!!
Inquiry Reflection
Dialogue Discussion
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
Defensive posturesDefensive postures
Systems thinking is especially prone to evoking defensiveness because of its central
message, that our actions create our reality
The problems we perceive are caused by our actions, not by external, exogenous forces outside of us
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
PracticePractice
The discipline of team learning requires practice Teams do not practice enough, generally A great play or great orchestra does not happen
without practice Neither does a great sports team Such teams learn by continual movement
between performance and practice
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
The State of Team LearningThe State of Team Learning
TL is poorly understood We cannot describe the phenomenon well--no
measures There are no overarching theories We cannot distinguish team learning from
groupthink There are few reliable methods for building
team learning
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
Need for Team LearningNeed for Team Learning
Has never been greater Complexity of today’s problems demands it Actions of teams must be innovative and
coordinated
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
Skills Underlying Team Learning Skills Underlying Team Learning
Team Learning
PersonalMastery
SharedVision
SystemsThinking
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
Werner HeisenbergWerner Heisenberg
Science is rooted in conversations Cooperation of different people may culminate
in scientific results of the utmost importance Collectively, we can be more insightful, more
intelligent than we can possibly be individually
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
David BohmDavid Bohm
A leading quantum theorist Developed a theory and method of “dialogue”
when a group “becomes open to the flow of a larger intelligence”
Quantum theory implies that the universe is basically an indivisible whole
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
Bohm’s most distinctive contribution
Bohm’s most distinctive contribution
Thought is “largely a collective phenomenon”
Analogy between the collective properties of electrons vs. way our thoughts work
Leads to an understanding of the general counter productiveness of thought
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
Bohm’s contribution, continuedBohm’s contribution, continued
“our thought is incoherent… and the resulting counter-productiveness lies at the root of the world’s problems”
Prepared by James R. Burns
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
Dialogue and DiscussionDialogue and Discussion
Suspending assumptions Seeing each other as colleagues A Facilitator Who Holds the Context of
Dialogue Balancing Dialogue and Discussion Reflection, Inquiry and Dialogue
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
Dialogue and DiscussionDialogue and Discussion
Their power lies in their synergy No synergy without an understanding of
their distinctions DISCUSSION--like a ping/pong game where
the topic gets hit around– subject is analyzed and diagnosed from many
points of view
Emphasis is on winning--having one’s view accepted by the group
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
More Dialogue and DiscussionMore Dialogue and Discussion
A sustained emphasis on winning is not compatible with giving first priority to coherence and truth
To bring about a change of priorities from “winning” to “pursuit of the truth”, a dialogue is necessary
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
DialogueDialogue
From the Greek, it means “through the From the Greek, it means “through the meaning”; “meaning passing or moving meaning”; “meaning passing or moving through”through”
Through dialogue, a group accesses a larger Through dialogue, a group accesses a larger “pool of common meaning” which cannot be “pool of common meaning” which cannot be accessed individually.accessed individually.
““The whole organizes the parts”The whole organizes the parts”
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
More DialogueMore Dialogue
Purpose is not to win, but to go beyond any one individual’s understanding
In dialogue, individuals gain insights that simply could not be gained individually
In dialogue, individuals explore difficult, complex issues from many points of view
Dialogue reveals the incoherence in our thought
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
The Purpose of DialogueThe Purpose of Dialogue To reveal the incoherence in our thought--
three types of incoherence Thought denies that it is participative Thought stops tracking reality and just
goes, like a program» We misperceive the thoughts as our own, because
we fail to see the stream of collective thinking from which they arise
Thought establishes its own standard of reference for fixing problems
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
Incoherent thoughtIncoherent thought
Thought stands in front of us and pretends that it does not represent
We become trapped in the theater of our thoughts
Dialogue is a way of helping people to “see the representative and participative nature of thought”
In dialogue, people become observers of their own thinking
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
Suspending AssumptionsSuspending AssumptionsSuspending AssumptionsSuspending Assumptions
[HOLDING THEM IN FRONT OF YOU][HOLDING THEM IN FRONT OF YOU] Difficult because thought deludes us into a Difficult because thought deludes us into a
view that this is the way it isview that this is the way it is
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
Seeing each other as ColleaguesSeeing each other as Colleagues
Necessary because thought is participative Necessary to establish a positive tone and
offset the vulnerability that dialogue brings Does not mean that you need to agree or share
the same views
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
Dialogue, Colleagues, and Hierarchy
Dialogue, Colleagues, and Hierarchy
Choosing to view “adversaries” as “colleagues with different views” has the greatest benefits
Hierarchy is antithetical to dialogue, yet is difficult to escape in organizations
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
Dialogue, Colleagues, and Hierarchy
Dialogue, Colleagues, and Hierarchy
People who are used to holding the prevailing view because of their senior position, must surrender that privilege in dialogue, AND CONVERSELY
Dialogue must be playful--playing with the ideas, evaluating and testing them
Prepared by James R. Burns
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
A Facilitator Who “Holds the Context” of Dialogue
A Facilitator Who “Holds the Context” of Dialogue
In the absence of a skilled facilitator, our habits pull us toward discussion and away from dialogue
Carries out many of the basic duties of a good “process facilitator”
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
A Facilitator, ContinuedA Facilitator, Continued
But the facilitator is allowed to influence the flow of development simply through participating
As teams develop skill in dialogue, the role of the facilitator becomes less crucial
Prepared by James R. Burns
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
Balancing Dialogue and Discussion
Balancing Dialogue and Discussion
Discussion is the necessary counterpart of dialogue
In discussion different views are presented and defended, which may provide a useful analysis of the whole situation
In dialogue, different views are presented as a means toward discovering a new view
Thesis – Antithesis, leading to Synthesis
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
Dialog Vs. DiscussionDialog Vs. DiscussionDialog Vs. DiscussionDialog Vs. Discussion
Dialogue established the view that leads to Dialogue established the view that leads to courses of actioncourses of action
Discussion leads to new courses of action Discussion leads to new courses of action without establishing that new viewwithout establishing that new view
Teams that dialogue regularly develop a deep Teams that dialogue regularly develop a deep trust that cannot help but carry over to trust that cannot help but carry over to discussiondiscussion
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
Great Teams vs. Mediocre Teams
Great Teams vs. Mediocre Teams
A team that is continually learning is the visible conflict of ideas
In great teams, conflict becomes productive, inducing the need for ongoing dialogue
Argyris: the difference between great teams and mediocre teams lies in how they face conflict and deal with the defensiveness that invariably surrounds conflict
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
Defensive RoutinesDefensive Routines
Entrenched habits we use to protect ourselves from the embarrassment and threat that come with exposing our thinking.
Form a protective shell around our deepest assumptions
Forceful, articulate, intimidating CEO’s Cannot be seen
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
Defensive RoutinesDefensive Routines
In some organizations, to have incomplete or faulty understanding is a sign of weakness or incompetence
IT IS SIMPLY UNACCEPTABLE FOR MANAGERS TO ACT AS THOUGH THEY DO NOT KNOW WHAT IS CAUSING A PROBLEM
To protect their belief, managers must close themselves to alternative views and make themselves uninfluenceable
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
Defensive RoutinesDefensive Routines
Defensive becomes an accepted part of organizational culture
We are the carriers of defensive routines and organizations are the hosts
Defensive routines block the flow of energy in a team that might otherwise contribute toward a common vision
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
Maturity ModelsMaturity Models
Software Quality Function Deployment Capability Maturity Model Project Maturity Model
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
Quality Function DeploymentQuality Function Deployment
Translates the “voice of the customer” into Translates the “voice of the customer” into technical design requirementstechnical design requirementsCustomer is KingCustomer is King
Displays requirements in matrix diagramsDisplays requirements in matrix diagrams First matrix called “house of quality”First matrix called “house of quality” Series of connected housesSeries of connected houses
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
Quality HouseQuality House
Trade-off matrix
Design characteristics
Customer requirements
Target values
Relationship matrix
Competitive assessment
Imp
ort
ance
11 22
33
44
55
66
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
Iro
ns
wel
lE
asy
and
sa
fe t
o u
se
Competitive Assessment
Customer RequirementsCustomer Requirements 1 2 3 4 5
Presses quickly 9 B A XX
Removes wrinkles 8 AB XX
Doesn’t stick to fabric 6 XX BA
Provides enough steam 8 AB XX
Doesn’t spot fabric 6 XX AB
Doesn’t scorch fabric 9 A XXB
Heats quickly 6 XX B A
Automatic shut-off 3 ABXX
Quick cool-down 3 XX A B
Doesn’t break when dropped 5 AB XX
Doesn’t burn when touched 5 AB XX
Not too heavy 8 XX A B
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
En
erg
y n
ee
de
d t
o p
res
s
We
igh
t o
f ir
on
Siz
e o
f s
ole
pla
te
Th
ick
ne
ss
of
so
lep
late
Ma
teri
al
us
ed
in
so
lep
late
Nu
mb
er
of
ho
les
Siz
e o
f h
ole
s
Flo
w o
f w
ate
r fr
om
ho
les
Tim
e r
eq
uir
ed
to
re
ac
h 4
50
º F
Tim
e
to g
o f
rom
45
0º
to 1
00
º
Pro
tec
tiv
e c
ov
er
for
so
lep
late
Au
tom
ati
c s
hu
toff
Customer RequirementsCustomer Requirements
Presses quickly - - + + + -
Removes wrinkles + + + + +
Doesn’t stick to fabric - + + + +
Provides enough steam + + + +
Doesn’t spot fabric + - - -
Doesn’t scorch fabric + + + - +
Heats quickly - - + -
Automatic shut-off +
Quick cool-down - - + +
Doesn’t break when dropped + + + +
Doesn’t burn when touched + + + +
Not too heavy + - - - + -
Iro
ns
wel
lE
asy
and
sa
fe t
o u
se
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
En
erg
y n
eed
ed t
o p
ress
Wei
gh
t o
f ir
on
Siz
e o
f so
lep
late
Th
ickn
ess
of
sole
pla
te
Mat
eria
l u
sed
in
so
lep
late
Nu
mb
er o
f h
ole
s
Siz
e o
f h
ole
s
Flo
w o
f w
ate
r fr
om
ho
les
Tim
e re
qu
ired
to
re
ach
45
0º
Tim
e t
o g
o f
rom
450
º to
10
0º
Pro
tect
ive
cove
r fo
r s
ole
pla
te
Au
tom
atic
sh
uto
ff
--
++
+
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
En
erg
y n
eed
ed t
o p
ress
Wei
gh
t o
f ir
on
Siz
e o
f so
lep
late
Th
ickn
ess
of
sole
pla
te
Mat
eria
l u
sed
in
so
lep
late
Nu
mb
er o
f h
ole
s
Siz
e o
f h
ole
s
Flo
w o
f w
ate
r fr
om
ho
les
Tim
e re
qu
ired
to
re
ach
45
0º
Tim
e t
o g
o f
rom
450
º to
10
0º
Pro
tect
ive
cove
r fo
r
sole
pla
te
Au
tom
atic
sh
uto
ff
Units of measure ft-lb lb in. cm ty ea mm oz/s sec sec Y/N Y/N
Iron A 3 1.4 8x4 2 SS 27 15 0.5 45 500 N Y
Iron B 4 1.2 8x4 1 MG 27 15 0.3 35 350 N Y
Our Iron (X) 2 1.7 9x5 4 T 35 15 0.7 50 600 N Y
Estimated impact 3 4 4 4 5 4 3 2 5 5 3 0
Estimated cost 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 4 4 5 2
Targets 1.2 8x5 3 SS 30 30 500
Design changes * * * * * * *
Ob
jec
tiv
e
me
as
ure
s
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
Capability Maturity ModelCapability Maturity Model
Developed in preliminary form by Watts Humphries (published in a book he wrote that appeared in 1989)
Refined by the SEI (Software Engineering Institute) , a spin-off of Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh
Known as the CMM Discussed in Larson & Gray, Ch. 16, page 575
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
Immature Software OrganizationsImmature Software Organizations
Processes are ad hoc, and occasionally chaotic.
Processes are improvised by practitioners ON THE FLY.
Testing, reviews and walkthroughs usually curtailed under stress.
Quality is unpredictable.
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
Immature Software Organizations, Cont’d
Immature Software Organizations, Cont’d
Costs and schedules are usually exceeded.
Reactionary management is usually firefighting.
Success rides on individual talent and heroic effort.
Technology benefits are lost in the noise.
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
Mature Software OrganizationsMature Software Organizations Processes are defined and documented. Roles and responsibilities are clear. Product and process are measured. Processes and projects finish on time and
within budget Management has time to plan, monitor, and
communicate.
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
Mature Software Organizations, Cont’d
Mature Software Organizations, Cont’d
Quality, costs, and schedules are predictable
Management committed to continuous improvement.
Technology is used effectively within defined processes.
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
Software Process DefinitionSoftware Process Definition
Project Planning Project Management Software Engineering Procedures Software standards Software Quality Evaluation Software Configuration management
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
The Five Levels of Software Process Maturity
The Five Levels of Software Process Maturity
INITIAL REPEATABLE DEFINED MANAGED OPTIMIZING
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
Five LevelsFive Levels
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University16–61
Organization Project Management
in the Long Run
Organization Project Management
in the Long Run Capability Maturity Model (CMM)– Focuses on guiding and assessing organizations
in implementing concrete best practices of managing software development projects.
Organizational Project Maturity Model (OPM3)– Is divided into a continuum of growth levels:
initial, repeatable, defined, managed, and optimized.
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University16–62
Project Management Maturity Model
Project Management Maturity Model
FIGURE 16.2
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
InitialInitial
Software processes are ad hoc, even chaotic The software processes are not defined Success depends on individual effort The environment is not stable
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
Initial, ContinuedInitial, Continued
The benefits of software engineering practices are undermined
Planning is nonexistent or ineffective Process capability is unpredictable because
the software process is constantly changed or modified as the work progresses
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
RepeatableRepeatable
Basic project management policies and procedures are established
Cost, schedule and functionality (scope) are tracked by module and task
A process discipline is put in place to repeat earlier successes
Managing new projects is based on experience with similar projects
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
Repeatable, ContinuedRepeatable, Continued
Basic software management controls are installed
Estimations of cost and time to complete are based on history for similar projects
Problems are identified and documented Software requirements are baselined (made
tough to change)
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
Repeatable, ContinuedRepeatable, Continued
Project standards are defined Project teams work with their customers and
subcontractors to establish stable, managed working environments
Process is under the control of a project management system that is driven by performance on previous projects
A project performance database is defined and populated
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
DefinedDefined
Software processes are documented Software processes are standardized and
integrated organization-wide All projects use documented and approved
versions of the organization’s processes of developing and maintaining software
A Software Engineering Process Group (SEPG) is created to facilitate process definition and improvement efforts
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
Defined, ContinuedDefined, Continued
Organization-wide training programs are implemented
Organization-wide standard software processes can be refined to encompass the unique characteristics of the project
A peer review process is used to enhance product quality
Process capability is stable and based on a common understanding of processes, roles, and responsibilities in a defined process
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
ManagedManaged
Quantitative quality goals are defined Product quality and productivity are measured
and collected Both processes and products are
quantitatively understood Both processes and products are controlled
using detailed measures A productivity and quality database is defined
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
Managed, ContinuedManaged, Continued
Projects achieve control by narrowing the variation in performance to within acceptable boundaries
Process variation is controlled by use of a strategic business plan that details which product lines to pursue
Risks associated with moving up the learning curve of a new application domain are known and carefully managed
Process capability is measured and operating within measurable limits
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
OptimizingOptimizing
Continuous process improvement is enabled by quantitative feedback
Continuous process improvement is assessed from testing innovative ideas and technologies
Weak process elements are identified and strengthened
Defect prevention is explicit
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
Optimizing, Cont’dOptimizing, Cont’d
Statistical evidence is available on process effectiveness
Innovations that exploit the best software engineering practices are identified
Improvement occurs from– INCREMENTAL ADVANCEMENTS IN EXISTING
PROCESSES
– INNOVATIONS USING NEW TECHNOLOGIES AND METHODS
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
How are firms doing??How are firms doing??
Many U.S. firms have reached the highest level, OPTIMIZING
Indian firms may be doing better
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
Organizational Project Management Maturity Model (OPM3)
Organizational Project Management Maturity Model (OPM3)
1. Ad-Hoc: The project management process is described as disorganized, and occasionally even chaotic. The organization has not defined systems and processes, and project success depends on individual effort. There are chronic cost and schedule problems.
2. Abbreviated: There are some project management processes and systems in place to track cost, schedule, and scope. Project success is largely unpredictable and cost and schedule problems are common.
3. Organized: There are standardized, documented project management processes and systems that are integrated into the rest of the organization. Project success is more predictable, and cost and schedule performance is improved.
4. Managed: Management collects and uses detailed measures of the effectiveness of project management. Project success is more uniform, and cost and schedule performance conforms to plan.
5. Adaptive: Feedback from the project management process and from piloting innovative ideas and technologies enables continuous improvement. Project success is the norm, and cost and schedule
performance is continuously improving.
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
Enter CMMI: Capability Maturity Model Integration
Enter CMMI: Capability Maturity Model Integration
In 2007, the SEI asserted that it would no longer support the old SW-CMM.
On Dec 31, 2007 all SW-CMM appraisal results were expired
The purpose of the CMMI was to focus process maturity more towards project performance
Organizations must now upgrade to the CMMI The CMMI is vastly improved over the CMM Emphasis is on business needs, integration and
institutionalization
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech UniversitySlide 77 of 146
CMMI Staged Representation - 5 Maturity Levels
Level 5
Initial
Level 1
Processes are unpredictable, poorly controlled, reactive.
Managed
Level 2
Processes are planned, documented, performed, monitored, and controlled at the project level. Often reactive.
Defined
Level 3 Processes are well characterized and understood. Processes, standards, procedures, tools, etc. are defined at the organizational (Organization X ) level. Proactive.
Quantitatively Managed
Level 4
Processes are controlled using statistical and other quantitative techniques.
Optimizing
Proce
ss
Mat
urity
Process performance continually improved through incremental and innovative technological improvements.
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
CMMI OriginsCMMI Origins
The CMMI was derived from the 1. SW-CMM—capability maturity model for software
2. EIA/IS – electronic Industries Alliance Interim Standard
3. IPD-CMM—Capability Maturity Model for Integrated Product Development
1. CMMI architecture is open and designed to accommodate additional disciplines, like
1. CMMI-DEV – processes for development
2. CMMI-ACQ—processes required for supplier sourcing
3. CMMI-SVC—processes required for services
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
CMMI: cap mat model integrationCMMI: cap mat model integration
Level 0: Incomplete No goal. Level 1: Performed The process supports and enables achievement of the specific goals
of the process area by transforming identifiable input work products to produce identifiable output work products.
Level 2: Managed The process is institutionalized as a managed process. Level 3: Defined The process is institutionalized as a defined process. Level 4: Quantitatively Managed The process is institutionalized as a quantitatively managed process. Level 5: Optimizing The process is institutionalized as an optimizing process.
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
Use of this tool has shown…Use of this tool has shown…
The Engineering and Construction Industries have a higher level of maturity than do the information systems and software development disciplines
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
Completing and Terminating a Project
Completing and Terminating a Project
James Burns
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
CompletingCompleting
Integration Testing–Regression methods
Final Testing Acceptance Testing Installation/Conversion Training
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
Purpose of Acceptance TestingPurpose of Acceptance Testing
to get paid every dime that you are owed!! When is the best time to write the Acceptance
Test Plan Why??? Who dictates what those tests will consist of? Do you think there should be at least one test
for each and every defined requirement?
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
Final, Thorough TestFinal, Thorough Test
Do beta testing?? Run some old integration tests Devise true-to-life tests Try to overload the system Try to break it by entering wrong inputs, out of
range values, etc. Test user documentation as well.
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
InstallationInstallation
going live
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
TrainingTraining
Usually, not enough budget is set aside for training
At the mid-market level and lower, training budgets are slim–On-line, context-sensitive help is one answer
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
ConversionConversion
Crash Parallel Pilot
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
Customer SurveyCustomer Survey
Degree to which objectives were achieved? Degree to which users accepted and endorsed
the product
Overall satisfaction level Best if done by an outside survey agency or
firm
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
Lessons Learned—HERE ARE SOME POSSIBILITIES
Lessons Learned—HERE ARE SOME POSSIBILITIES
Allow enough time? Make it fun? Beginnings are important! Top management support is critical! Managing change is 50 percent of project
management! Make management reviews interactive! Set realistic milestone dates, but stick to the
schedule! Plan at a workable level!
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
Closing BashClosing Bash
Party? Rap song? Actor?
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
PracticesPractices
A walkthrough after every design phase is a good practice
Architectural design– Then a walkthrough
Medium-level design–A walkthrough
Database design–A walkthrough
Detailed design–A walkthrough
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
Software Tools--use themSoftware Tools--use them
Librarians--keep track of who changed what when– also called Code Management Systems
Module Management Systems– automate the building of an entire software system–Visual Studio is one example–Eclipse is another
Performance Coverage analyzer– determines where all the computing time is being spent– traces sections of the system that were executed, their
frequency and duration
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
More ToolsMore Tools
Source code analyzers– Tells you where you’re doing strange or inefficient
things in the source code
– Lets you find all usages of a particular variable or string
Test Manager– makes regression testing very simple
Debugger– Program stop, trace, and step through
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
ClosingClosing
The closing process Provide a warranty–Be willing to address any problems that crop up
within a six-month period of installation
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
TerminationTermination
Get paid History Database Lessons Learned– Post project review (also called a POSTMORTEM)– Write down what went well, what could have been
improved, make suggestions for follow on projects, gather more statistics on actual vs. planned performance
– Produce a formal report Write follow-on proposal for next project Sell the next project
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
MaintenanceMaintenance
Should be considered as a separate project, separately funded, so you can get paid for all of the development work
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
Checklist for Closeout & Termination Stage
Checklist for Closeout & Termination Stage
New system is up and running smoothly Conversion and cutover from any older
systems is complete End users are trained and comfortable with
new system Warranty is provided The next project is sold A post project review (POSTMORTEM) is held Responsibility and method of ongoing
maintenance is defined
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
User documentationUser documentation
Run/installation manual User’s Guide Maintenance Guide Training documentation
J. R. Burns, Texas Tech University
That’s it, Folks…That’s it, Folks…