Lean Re Pres Rudorfer Vector Forum V1

Lean Requirements Engineering:
Experiences
p
Vector Industry Forum 2011
June 30, 2011

© Siemens AG 2011. All rights reserved.

Contents

 Goals

 Brief look on Siemens

 Project syngo.via

 Business challenges

 Lean Requirements Engineering

 Results and Summary

 Further Information

Page 2 Arnold Rudorfer, Siemens AG Healthcare Sector I&T SY

Contents

 Goals

 Brief look on Siemens







Goals
G l

 Provide an overview of
requirements engineering
challenges in a medical platform
project
 Apply lean approaches to
requirements engineering and
project management
 Introduce lean requirements
engineering to cope with the
challenges
 Show lessons learned and
achieved benefits


Contents

 Goals

 Brief look on Siemens Healthcare







Siemens Healthcare
THE Integrated Healthcare Company
I t t d H lth C

in-vivo diagnostics (imaging)

X-Ray Computed Magnetic Molecular Ultrasound Oncology
Tomography Resonance Imaging

syngo.via
in-vitro
in vitro diagnostics (laboratory systems)

Immunodiagnostics Nucleid Acid Clinical Chemistry Hematology Urin Lab Automation Near Patient
Testing Analysis Testing


Siemens Healthcare
Development of S l and Employee Numbers
D l t f Sales d E l N b

Sales according to region1)

Germany
9%
Asia & Australia
17%
Europe
(without Germany)
31% 0.97
0.7
0 0.9
1.0 1.1

Employees according to region2)
Germany
Americas
A i
23%
43%
Europe
Asia & Australia
(without Germany)
17%
19%
9.7 11.4 11.3

Americas
1) Basis: FY 2009 acc. To customer locations. 2) Figures worldwide as of Sept. 30, 2009 41%
%


Contents

 Goals

 Brief look on Siemens and Vector

Project syngo.via






Disclaimer:
The content discussed in this presentation needs
to be considered as work in progress
progress.


Project:
P j t syngo.via Product
i P d t

Project Overview

syngo.via: Next generation
imaging soft are for the entire
software
reading process

Project data:
 > 5,000 single product requirements
 Several millions lines of code
C++/C#
 Several hundred developers in
many locations
 Clinical applications for Radiology,
PACS, X-Ray, CT, PET/SPECT,
PACS X Ray CT PET/SPECT
Oncology, Particle Therapy and MR
can be developed


Example: syngo.mCT Oncology
Whole O
Wh l Oncology Workflow
l W kfl

Automated Case Preparation Disease Oriented
Disease-Oriented Reading Multi Modality
Multi-Modality Access

 Automated bone and bloodpool  Preferred layout applied  Image fusion for CT, PET, and
removal  Automated lesion segmentation MR images, etc.
 Automated sorting of images, etc.  Automatic loading of prior exams, etc.

Courtesy of University Hospital of Munich-Grosshadern/ Munich, Germany © Siemens AG 2011. All rights reserved.
syngo.mCT Oncology is cleared in theRudorfer, Siemens AG Healthcare
Page 11 Arnold U.S. with syngo.PET&CT Oncology. Sector I&T SY H IM SY

Contents

 Goals



Business challenges





Business Ch ll
B i Challenges

Industry Cycle time
regulations down

Complexity
Costs down growth
Need to
industrialize
product
development
Focus of this talk

Platforms
Application Life-cycle Lean Requirements
Model-based
Management Tools Engineering
Globally Integrated
Clinical Workflows

Contents

 Goals




Lean Requirements Engineering




RE Issues in the Project
Four pressing pain-points to look at …
F i i i t t l k t

1.Engineering artifact structure does 3.V-model style life-cycle does not
not facilitate market valuation allow for flexible adaptations
2.Complex architecture cannot be 4.High manual effort for traceability
controlled by product management and auditability


Pain point 1: Engineering artifact structure does
not f ilit t market valuation
t facilitate k t l ti

Selected issues:
S Solutions:
 Domain model for imaging
platform partially complete A. Feature Model
 S
Scope for release planning
f l l i B. Value-based Ranking of
difficult to define Features
 Need to short development
lifecycle – outdated requirements

Solution A F t
S l ti A: Feature Model
M d l

Highest Level Benefits:
B fi
 Higher level abstraction of grouping of
requirements into sellable units: From 5,000
product requirements to 800+ features
(factor ~ 6)
 Visual domain model for healthcare
workflows (tree & graphical)
 Reduction of (de-) scoping effort by ~ 30% (*)
Graphical View
 Reduction in time to understand aspects of
the system
 Hierarchical relationships enable mapping of
stakeholder requests and visualize
dependencies
 Basis for introducing variability management
Hierarchical View
Hi hi l Vi  Feeds the
F d th product b kl
d t backlog
(*) Source: Estimates from product managers

Solution B V l b
S l ti B: Value-based Ranking of Features
d R ki fF t

Characteristics:
 Ranking is used to determine the release
backlog
 Main criteria for ranking are business value,
technical risk and effort

Benefits:
 Only features with the highest business
value (and feasibility) are implemented
 Feature independence assures
parallelization of development
 Simulation of optimal release plan (what-
if analysis)


Pain point 2: Complex architecture cannot be
controlled by product management
t ll d b d t t

Selected issues:
 Business needs not consistently linked to Solutions:
features/ requirements; dependencies C. Architecture Model Mapping
between features not easily visible
y
 Too much variability in software D. Graphical Modeling of
architecture Clinical Workflows
 Lack of a clear ranking of requirements
according to business value


Solution C: Architecture M d l Mapping
S l ti C A hit t Model M i

F Feature Model Characteristics:
 Identifies links between features and their
F F F
implementation
SWF SWF SWF SWF SWF SWF SWF
 Explicit modeling of variability in the
architecture
S Architecture Model

Benefits:
SS SS SS
 Architectural decisions motivated by features
and product-line variability
C C C C C C

 Enable reduction of architectural complexity

 Support impact analysis for (de-) scoping
sessions
 Early identification of architectural risks

 Improved accuracy of early effort estimates

 Reduction of number of scoping sessions


Solution D: Graphical Modeling of Clinical
Workflows
W kfl

Characteristics:
 Used to describe clinical workflows that
consist of a collection of steps in a
defined sequence together with
accompanying specification of pre-/post-
conditions, business rules, performance
aspects, etc.

Benefits:
 Increase expressiveness of clinical
workflows t describe d
kfl to d ib dynamic b h i
i behaviors
 Early analysis of stakeholder requests from
customers; joint modeling sessions to
describe th needs f
d ib the d from th customer‘s
the t ‘
point of view
 Reduction of review times due to visual
approach (~ -40%) (*)
40%)
(*) Source: Estimates from product managers


Pain point 3: V-model style life-cycle does not
allow f fl ibl adaptations
ll for flexible d t ti

Selected issues to deal with: Solutions
S l ti
 V-model life-cycle provides visibility
E. Incremental Requirements
on milestones but does not allow
Engineering and Project
g g j
for stepwise refinement
Management
 Late changes of features due to
customer and market inputs create
high rework


Solution E: Incremental Requirements Engineering
and Project Management
dP j tM t

From Feature Model

Characteristics: Benefits:
 Hi h l
High-level f t
l features are elaborated
l b t d  Mi 25% reduction of upfront
Min. d ti f f t
when needed – just enough requirement engineering work, just-in-
specification before time (*)
implementation  Elimination of unnecessary hand offs
hand-offs
 Top-ranked features will be refined between development roles
& assigned for implementation  ~ 20% reduction of life-cycle time
(*) Source: MS Team Foundation Server Business Case, May 2010
through concurrent engineering (**)
( )
(**) Source: Experience of agile clinical/ financial information systems projects


Lean Requirements Engineering and Project
Management
M t


Process-Adaption:
From V-Model to Agile Development
F V M d l t A il D l t

„Old V Model Process
Old“ V-Model
D2 D3 D4

Specification
S ifi ti Implementation
I l t ti Test
T t System-
S t
+ Plan + Repair test
Design
Input
„New“ A il P
N “ Agile Process
IT IT
Start Accept End
D2 D3 Commit D4

Plan Implementation Test System-
+ Test + Repair
p + Repair test
Feasibility Design
Input

Readiness Doneness
D


Pain point 4: High manual effort for traceability
and auditability
d dit bilit

Selected issues to deal with: Selected solution(s):
 Key-based tracing creates a high
manual effort
 Not all traces relate to requirements F. Structure based tracing of
Structure-based
content features and requirements
 Many trace errors are induced after
change requests
g q


Solution F: Structure-based tracing of features
and requirements
d i t

Characteristics:
Features group one or more requirements
in a meaningful way
Solution based tracing = Mapping between
Solution-based
features or parent-child relationships
Tracing efforts are combined with reviews
and tooling

For feature-oriented
RE:
RE
Structure-based tracing, Benefits:
i.e. Mapping between
Features and SW
Features
Effort reduction for tracing
For feature-oriented
RE: Reduction of tracing error rate
Structure-based tracing,
i.e. Parent-child
relationship (
p (1:m))


Major Changes: Recap
Lean Requirements Engineering
L R i t E i i

 Feature Model
 Value-based Ranking of Features
 Graphical Modeling of Clinical
Workflows
 Architecture Model Mapping
 Incremental Requirements
Engineering and Project
Management


Contents

 Goals





Results and Summary



Results
Business C
B i Case – C t ib ti
Contribution of Levers
fL

Description of Benefit Distribution of
Benefits
 Tracing with less effort (based on 25%
ion
uct

feature model‘s nature no verticals)
model s nature,
Produ
Planning Defniti

 More effective stakeholder management (less scoping
sessions, reduction in review times and effort)
g

T
Transparency and easy overview on product f
d i d t functionality
ti lit 23%
Project

 Reduction of product complexity (transparent modeling 7%
Design

of product lines and product variability)

More effective Testing 45%
Test

Easier bug-fixing

Source: OREA Business Case, February 2011

Results
Business C
B i Case – NPV P j ti
Projection

 Benefits are realized across
NPV Projection
engineering workflows: Product
Definition, Project Planning, Design
and Test
 Break-even reached in 2nd year
 Hints for other RE practitioners:
 Business case can only be carried
out with a complete technical
concept t
 Sensitivity analysis done on risks
shows that the effort is worthwhile
even when everything goes wrong.

Source: OREA Business Case, February 2011


Key Take-Aways
K T k A

 S ccessf l platform de elopment req ires a b siness oriented
Successful development requires business-oriented
Requirements Engineering approach
 The introduction of lean Requirements Engineering is a huge
organizational change management endeavor
 A feature perspective both for organizing requirements facilitates
tracing business and market needs to implementation details
 Introducing a platform concept means to restructure requirements
and li k th
d link them to architecture components
t hit t t
 Continuous assessment and verification of business benefits is
necessary to judge what is working and what not


Thank
Th k you for your attention!
f tt ti !


Contents

 Goals






Further Information


Documented Experiences and Best Practices
from various Industry Projects
f i I d t P j t

English language:
Software & Systems
Requirements
Engineering: I P ti
E i i In Practice
2009
McGrawHill

Link to web site McGrawHill


Arnold Rudorfer
Director Software Initiative and
Process Improvement
Siemens AG Healthcare Sector

Hartmannstrasse 16
D-91052 Erlangen

Phone: +49 9131 – 84 2299
Fax: +49 9131 – 84 8691
Mobile: +49 174 1537825

E-Mail:
arnold.rudorfer@siemens.com


Lean Re Pres Rudorfer Vector Forum V1

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (7)

Similar to Lean Re Pres Rudorfer Vector Forum V1

Similar to Lean Re Pres Rudorfer Vector Forum V1 (20)

More from Arnold Rudorfer

More from Arnold Rudorfer (13)

Lean Re Pres Rudorfer Vector Forum V1