Counting Use Case Points
•Download as PPT, PDF•
0 likes•883 views
Presentation by Capgemini on the NESMA fall conference 2006.
Recommended
More Related Content
Similar to Counting Use Case Points
Similar to Counting Use Case Points (20)
More from Nesma
More from Nesma (20)
Counting Use Case Points
- 1. Counting Use Case Points Peter Bink December 7th, 2006
- 2. The history of and rationale behind use case points Initiated by Capgemini US and UK in 2000 to determine functional size in an early stage. NL involved since 2001 Not a global standard way of counting functional size. Requirements: Quantifying the functional size • Correlation with FPs and SLOCs • Connected to RUP • Easy to count UCP is now used for: • Most of our top down estimates • All project closure evaluations • For .NET, JAVA and BI projects Peter Bink, Use Case Points NESMA conference, 7 Dec 2006
- 3. Where are Use Case Points based on? Flows • Main flow • Alternative flows • Errorflows Boundary classes • Screens • Interface messages • Reports Business rules Peter Bink, Use Case Points NESMA conference, 7 Dec 2006
- 4. Flows Peter Bink, Use Case Points NESMA conference, 7 Dec 2006
- 5. Boundary classes High correlation with functional size Peter Bink, Use Case Points NESMA conference, 7 Dec 2006
- 6. Business rules Peter Bink, Use Case Points NESMA conference, 7 Dec 2006
- 7. Correlation between UCP and FP y = 20,85x Correlation between UCP and FP 2 R = 0,821 n = 48 Remarks: 4000 • Dutch and English projects 3500 •For UK projects FP are backfired from SLOCs 3000 2500 FP 2000 1500 1000 500 0 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 UCP Peter Bink, Use Case Points NESMA conference, 7 Dec 2006
- 8. Advantages Early sizing by experienced analyst Intuitive approach that analysts can use if they are familiar with use cases. The concept of use cases is persistent throughout a project Use case sizing is easy/cheap Easy to use with new techniques, such as SOA, Buss. Intell. Can be used for calculations The approach works well. There may be more accurate sizing approaches but none that we have found so far are as cheap, flexible, intuitive and easy to use up front. Peter Bink, Use Case Points NESMA conference, 7 Dec 2006
- 9. Challenges Find the right level of aggregation Versus Not an accepted standardised method Not documented in detail (like NESMA PFA) Cannot be used easily by other companies, because there are some undocumented features Peter Bink, Use Case Points NESMA conference, 7 Dec 2006
- 10. Tips & tricks Preferably use more than one sizing method. Don’t mix between size and productivity Translate complexity in productivity & Size is uniquely quantified Calibrate regularly between people that count UCPs Peter Bink, Use Case Points NESMA conference, 7 Dec 2006
- 11. More info peter.bink@capgemini.com Peter Bink, Use Case Points NESMA conference, 7 Dec 2006
Editor's Notes
- - Can be used by an experienced analyst to size a project even before the requirements have documented at detailed level. - Can be calibrated against completed projects. Intuitive approach that analysts can use if they are familiar with use cases. The terminology/language is not new to them and they can use the approach if they are given the guidelines - they do not need a two day training course and several years of counting experience! The concept of use cases is persistent throughout a project from requirements to final testing so the UCP sizing approach can be reused throughout the project. The number of use cases may change as the use cases are elaborated but our experience so far is that the number of use case points does not change significantly. Use case sizing is easy/cheap to do compared with many other sizing approaches such as Function Point counting. The approach seems to work reasonably well. There may be more accurate sizing approaches but none that we have found so far are as cheap, flexible, intuitive and easy to use up front.