Over the last decade, the software industry has been investing heavily in software process improvement, such as CMM(I) initiatives. But achieving higher CMMI levels does not guarantee business success. Being able to define strategic business objectives and implementing a derived product development strategy with a proactive attitude toward quality determines whether one is successful in the long run.
This article focuses on the importance of quality, where the existing approach toward dealing with quality in the late testing phase is criticized. The author discusses how quality can be managed proactively, using an example from industry. Ericsson R&D Netherlands defined a project defect model and ran a pilot project to manage quality
throughout product development.
Product Management And Service Delivery Process - FlackVentures ExampleKate Pynn
A lifecycle methodology enforces some very important processes that deliver critical value to Service Delivery. Some key contributions are:
Business driven goals (e.g. profit, performance, credible schedules, resource effectiveness….)
Roles and responsibility clarification (e.g. delegation, decision making, optimization….)
Organizational effectiveness (e.g. resource structure for task, enable cross functional efforts….)
Planning enforcement at the beginning before major resources committed
Continuous learning enabled that builds core competency in credible delivery plans.
Product Management And Service Delivery Process - FlackVentures ExampleKate Pynn
A lifecycle methodology enforces some very important processes that deliver critical value to Service Delivery. Some key contributions are:
Business driven goals (e.g. profit, performance, credible schedules, resource effectiveness….)
Roles and responsibility clarification (e.g. delegation, decision making, optimization….)
Organizational effectiveness (e.g. resource structure for task, enable cross functional efforts….)
Planning enforcement at the beginning before major resources committed
Continuous learning enabled that builds core competency in credible delivery plans.
AGILE PROJECT MANAGEMENT IN NON-SOFTWARE SECTORS DURING TURBULENT TIMESijseajournal
Scholars have viewed Agile Project Management APM as a prominent solution for software and nonsoftware innovative institutions to cope with its unstable environment. APM has been tested in the software
field and proven to be successful. Since 2015, there is ongoing war in Yemen that negatively affects most
sectors including the business and microfinance sectors. Social Fund for Development SFD, the
microfinance industry leader in Yemen, sought solutions for enhancing the Microfinance Institutions MFIs
capabilities during the current environment turbulence. This research investigates any possible advantages
in adopting APM in the microfinance sector, out of software domain. A qualitative method was used to
conduct the research. three microfinance pioneers were selected and 11 professionals from all
management levels were interviewed. In addition, three workshop discussions with 22 members of product
development teams were held. The study found that adopting APM would help these MFIs to enhance their
resilience by bridging the identified gaps and challenges.
New Product Development Tools and Techniques SurveyDayu Tony Jin
This is the questionnaire that I developed for one of my market research research project. Various techniques have been incorporated to improve response rate. For details, please visit: http://servicesresearch.blogspot.sg/2010/10/research-methogology-course-summary-2.html
New Product Development Philosophy IB Work BetterStephen Tavares
This presentation outlines Philosophy IB's offerings in the New Product Development space including governance and process design and outsourced project management.
The Critical Role of Sales Throughout the New Product Development ProcessGreg Bonsib
The sales team has a critical role at every stage of the NPD process. So does product marketing. These roles are very different and each crucial to the ultimate product commercialization success in the marketplace.
The Book details on how to approach CMMI Implementation in an organization. It details out the various phases involved in CMMI Implementation and how to plan and execute them. It details on various aspects which we tend to overlook in CMMI Implementation.
Who Should Read?
• Organization looking forward to implement CMMI
• Top Management person, trying to understand how to go about
• SEPG, Program manager and Process Quality members
• Anyone who is interested in understanding the Implementation of CMMI
Why to Read?
• To get complete End to End understanding on CMMI Implementation Lifecycle
• Plan your budget, effort and resources for the program
• Set your expectations clear on CMMI Implementation
• Be aware of the different aspects in Implementation
How it’s different:
• Written from practitioners’ point of view
• Communicates the reality in practical implementation
Word of Caution:
• The book contains only samples and typical examples and they are not comprehensive and to be verified and validated on a particular context for applicability
These slides were prepared for Engineering and Food Technology students at Massey University, New Zealand to provide guidance in writing a product development report based on a group project.
Integrated Project Management Measures in CMMIijcsit
Project management is quite important to execute projects effectively and efficiently. Project management
is vital to projects success. The main challenge of project management is to achieve all project goals,
taking into consideration time, scope, budget constraints, and quality. This paper will identify general
measures for the two specific goals and its ten specific practices of Integrated Project management Process
Area in Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI). CMMI is a framework for improvement and
assessment of computer information systems. The method we used to define the measures is to apply the
Goal Questions Metrics (GQM) paradigm to the two specific goals and its ten specific practices of
Integrated Project management Process Area in CMMI.
Product design and development by Karl T. UlrichJoy Biswas
Chapter 1
Introduction to Product design and Development by Karl T. Ulrich. Here is the presentation file of chapter 1 by the students of SUST IPE 2010-11 batch.
This presentation is an continuation of my earlier presentation of TQM. This Ppt covers Quality Function Deployment, Quality Control Tools - Old and New, Benchmarking, Business Process Reengineering, Six Sigma, etc
The three-day course, "Introduction to CMMI", introduces participants to the fundamental concepts of the CMMI model. The course assists companies in integrating best practices from proven discipline-specific process improvement models, including systems engineering, software engineering, integrated product and process development and supplier sourcing.
The course is composed of lectures and class exercises with ample opportunity for participant questions and discussions. After attending the course, participants will be able to describe the components of CMMI, discuss the process areas in CMMI, and locate relevant information in the model.
The workshop will help the participants to:
Understand the CMMI framework
Understand the detailed requirements of the process areas in the CMMI V1.3
Make valid judgments regarding the organization's implementation of process areas
Identify issues that should be addressed in performing process improvements using the CMMI V1.3
Building the Right Product vs. The Product RightMojoTech
Striking a delicate balance between creating the desired product and developing it flawlessly is a distinction often overlooked by those who question a Product Managers necessity or a development partner's qualifications.
Building the Right Product:
Conducting a thorough Product Discovery, addressing key questions, and understanding stakeholder goals and requirements are vital steps to mitigate faulty assumptions and deliver a successful solution.
Building the Product Right:
Only focusing on building the product right risks developer-centric outcomes. A PM's expertise is crucial for non-technical teams and Product Owners to balance technical requirements and product goals.
AGILE PROJECT MANAGEMENT IN NON-SOFTWARE SECTORS DURING TURBULENT TIMESijseajournal
Scholars have viewed Agile Project Management APM as a prominent solution for software and nonsoftware innovative institutions to cope with its unstable environment. APM has been tested in the software
field and proven to be successful. Since 2015, there is ongoing war in Yemen that negatively affects most
sectors including the business and microfinance sectors. Social Fund for Development SFD, the
microfinance industry leader in Yemen, sought solutions for enhancing the Microfinance Institutions MFIs
capabilities during the current environment turbulence. This research investigates any possible advantages
in adopting APM in the microfinance sector, out of software domain. A qualitative method was used to
conduct the research. three microfinance pioneers were selected and 11 professionals from all
management levels were interviewed. In addition, three workshop discussions with 22 members of product
development teams were held. The study found that adopting APM would help these MFIs to enhance their
resilience by bridging the identified gaps and challenges.
New Product Development Tools and Techniques SurveyDayu Tony Jin
This is the questionnaire that I developed for one of my market research research project. Various techniques have been incorporated to improve response rate. For details, please visit: http://servicesresearch.blogspot.sg/2010/10/research-methogology-course-summary-2.html
New Product Development Philosophy IB Work BetterStephen Tavares
This presentation outlines Philosophy IB's offerings in the New Product Development space including governance and process design and outsourced project management.
The Critical Role of Sales Throughout the New Product Development ProcessGreg Bonsib
The sales team has a critical role at every stage of the NPD process. So does product marketing. These roles are very different and each crucial to the ultimate product commercialization success in the marketplace.
The Book details on how to approach CMMI Implementation in an organization. It details out the various phases involved in CMMI Implementation and how to plan and execute them. It details on various aspects which we tend to overlook in CMMI Implementation.
Who Should Read?
• Organization looking forward to implement CMMI
• Top Management person, trying to understand how to go about
• SEPG, Program manager and Process Quality members
• Anyone who is interested in understanding the Implementation of CMMI
Why to Read?
• To get complete End to End understanding on CMMI Implementation Lifecycle
• Plan your budget, effort and resources for the program
• Set your expectations clear on CMMI Implementation
• Be aware of the different aspects in Implementation
How it’s different:
• Written from practitioners’ point of view
• Communicates the reality in practical implementation
Word of Caution:
• The book contains only samples and typical examples and they are not comprehensive and to be verified and validated on a particular context for applicability
These slides were prepared for Engineering and Food Technology students at Massey University, New Zealand to provide guidance in writing a product development report based on a group project.
Integrated Project Management Measures in CMMIijcsit
Project management is quite important to execute projects effectively and efficiently. Project management
is vital to projects success. The main challenge of project management is to achieve all project goals,
taking into consideration time, scope, budget constraints, and quality. This paper will identify general
measures for the two specific goals and its ten specific practices of Integrated Project management Process
Area in Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI). CMMI is a framework for improvement and
assessment of computer information systems. The method we used to define the measures is to apply the
Goal Questions Metrics (GQM) paradigm to the two specific goals and its ten specific practices of
Integrated Project management Process Area in CMMI.
Product design and development by Karl T. UlrichJoy Biswas
Chapter 1
Introduction to Product design and Development by Karl T. Ulrich. Here is the presentation file of chapter 1 by the students of SUST IPE 2010-11 batch.
This presentation is an continuation of my earlier presentation of TQM. This Ppt covers Quality Function Deployment, Quality Control Tools - Old and New, Benchmarking, Business Process Reengineering, Six Sigma, etc
The three-day course, "Introduction to CMMI", introduces participants to the fundamental concepts of the CMMI model. The course assists companies in integrating best practices from proven discipline-specific process improvement models, including systems engineering, software engineering, integrated product and process development and supplier sourcing.
The course is composed of lectures and class exercises with ample opportunity for participant questions and discussions. After attending the course, participants will be able to describe the components of CMMI, discuss the process areas in CMMI, and locate relevant information in the model.
The workshop will help the participants to:
Understand the CMMI framework
Understand the detailed requirements of the process areas in the CMMI V1.3
Make valid judgments regarding the organization's implementation of process areas
Identify issues that should be addressed in performing process improvements using the CMMI V1.3
Building the Right Product vs. The Product RightMojoTech
Striking a delicate balance between creating the desired product and developing it flawlessly is a distinction often overlooked by those who question a Product Managers necessity or a development partner's qualifications.
Building the Right Product:
Conducting a thorough Product Discovery, addressing key questions, and understanding stakeholder goals and requirements are vital steps to mitigate faulty assumptions and deliver a successful solution.
Building the Product Right:
Only focusing on building the product right risks developer-centric outcomes. A PM's expertise is crucial for non-technical teams and Product Owners to balance technical requirements and product goals.
Dear students get fully solved assignments
Send your semester & Specialization name to our mail id :
“ help.mbaassignments@gmail.com ”
or
Call us at : 08263069601
Dear students get fully solved assignments
Send your semester & Specialization name to our mail id :
“ help.mbaassignments@gmail.com ”
or
Call us at : 08263069601
Enterprise Agile release planning is complicated when multiple agile teams work together to deliver combined capabilities, and the scope for a release span across multiple business functions, processes, and systems. This paper presents agile release planning models for large global organizations delivering business capabilities using IT projects.
Chapter 2
The New Products Process
*
The Procter & Gamble Cosmetics SagaStarting point: senior management commitment to new products.P&G’s Cosmetics business unit had no clear product strategy, unfocused product initiatives, and too many customer segments being targeted – in short, a lack of focus.P&G Cosmetics skillfully used all three strategic elements and made the weak business unit profitable.
*
P&G Cosmetics and the PICSituation Assessment:Underserved consumer market that wanted quality facial product such as cleansers, eye products, etc.Supply chain was uncoordinated as production and shipments were not tied to demand; market forecasts were not driving shipping schedules.PIC recommended a strategic focus on products for the face – other opportunities would not be pursued.
*
P&G Cosmetics and the New Products ProcessP&G Cosmetics used a phased process like that of Chapter 1.Project teams established early in process.Consumer research done early and used in the process (the voice of the customer).Tough evaluation steps were carefully implemented as new products were compared to best practices and benchmarks.
*
P&G Cosmetics and the New Product PortfolioP&G Cosmetics systematically added new products such that maximum buzz and excitement was created in the marketplace.If already several eye makeup products on the market, they would not immediately launch another. Management called this an “initiative rhythm” for product launch.
*
P&G Cosmetics and the Role of Effective Team ManagementSenior Cosmetics executives were committed to success as was corporate level management.Initiative Success Managers were hired to lead strategy development, manage evaluation meetings, train employees, etc.The best team leaders were sought and rewarded based on performance.
*
The Phases of the New Products Process
Phase 1: Opportunity Identification/Selection
Phase 2: Concept Generation
Phase 3: Concept/Project Evaluation
Phase 4: Development
Phase 5: Launch
Figure 2.1
The Evaluation Tasks in the New Products Process
Figure 2.2
Opportunity Identification/
Selection
Concept Generation
Concept/Project Evaluation
Development
Launch
Direction;
Where should we look?
Initial Review:
Is the idea worth screening?
Full Screen:
Should we try to develop it?
Progress Reports:
Have we developed it?
Market Testing:
Should we market it?
*
Phase 1: Opportunity Identification/Selection
Active and passive generation of new product opportunities as spinouts of the ongoing business operation. New product suggestions, changes in marketing plan, resource changes, and new needs/wants in the marketplace. Research, evaluate, validate, and rank them (as opportunities, not specific product concepts). Give major ones a preliminary strategic statement to guide further work on it.
*
Activities that Feed Strategic Planning for New ProductsOngoing marketing planning (e.g., need to meet new aggressive competitor)Ongoing corporate plan ...
For Milestone Three, you drafted your campaign outline with your.docxAKHIL969626
For Milestone Three, you drafted your campaign outline with your final selection of the three to five digital tools that will be employed.
However, this outline is general in nature and not specific to the client in your campaign.
Please see the embedded Rubric for grading details.
Social Trends
You identify current social trends. You do not describe how the company should be communicating.
Target Audience
You did not identify the target audience, using clear and specific examples. You did not show how the digital tools can be used to reach the target audience.
Digital Tools
You recommend three to five digital tools for the digital campaign. You did not substantiate the recommendations with research.
Brand Imaging Strategies
You describe brand imaging strategies that can be employed. You di not use specific and relevant details. You did not develop an engaging theme.
Future Trends
You evaluate future trends and recommend how to engage upon these trends. You use research to substantiate your ideas.
Articulation of Response
Your submission is free of errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, and organization and is presented in a professional and easy to read format. You did have APA style errors. Please see this link for reference: https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/560/01/
You would benefit from contacting the Online Writing Center about the proper use of APA style. The SNHU Online Writing Center is staffed with writing coaches who can work one on one with you to guide the writing process. Simply:
• Click “Course Tools” from the main menu;
• Navigate to the Writing Center’s “Submit Your Paper for Written Feedback and Support” icon;
• Follow the instructions to be taken to the Paper Center;
• Upload your paper as a PDF.
You will receive feedback as a downloadable file in the Paper Center within 48 hours.
I would suggest you rework and resubmit this Milestone assignment.
Project Metrics, Monitoring, and Control
Module 5: Learning curves
Page 1 of 2PJM535 - Module 5: Learning curves
9/19/2016https://coursecms.csuglobal.edu/file/ed1d4003-dfb2-4a99-948f-6ddaedb0a255/1/production/PJM535_5/pjm535...
1. Theory of Learning Curves
Project management philosophy may state that experience curves are based on the old adage that “practice makes perfect.”
A service or product can always be made better and in less time in each succeeding attempt. In the 1960’s, true implications of
experience curves became evident. Companies such as Boston Consulting Group showed that each time cumulative production doubled,
the total manufacturing time and cost fell by a constant and predictable amount (Kerzner, 2009). Projects with repeatable processes
have the same effect, meaning product deliverables are met earlier and at less cost.
Today’s management often measures the profitability of a corporation as a function of market share. As the market share increases,
profitability will increase because of lower prod ...
PLM is about “managing products across their lifecycles”, and it applies to any company with a product. It applies to all sizes of companies, ranging from large multinational corporations to small and medium enterprises. It’s applied across a
wide range of industrial sectors including aerospace, apparel, automotive, beverage,consumer goods, construction equipment, defence, electrical engineering, electronics, food, life sciences, machinery, machine tool, mechanical engineering,medical equipment, pharmaceutical, plastics, shipbuilding, shoe, software, transportation and turbine.
PRODUCT BRIEF DEVELOPMENT TOOLS Quality Function Dep.docxbriancrawford30935
PRODUCT BRIEF
DEVELOPMENT
TOOLS
Quality Function Deployment
In a few words: The voice of the customer translated into the voice of the engineer.
To design a product well, a design teams needs to know what it is
they are designing, and what the end-users will expect from it.
Quality Function Deployment is a systematic approach to design
based on a close awareness of customer desires, coupled with the
integration of corporate functional groups. It consists in
translating customer desires (for example, the ease of writing for
a pen) into design characteristics (pen ink viscosity, pressure on
ball-point) for each stage of the product development (Rosenthal,
1992).
Ultimately the goal of QFD is to translate
often subjective quality criteria into objective
ones that can be quantified and measured and
which can then be used to design and
manufacture the product. It is a complimentary
method for determining how and where
priorities are to be assigned in product
development. The intent is to employ
objective procedures in increasing detail
throughout the development of the product.
(Reilly, 1999)
Quality Function Deployment was developed
by Yoji Akao in Japan in 1966. By 1972 the
power of the approach had been well
demonstrated at the Mitsubishi Heavy
Industries Kobe Shipyard (Sullivan, 1986) and
in 1978 the first book on the subject was
published in Japanese and then later translated
into English in 1994 (Mizuno and Akao,
1994).
In Akao’s words, QFD "is a method for developing a design quality aimed at satisfying the
consumer and then translating the consumer's demand into design targets and major quality
assurance points to be used throughout the production phase. ... [QFD] is a way to assure the
design quality while the product is still in the design stage." As a very important side benefit he
points out that, when appropriately applied, QFD has demonstrated the reduction of development
time by one-half to one-third. (Akao, 1990)
The 3 main goals in implementing QFD are:
1. Prioritize spoken and unspoken customer wants and needs.
2. Translate these needs into technical characteristics and specifications.
3. Build and deliver a quality product or service by focusing everybody toward customer
satisfaction.
Technique useful for:
Derivative First of a kind
Me too with
a twist Next generation
Familiar New
E
st
ab
lis
he
d
N
ew
M
ar
ke
t
Product Concept
Since its introduction, Quality Function Deployment has helped to transform the way many
companies:
• Plan new products
• Design product requirements
• Determine process characteristics
• Control the manufacturing process
• Document already existing product specifications
QFD uses some principles from Concurrent Engineering in that cross-functional teams are
involved in all phases of product development. Each of the four phases in a QFD process uses a
matrix to translate customer requirements from initial plann.
Psychological Safety in Teams - FlowCon France 2024 - Ben LindersBen Linders
Psychological safety in teams is important; team members must feel safe and able to communicate and collaborate effectively to deliver value. It’s also necessary to build long-lasting teams since things will happen and relationships will be strained.
But, how safe is a team? How can we determine if there are any factors that make the team unsafe or have an impact on the team’s culture?
In this mini-workshop, we’ll play games for psychological safety and team culture utilizing a deck of coaching cards, The Psychological Safety Cards. We will learn how to use gamification to gain a better understanding of what’s going on in teams. Individuals share what they have learned from working in teams, what has impacted the team’s safety and culture, and what has led to positive change.
Different game formats will be played in groups in parallel. Examples are an ice-breaker to get people talking about psychological safety, a constellation where people take positions about aspects of psychological safety in their team or organization, and collaborative card games where people work together to create an environment that fosters psychological safety.
Why people hate working in Agile teams - QA Challenge Accepted 2023 - Ben Lin...Ben Linders
By now, many of us have been through one or more "agile transformations". We've been surrounded by agile coaches and Scrum masters who tried to help us adapt to agile, with managers who became servant leaders. Hopefully they weren't telling you what to do or how to do your work! A lot of people simply hate working in agile teams - Ben hears that all the time. And that is why he's here! In this talk, Ben will explore the difficulties of collaborating in teams and what we can do to make it beneficial and worthwhile for people to work in teams. Ben will delve into what teams really need, and what leaders should do and should not do to support them, including providing an environment and culture where teams can flourish and supporting teams in removing barriers. Through this talk, attendees will gain a better understanding of the reasons why people struggle to work in agile teams, and what leaders can do to create a positive and supportive environment for teams. The talk is intended for anyone working in a team or working with teams, from agile coaches and Scrum masters to managers and team members who are looking to improve their collaboration skills and create a more positive and productive work environment.
Improving Your Testing Skills and Practices with Gamification - Testing Unite...Ben Linders
So many challenges, so little time. As testers or quality engineers, we need to sharpen the saw, but how? Gamification can be a way to look at how you’re doing and find out where to improve. It’s a great way to have everyone engaged and get the best out of people.
In this presentation, Ben Linders will show how playing games (onsite or online) with the Agile Testing Coaching Cards and Agile Quality Coaching Cards help to explore your current quality and testing practice and decide as a team on what to improve or experiment with.
Start up distributed teams online - Mini XP days 2022 - Ben LindersBen Linders
How to start up a distributed team online with gamification
Remote first is becoming the norm, and this is also true for new teams. Where you would previously organize one or more onsite kick-off sessions to start a new team, a new distributed team would have to be working online together from day 1.
Techniques used for team chartering might still be useful, but they would need a different approach for online working. Gamification, incentifying people’s engagement by using game-style principles and practices, can help you to build strong teams.
In this session, we’ll look at several tools and playing formats that can be used to start up distributed teams and foster further development.
We’ll do the exercises in teams, and as we will be experimenting with both in-person and online exercises it’s good to bring your laptop or tablet too.
Mini XP Days
Instead of scaling up further, XP Days decided to “scale-out”: they rerun some of the favourite sessions of the previous year’s XP Days at the “Mini XP Day”, a one day conference with three tracks. Mini XP Day is ideal if you’ve missed XP Days or if you want to get a “taste” of what XP Days is.
Mini XP Days 2022 will be held on May 17 at the Van der Valk Hotel Beveren.
Increasing psychological safety in agile teams - Agile humans lean coffee 202...Ben Linders
Psychological safety in teams is important; it is necessary for the team to be able to communicate and collaborate effectively in order to deliver value. It's also necessary to build long-lasting teams since things will happen and relationships will be strained; team members must be informed of what's going on in the team and feel comfortable dealing with it. But, how safe is a team? How can we determine if there are any factors that make the team unsafe or have an impact on the team's culture?
In this mini-workshop, we'll play a game for psychological safety and team culture utilizing a deck of coaching cards. We will learn how to use gamification to gain a better understanding of what's going on in teams. Individuals can share what they have learned from working in teams, how it impacted the team's safety and culture, and what led to positive change.
We'll use a Jamboard for the game, so you will need a Google account to join the Jamboard. All participants will receive a code along with a discount for buying the cards.
Improving your quality and testing skills with gamification - Spring 2021 Onl...Ben Linders
For the first time, I’m doing a session at the Online Testing Conference. I’ll be playing games with the Agile Testing Coaching Cards and Agile Quality Coaching Cards to help people explore how things are going and to improve their way of working.
Improving Your Quality and Testing Skills with Gamification
So many challenges, so little time. As testers we need to sharpen the saw, but how? Gamification can be a way to look at how you’re doing and find out where to improve. It’s a great way to have everyone involved and get the best out of people.
In this presentation, Ben Linders will play games with the Agile Testing Coaching Cards and Agile Quality Coaching Cards to show how you can explore your current quality and testing practice and decide in your team on what to improve or experiment with.
Players can use the coaching cards to discuss quality and testing values, principles, and practices. In teams, people can use the cards to share their experiences and learnings.
Different game formats can be used to share experiences on testing and quality principles and practices and explore how they can be applied effectively.
Takeaways
Show how to use gamification to self-assess your current way of working.
Play games with the Agile Testing Coaching Cards and Agile Quality Coaching Cards.
Explore how to facilitate games to enhance quality and testing in agile teams.
\
Online Testing Conference
OnlineTestConf was the first 100% online conference to provide all the advantages of attending professional QA related conferences: personal learning, networking etc. without the shortcomings of scheduling, expenses and travel. The conference has been running for the past 5 years on a semi-annual basis, long before COVID-19 forced all live events online.
Our next event will be our 10th OnlineTestConf! Conference attendees are from all parts of the world, we host well known speakers as well as young presenters, and discuss everything that relates to Testing and QA. Attendance is and will remain free of charge and we invite anyone who sees themselves involved in testing and the testing community to join.
How agile are you? - Agile New England 2021 - Ben LindersBen Linders
On April 1, 2021, (no joke) I did an Agile 101 for Agile New England where we played the Agile Self-assessment Game online.
The Agile Self-assessment Game: How Agile Are You? by Ben Linders
The Agile Self-assessment Game is an Agile ” compass & map” to find out where you are and inspire you with ideas and suggestions on where to go next on your agile journey. It’s a cooperative card game to discover how agile you are and what you can do to increase your agility to deliver more value to their customers and stakeholders.
In this session, Ben Linders explored how a game can enable people to pull in ideas for change and apply those in a way that best suits their collective needs. And we have played with the Agile self-assessment cards online.
Ben Linders is an Independent Consultant in Agile, Lean, Quality, and Continuous Improvement. As an adviser, trainer, and coach, he helps organizations with effectively deploying software development and management practices. He focuses on continuous improvement, collaboration and communication, and professional development, to deliver business value to customers. Ben is an active member of networks on Agile, Lean, and Quality, and a well-known speaker and author. Creator of many Agile Coaching Tools, for example, the Agile Self-assessment Game.
Mini workshop collaborative problem solving - OOP 2021 - Ben LindersBen Linders
Problem? What Problem? Practice Collaborative Problem-solving
Working in teams we face problems in our daily work. As a team, we should be able to solve problems collaboratively. Agile calls these problems impediments.
Impediments can be something in the way of working, processes, tools, or organizational rules or structures. They can also be something cultural or structural.
In this mini-workshop, we’ll practice solving an impediment as a team. Next, we’ll explore how we solved it, how we worked together. What hindered and helped us. We’ll learn what we can do to collaborate better.
Futurespective on Software Development in 2040 - Agile Tour Brussels 2020 - B...Ben Linders
Back to the Future – A Futurespective on Software Development in 2040
We start the futurespective by sketching the future. How is software developed in 2040? Is it people, AI, or a combination? Teams, large groups, or individual work? Programming and testing, or other approaches? Continuous delivery, chunks, iterations, push or pull? Distributed, dispersed, localized teams? There are no limits, let your imagination flow to visualize ideas about developing software products in 2040.
Next, we’ll discuss what got us there. How did these new ways of developing software come into existence? How did we discover them? What experiments led to this? What drove us or influenced us along the way?
Finally, we think about the steps that we can take in 2020 to reach the castle in the sky of software development. What can we do now to become better? What should we stop as it won’t exist in the future anymore?
Let’s find out how the future of software development looks, by doing a futurespective exercise in groups!
How agile are you - Agile Tour London 2020 - Ben LindersBen Linders
Let’s Play a Game to Self-assess Your Agility
Every team, every organization is less or more agile. But how agile are you, and how can you increase your agility? Methods or frameworks don’t tell you how to become agile or increase your agility.
The Agile Self-Assessment Game is an “agile map” with coaching cards for Scrum, DevOps, Kanban, and Business Agility.
Playing the game inspires you with ideas and suggestions on where to go next on your agile journey. Join this session to experience different playing formats in teams, learn how you can discover how agile you are, and get fresh ideas to increase your agility.
Mini workshop retrospecting your retrospectives - Experience Agile 2020 - Be...Ben Linders
The mini-workshop Retrospecting your Retrospectives at eXperience Agile 2020 provides you with ideas to debug your agile retrospectives, find out why they aren’t working and learn how to spice them up and bring the energy back in the team.
Are your retrospective meetings not helping teams to improve? Same actions coming up every retro? People skip the retro, or find them boring? A lack of energy in the room? Chit-chatting instead of discussing real issues? No need for that, let’s retrospect your retrospectives!
In this mini-workshop, you will experience how to use retrospective exercises to debug your retrospective meetings. People will work in teams to reflect on how their retrospectives are going and will learn what they can do to make them valuable again.
It’s a highly interactive session, learning by doing. I’ll bring in my experience from 20 years of doing agile retrospectives, and will set a culture where people will share their ideas and learn.
Agile retrospectives should help teams to reflect at the end of each iteration to learn and decide what to improve and take action in the next iteration. Valuable Agile Retrospectives provide the solution for a successful agile adoption at all levels in the organization. They help teams to reflect and learn how to apply agile practices effectively, and support managers with ideas to set conditions for their teams to grow and deliver more value.
But sometimes retrospectives don’t live up their expectation. Problems that can happen are:
The same questions (what went well, what to improve) are being asked
Similar actions keep coming up in every retrospective
Nothing happens after the meeting, actions are not done
People are postponing or skipping the retrospective meeting
Team members complain that retrospectives are boring and a waste of time
There’s a lack of energy in the room during the meeting, people are not engaged
People don’t feel safe to speak up and share their view
Discussions in the retrospective are not about the real problems (elephant in the room)
The retrospective facilitator is leading people towards a pre-defined answer/solution
In this session, teams will be doing 5 different exercises. In a time slot of two hours, teams rotate to do 2-3 of them.
Intended audience: Scrum masters, agile coaches, tech leads, developers, testers, operations, and anyone who facilitates retrospectives.
This session includes ideas published in my book Getting Value out of Agile Retrospectives, practices from the Retrospective Exercises Toolbox, and agile coaching tools available in my webshop. It’s partly based on things that I teach in one of my workshops: Increasing Organizational Agility with Retrospectives.
Learning Objectives:
Learn to use exercises to reflect on your current practice of retrospectives
See how to create a safe and productive environment to run retrospectives
Practice effective skills for facilitating retrospectives and getting people engaged
Webinar enhancing quality and testing in agile teams - PractiTest - Ben LindersBen Linders
It can be hard for agile teams to deal with quality and testing challenges and decide what to do to deliver high-quality products. There are many different approaches and solutions, which, depending on the context, the problem at hand, and how they are applied, can be more or less effective.
In this webinar, Ben Linders will show you how can use gamification to self-assess your current way of working and enhance quality and testing in agile teams. Playing games with the Agile Testing Coaching Cards and Agile Quality Coaching Cards make it possible to explore your current quality and testing practice and reach a consensus on what could be improved.
Players can use the coaching cards to discuss quality and testing values, principles, and practices. In teams, people can use the cards to share their experiences and learnings.
During the webinar, we’ll pick out cards from the coaching decks to go into detail on specific principles and practices and explore how they can be applied effectively.
Futurespective on software development in 2040 - Aginext - Ben LindersBen Linders
I just came back from 2040 to find out that we are still making software. But it’s not as we know it, Jim! Software development is done completely differently compared to the agile wave that we had at the start of the century. How different? Well, let’s futuresplore it together.
Leading for Self-organization - Stretch 2020 - Ben LindersBen Linders
Agile is something for teams, right? True, but teams don’t function in a vacuum. As a manager, you can set the stage and support teams who want to increase their agility. This presentation explores three topics that managers can work on to make teams succeed and increase the company’s agility: Leadership, Collaboration, and Culture.
Pecha Kucha How to screw up your agile retrospective big time - Ben Linders -...Ben Linders
Retrospectives are great, except when they are not. This tongue-in-cheek presentation explores how you can make agile retrospectives unsuccessful by screwing them, up. I gave this Pecha Kucha at OOP 2020.
Agile Retrospectives to the Next Level - Organizational Agility - OOP 2020 - ...Ben Linders
Agile Retrospectives can be used to deal with problems in teams, at a project or product level, or those related to the collaboration between the team and stakeholders. But you need a different approach compared to team level retrospectives to do organizational-wide improvement.
This session shows how to use agile retrospectives to reveal and solve systemic organizational problems and to increase the company’s agility It explores different approaches, formats, and techniques for agile retrospectives that are done beyond the development team.
Extended Abstract
Nowadays many agile teams are doing retrospectives regularly. They are investing their time to reflect, learn, and take action to improve their way of working and deal with problems that they are facing in a structural way.
Organizations are seeing the benefits from this: teams that are becoming empowered, being able to deliver more value to customers and stakeholders, happy employees, and fewer people leaving the organization. It’s time to take retrospectives to a higher level, and use them to reveal and solve systemic organizational problems. Agile Retrospectives can be used to do that, but you need a different approach.
In this session, I will show how we can use retrospectives to improve the agility of organizations.
Note: Some might call the above approach scaling retrospectives. If that goes towards imposing how teams do retrospectives with some kind of framework, then I believe it doesn’t work. Increasing agility with retrospectives is about creating an environment where teams not only focus on their own improvement needs but also on the company as a whole, and get support from management when improvements go over their team borders or outside their autonomy.
Learning at Scale - FlowCon France 2019 - Ben LindersBen Linders
Where we are seeing more and more individual and team level learning and continuous improvement in organizations, improvements at the higher levels still tend to pose significant challenges. We learn as a team and learn how to be a team, but when we reach the borders of our team and have to deal with more complex systems involving people from our ecosystem and even sometimes from people outside our ecosystem, many improvement practices break down and don’t lead to sustainable results. At the same time, the bigger and more complex our solutions become, the more we need to be able to secure improvement at all levels in the organization.
In this talk, Ben Linders will explore what we can do to increase our understanding of systematic problems at higher levels in organizations, and how to use that to improve the performance and agility of organizations. He will show how we can apply techniques like system/multi-team retrospectives and systems thinking to get improvement going at a level of two higher than the team, and present the benefits that this can bring to teams and organizations as a whole.
Organizational agility: Taking retrospectives to the next level - DevOpsCon M...Ben Linders
Nowadays, many agile teams are doing retrospectives regularly. They are investing time to reflect, learn, and take action to improve their way of working and deal with problems that they are facing in a structural way. Organizations are seeing the benefits from this: teams that are becoming empowered, being able to deliver more value, happy employees, and fewer people leaving the organization. It’s time to take retrospectives to a higher level, and use them to reveal and solve systematic organizational problems. Problems that exist at a project or product level are related to the collaboration between teams and their stakeholders. Agile retrospectives can be used to do that, but you need a different approach. In this session, Ben Linders will show how we can use retrospectives to improve the agility of organizations.
Dealing effectively with impediments - Agile Management Congress 2019 - Ben L...Ben Linders
If your organization wants to become agile and lean, teams need to be able to handle impediments quickly and effectively.
Playing the Impediment Board Game, you will practice how to recognize and analyze impediments, understand how they hinder teams, and decide what to do by deploying agile and lean principles and good practices. You’ll learn to become more effective by recognizing impediments early and get rid of them before they become a major issue.
The impediment game teaches you the five steps for handling impediments effectively:
– recognize and analyze impediments
– find out how they hinder the team
– find effective solutions to deal with them
– decide what to do and who can do it
– learn how to become more effective in dealing with impediments
Agile coaches use the Impediment Board Game in agile transformations to coach teams and help them to become self-organized and empowered to solve any impediments that they might face on their agile journey.
Come play the impediment board game!
Teams what is in it for me - Agile Portugal 2019 - Ben LindersBen Linders
Agile talks a lot about self-organized teams, where developers and testers work together to deliver software. But what can you do to make teams succeed? This talk explores why people would like to work in teams, what managers can do to enable a team structure and culture, and how to (not) manage agile teams.
Elevating Tactical DDD Patterns Through Object CalisthenicsDorra BARTAGUIZ
After immersing yourself in the blue book and its red counterpart, attending DDD-focused conferences, and applying tactical patterns, you're left with a crucial question: How do I ensure my design is effective? Tactical patterns within Domain-Driven Design (DDD) serve as guiding principles for creating clear and manageable domain models. However, achieving success with these patterns requires additional guidance. Interestingly, we've observed that a set of constraints initially designed for training purposes remarkably aligns with effective pattern implementation, offering a more ‘mechanical’ approach. Let's explore together how Object Calisthenics can elevate the design of your tactical DDD patterns, offering concrete help for those venturing into DDD for the first time!
Climate Impact of Software Testing at Nordic Testing DaysKari Kakkonen
My slides at Nordic Testing Days 6.6.2024
Climate impact / sustainability of software testing discussed on the talk. ICT and testing must carry their part of global responsibility to help with the climat warming. We can minimize the carbon footprint but we can also have a carbon handprint, a positive impact on the climate. Quality characteristics can be added with sustainability, and then measured continuously. Test environments can be used less, and in smaller scale and on demand. Test techniques can be used in optimizing or minimizing number of tests. Test automation can be used to speed up testing.
Epistemic Interaction - tuning interfaces to provide information for AI supportAlan Dix
Paper presented at SYNERGY workshop at AVI 2024, Genoa, Italy. 3rd June 2024
https://alandix.com/academic/papers/synergy2024-epistemic/
As machine learning integrates deeper into human-computer interactions, the concept of epistemic interaction emerges, aiming to refine these interactions to enhance system adaptability. This approach encourages minor, intentional adjustments in user behaviour to enrich the data available for system learning. This paper introduces epistemic interaction within the context of human-system communication, illustrating how deliberate interaction design can improve system understanding and adaptation. Through concrete examples, we demonstrate the potential of epistemic interaction to significantly advance human-computer interaction by leveraging intuitive human communication strategies to inform system design and functionality, offering a novel pathway for enriching user-system engagements.
Enhancing Performance with Globus and the Science DMZGlobus
ESnet has led the way in helping national facilities—and many other institutions in the research community—configure Science DMZs and troubleshoot network issues to maximize data transfer performance. In this talk we will present a summary of approaches and tips for getting the most out of your network infrastructure using Globus Connect Server.
Encryption in Microsoft 365 - ExpertsLive Netherlands 2024Albert Hoitingh
In this session I delve into the encryption technology used in Microsoft 365 and Microsoft Purview. Including the concepts of Customer Key and Double Key Encryption.
State of ICS and IoT Cyber Threat Landscape Report 2024 previewPrayukth K V
The IoT and OT threat landscape report has been prepared by the Threat Research Team at Sectrio using data from Sectrio, cyber threat intelligence farming facilities spread across over 85 cities around the world. In addition, Sectrio also runs AI-based advanced threat and payload engagement facilities that serve as sinks to attract and engage sophisticated threat actors, and newer malware including new variants and latent threats that are at an earlier stage of development.
The latest edition of the OT/ICS and IoT security Threat Landscape Report 2024 also covers:
State of global ICS asset and network exposure
Sectoral targets and attacks as well as the cost of ransom
Global APT activity, AI usage, actor and tactic profiles, and implications
Rise in volumes of AI-powered cyberattacks
Major cyber events in 2024
Malware and malicious payload trends
Cyberattack types and targets
Vulnerability exploit attempts on CVEs
Attacks on counties – USA
Expansion of bot farms – how, where, and why
In-depth analysis of the cyber threat landscape across North America, South America, Europe, APAC, and the Middle East
Why are attacks on smart factories rising?
Cyber risk predictions
Axis of attacks – Europe
Systemic attacks in the Middle East
Download the full report from here:
https://sectrio.com/resources/ot-threat-landscape-reports/sectrio-releases-ot-ics-and-iot-security-threat-landscape-report-2024/
GraphRAG is All You need? LLM & Knowledge GraphGuy Korland
Guy Korland, CEO and Co-founder of FalkorDB, will review two articles on the integration of language models with knowledge graphs.
1. Unifying Large Language Models and Knowledge Graphs: A Roadmap.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2306.08302
2. Microsoft Research's GraphRAG paper and a review paper on various uses of knowledge graphs:
https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/blog/graphrag-unlocking-llm-discovery-on-narrative-private-data/
Dev Dives: Train smarter, not harder – active learning and UiPath LLMs for do...UiPathCommunity
💥 Speed, accuracy, and scaling – discover the superpowers of GenAI in action with UiPath Document Understanding and Communications Mining™:
See how to accelerate model training and optimize model performance with active learning
Learn about the latest enhancements to out-of-the-box document processing – with little to no training required
Get an exclusive demo of the new family of UiPath LLMs – GenAI models specialized for processing different types of documents and messages
This is a hands-on session specifically designed for automation developers and AI enthusiasts seeking to enhance their knowledge in leveraging the latest intelligent document processing capabilities offered by UiPath.
Speakers:
👨🏫 Andras Palfi, Senior Product Manager, UiPath
👩🏫 Lenka Dulovicova, Product Program Manager, UiPath
Accelerate your Kubernetes clusters with Varnish CachingThijs Feryn
A presentation about the usage and availability of Varnish on Kubernetes. This talk explores the capabilities of Varnish caching and shows how to use the Varnish Helm chart to deploy it to Kubernetes.
This presentation was delivered at K8SUG Singapore. See https://feryn.eu/presentations/accelerate-your-kubernetes-clusters-with-varnish-caching-k8sug-singapore-28-2024 for more details.
Observability Concepts EVERY Developer Should Know -- DeveloperWeek Europe.pdfPaige Cruz
Monitoring and observability aren’t traditionally found in software curriculums and many of us cobble this knowledge together from whatever vendor or ecosystem we were first introduced to and whatever is a part of your current company’s observability stack.
While the dev and ops silo continues to crumble….many organizations still relegate monitoring & observability as the purview of ops, infra and SRE teams. This is a mistake - achieving a highly observable system requires collaboration up and down the stack.
I, a former op, would like to extend an invitation to all application developers to join the observability party will share these foundational concepts to build on:
Transcript: Selling digital books in 2024: Insights from industry leaders - T...BookNet Canada
The publishing industry has been selling digital audiobooks and ebooks for over a decade and has found its groove. What’s changed? What has stayed the same? Where do we go from here? Join a group of leading sales peers from across the industry for a conversation about the lessons learned since the popularization of digital books, best practices, digital book supply chain management, and more.
Link to video recording: https://bnctechforum.ca/sessions/selling-digital-books-in-2024-insights-from-industry-leaders/
Presented by BookNet Canada on May 28, 2024, with support from the Department of Canadian Heritage.
Transcript: Selling digital books in 2024: Insights from industry leaders - T...
A Proactive Attitude Toward Quality: The Project Defect Model
1. A ProactiveAttitude Towards Quality: The Project Defect Model Linders & Sassenburg
- 1 -
A Proactive Attitude Toward Quality: The Project Defect Model
Ben Linders, Ericsson Telecommunicatie B.V. The Netherlands, and Hans
Sassenburg, SE-CURE AG, Switzerland
Published in: Software Quality Professional, Volume 7, Issue 1, december 2004.
Over the last decade, the software industry has been investing heavily in software
process improvement, such as CMM(I) initiatives. But achieving higher CMMI levels
does not guarantee business success. Being able to define strategic business objectives
and implementing a derived product development strategy with a proactive attitude
toward quality determines whether one is successful in the long run. Although the
importance of quality is generally not questioned, during project execution the focus
of project managers tends to shift toward meeting functional requirements, schedule,
and budget. It is only during the late testing phase that quality becomes important
again.
This article focuses on the importance of quality, where the existing approach toward
dealing with quality in the late testing phase is criticized. The author discusses how
quality can be managed proactively, using an example from industry. Ericsson R&D
Netherlands defined a project defect model and ran a pilot project to manage quality
throughout product development. This article describes the model, its implementation,
and the results. Although it is not easy to measure, track, and steer quality during a
project, this article shows that it is possible. Combining the quality approach with
existing management methods enables an organization to manage all project core
dimensions.
Key words: business benefit, defect management, goal question metric, measurement,
MTB, product development strategies, quality predictions
INTRODUCTION
The software industry has been investing heavily over the last decade in software process
improvement. Broadly accepted models such as the Software Engineering Institute’s
Capability Maturity Model (CMM®
) and its successor, the CMMI®
, are used to define and
2. A ProactiveAttitude Towards Quality: The Project Defect Model Linders & Sassenburg
- 2 -
institutionalize software development processes. Progress is reported on an ongoing basis, and
an increasing number of software manufacturers have reached higher capability maturity
levels. These process improvement initiatives have paved the way for taking the next step in
making software engineering the discipline its founders envisioned. What is the next step?
Isn’t CMM®
level 2, level 3, or even level 4 enough? Some say that it is not. Achieving a
certain maturity level is not a guarantee for business success. Being able to define strategic
business objectives and implementing a derived product development strategy with a
proactive attitude toward quality determines whether one is successful in the long run.
Many software manufacturers struggle with quality; it is often not more than paying lip
service. Although its importance is generally not questioned, during project execution the
focus of project managers tends to shift toward meeting functional requirements, schedule,
and budget. It is only during the late testing phase that quality becomes important again.
This article emphasizes the importance of quality independent of which product development
strategy is chosen. Further, the existing approach toward dealing with quality in the late
testing phase is criticized. The authors discuss how quality can be managed proactively, using
an example from industry. Ericsson R&D Netherlands defined a project defect model and ran
a pilot to manage quality throughout product development. Based on successes, many projects
now use the model. This article describes the model, its implementation, and the results.
Although it is not easy to measure, track, and steer quality during a project, this article shows
that it is possible. Combining the quality approach with existing management methods
enables an organization to manage all project core dimensions.
PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES
It is commonly accepted that the four core dimensions of project management are:
functionality (what), quality (how good), cost (how much), and time (when). Project
management deals with balancing these four dimensions in such a way that business
requirements are met. These business requirements are documented in a so-called business
case, which has twofold objectives. The first objective is expected revenues and costs related
to the product innovation, and the second objective is the release criteria together with their
relative priorities. The business case will definitely raise the question: “What has more value:
time-to-market, unique product features, high quality, low development, or operational cost?”
A software manufacturer must recognize that it cannot be all things to all people and must
3. A ProactiveAttitude Towards Quality: The Project Defect Model Linders & Sassenburg
- 3 -
focus on distinguishing itself in the marketplace. Possible product development strategic
orientations are:
• First mover. This orientation focuses on getting a product to market very fast. This is
typical for software manufacturers involved in rapidly changing technology or
products with rapidly changing fashion. Pursuing this strategy typically leads to
tradeoffs in optimizing functional requirements, development cost, and quality.
• Lowest development cost. This orientation focuses on minimizing development cost
or developing products within a constrained budget. This orientation occurs when
software manufacturers are developing under contract for other parties, where a
company has severely constrained financial resources. It involves tradeoffs with
functional requirements, time-to-market, and quality.
• Unique product features. This orientation focuses on having the highest level of
functional requirements or product features, including aspects such as the latest
technology and/or product innovation. It involves a trade-off of time-to-market,
development cost, and quality.
• Highest quality. This orientation focuses on assuring high levels of product quality
(reliability, safety, and so on). It is typical of industries requiring high quality because
of the significant costs after product release to correct a problem (for instance, recalls
in a mass market), the need for high levels of reliability (for instance, the aerospace
industry), or the significant safety issues (for instance, medical devices). It
corresponds to the orientation of minimizing operational cost. It involves a trade-off of
functional requirements, time-to-market, and development cost.
Which strategy should be chosen? Card suggests that the number of potential buyers and the
competition level together determine the kind of strategy that is the most profitable in the long
run (Card 1995) (see Figure 1).
Competition level
Low High
Few Unique product features Lowest development cost
Buyers
Many First mover
Highest quality
(Lowest operational cost)
Figure 1 Model of software markets (Card 1995)
4. A ProactiveAttitude Towards Quality: The Project Defect Model Linders & Sassenburg
- 4 -
The product development strategy might change as a product matures. Moore investigated
why many new technology companies started with new inventions and rapid market growth,
but collapsed within the next three years (Moore 1995; see also Denning 2001 in which
results of Moore’s study are summarized). He explained the phenomenon by recalling an
earlier model of mindsets toward the adoption of technologies. Initial success is gained by
selling products to technology enthusiasts and visionaries, who are quick to grasp the
implications and care less about issues such as reliability. When the market of visionaries
becomes saturated, however, the attempt to sell the technology to pragmatists might fail, as
they care more about stability or reliability. Moore used the metaphor of a chasm: the
company leadership discovers too late that it does not communicate with the pragmatists (see
Figure 2).
Technology
Enthusiasts
Visionaries Pragmatists Conservatives Skeptics
TheChasm
Early Market Mainstream Market
Figure 2 Chasm between the early market and the mainstream market (Moore 1995)
Moore also presented a model that shows how the project priorities or criteria shift during the
evolvement of a product seen from the customer’s perspective. This is illustrated in Figure 3
(Moore 1995).
Importance
1. Time to market
2. Product Needs
3. Quality
1. Time to market
2. Product Needs
3. Quality
1. Quality
2. Time to market
3. Product Needs
1. Quality
2. Product Needs
3. Time to market
1. Quality
2. Product Needs
3. Time to market
Market
description
Introduction
Early
Adopters
Mainstream
Late
Majority
End of Life
Buyer profile
Technology
enthusiasts
Visionaries Pragmatists Conservatives Skeptics
Figure 3 Project priorities as a function of a product’s life cycle (Moore 1995)
5. A ProactiveAttitude Towards Quality: The Project Defect Model Linders & Sassenburg
- 5 -
One can conclude that the best strategy depends on the company’s capabilities (strengths,
weaknesses, and core competences), market needs, and opportunities, goals, and financial
resources. There is no “right” strategy for a software manufacturer, but it is important that a
strategy is chosen. Independent of the chosen product development strategy, it is always
necessary to manage the quality dimension. Although the customer might be less interested in
quality during the early phases of a product, the software manufacturer will benefit from a
quality focus. Being able to limit the injection of defects or increase defect removal in early
development stages will normally lead to increased productivity and a less faulty product. In
general, this effect will allow a software manufacturer to deliver a better product earlier to the
market. (For more information, see also Sassenburg 2003.)
FOCUS ON QUALITY DELAYED UNTIL TESTING
Quality is normally defined as a nonfunctional requirement during the project definition
phase. However, during product development the focus tends to shift toward meeting product
needs, time-to-market, and budget (cost). Although nobody denies the usefulness of reviews
or inspections, when time pressure increases these are normally the first activities that are
skipped. It is only during testing that quality becomes important again with a strong focus on
reliability only. As a result, serious attention to quality is normally seen when the project is
nearing the release date. It is when integration and system tests are executed. Many software
defect prediction models have been formulated to find the optimal release time for software
products. These models support the trade-off between the three dimensions of cost, time, and
quality during the test phase (see Figure 4).
Failurerate
testing time
estimated
finish timepresent time
specified
goal
present
failure rate
Figure 4 Basic idea of software reliability estimation modelling
6. A ProactiveAttitude Towards Quality: The Project Defect Model Linders & Sassenburg
- 6 -
Fenton and Neil (1999) and others (Gokhale 1996; Wallace and Coleman 2001) conclude,
however, that these prediction models provide little support for determining the reliability of a
software product. Their underlying assumptions do not reflect reality.
Research revealed that software manufacturers struggle with determining the right moment to
release a software product (Sassenburg 2003). The analytical defect prediction models are
either unknown or not used. Instead, in practice often a combination of the following
nonanalytical methods is used to decide when a software product is “good enough” to release
(RTI 2002):
• A “sufficient” percentage of test cases run successfully.
• Statistics are gathered about what code has been exercised during the execution of a
test suite.
• Defects are classified, and numbers and trends are analyzed.
• Real users conduct beta testing and report failures that are analyzed.
• Developers analyze the number of defects found in a certain time period. When the
number stabilizes or remains below a certain threshold, the software is considered
“good enough.”
Not knowing the quality level when releasing a software product leaves the manufacturer
exposed to the following risks:
• Unpredictable product behavior. It is difficult to guarantee to the user(s) what the
exact functionality of the product will be. This may lead to user dissatisfaction and to
unforeseen, even potentially dangerous, situations.
• Unknown operational cost. The post-release or operational cost of the software
products may be unexpectedly high. For example, the exact status of the software
product and its documentation may be unknown leading to high corrective
maintenance costs. In addition, adaptive and perfective maintenance activities may be
severely hampered.
It is concluded here that focusing on quality only during the late testing phases should be
avoided. It is not only expensive, but also very risky. A more proactive attitude is needed
during the earlier development phases. In the doctoral research for release decisions, Ericsson
Telecommunicatie B.V. in the Netherlands was visited by Hans Sassenburg. This company
has developed and implemented a defect estimation model, used to measure and control
7. A ProactiveAttitude Towards Quality: The Project Defect Model Linders & Sassenburg
- 7 -
quality throughout the software life cycle next to budget, time, and functionality. The model is
described next.
MANAGING QUALITY: A CASE STUDY
Ericsson Telecommunicatie B.V. in the Netherlands has several units. Among them are a
market unit, which sells products and services to the local markets, and a research and
development (R&D) unit, which is the software design center for worldwide intelligent
networks product development. Software plays a very important role in Ericsson’s products.
This importance has led to large investments into software process improvement over the last
decade. In 1995, the Ericsson R&D unit in the Netherlands was the first Dutch organization to
reach CMM level 3. Since then, further investments have been made to increase its software
development capability. The focus of an ongoing improvement program is to align software
metrics with business objectives with a strong focus on managing quality.
Metrics
Can quality be proactively managed? In the first place, the requirements for measuring quality
are examined using the goal-question-metric (GQM) approach (Solingen and Berghout 1999):
Goals:
1. Control verification activities (optimize defect detection)
2. Control development activities (minimize defect injection)
3. Predict release quality of the product
4. Improve the quality of the development and test processes
There is a need for measurements in order to steer quality -- measurements usable to plan
quality at the start of the project, and to track it during project phases, enabling corrective and
preventive actions and reducing quality risks in a project. An additional project need is to
estimate the number of latent defects in a product at release. The purpose is twofold. First, it
is usable to decide if the product can be delivered to customers, or released, knowing the
quality. Second, it helps to plan the support and maintenance capacity needed to resolve the
defects that are expected to be reported by customers. Finally, it should be possible to have
quality data that can be analyzed together with the applied processes, and the way a project is
organized. This analysis provides insight into process and organizational bottlenecks, and,
therefore, enables cost-efficient improvements.
8. A ProactiveAttitude Towards Quality: The Project Defect Model Linders & Sassenburg
- 8 -
Questions:
1. What will be the quality of the released product?
a. Per requirement?
b. As perceived by customers?
2. How good are inspections?
a. How effective is the preparation?
b. How effective is this review meeting?
3. How good are the test phases?
a. How many test cases are needed?
b. How effective is a test phase?
4. What is the quality of the requirement definition?
5. What is the quality of the high-level and detailed design?
6. What is the initial quality of the code (before inspections/test)?
7. Which phase/activity has the biggest influence on quality?
This list is not exhaustive, but these are the questions that come to mind when one wants to
measure and control quality. Certain questions can trigger additional questions; for instance,
when it appears that a certain test phase is ineffective in finding defects, additional questions
are needed to investigate the activities and their effectiveness.
Metrics:
1. Number of undetected defects in the released product
2. Number of defects found per requirement
3. Number of latent defects in a product before an inspection or a test phase (available)
4. Number of defects expected to find in an inspection
5. Actual number of defects found in an inspection (detected)
6. Number of defects expected to be found in a test phase
7. Actual number of defects found in a test phase (detected)
8. Size of the document/code
9. Detection rate: percentage of defects detected (detected/available)
The aforementioned metrics can be collected in most projects, since the data are usually
already available in inspection records and defect tracking tools. But to analyze the metrics, a
9. A ProactiveAttitude Towards Quality: The Project Defect Model Linders & Sassenburg
- 9 -
measurement model is needed. Since the metrics are related, only when looking at a
combination of several metrics can conclusions be drawn that help answer the questions and
thus reach the goals set out for the measurements.
A Project Defect Model
The previous paragraph explained that there is need for a model to measure defect insertion
and detection in order to estimate and track product quality. A pilot project was started to
develop the project defect model. The project defect model is an estimation and tracking
model for product quality, using the defect flow in a project. The model is based on ideas
from Humphrey (1989) and Kan (2003). At the start of the project, defect estimates for all
processes are made. These estimates are tracked based on data collected from the processes
during the project, and the estimates and actual data are used to control the quality. The defect
flow is tailored to the process that is used in a project. Figure 5 illustrates the general model
that is used as a template.
Figure 5 Defect flow
This model can be used to illustrate the goals stated previously. Goal 1 relates to the
downward outgoing arrows, maximizing defect detection/reduction. Goal 2 is about
minimizing the incoming arrows on the left, and goal 3 relates to the resulting outgoing arrow
on the right. Goal 4 is general and relates to all arrows.
To get more insight into the quality of the product during development, it is necessary to
measure the software development processes from two views: injection and detection of
defects (including removal).
Injection of defects is done during the specification, design, and coding phases; defects are
either injected in documents or into the actual product code. The picture shows the “inflow”
10. A ProactiveAttitude Towards Quality: The Project Defect Model Linders & Sassenburg
- 10 -
of inserted defects from the development phases. Defects are also inserted due to faulty fixes
of previous defects. Measuring injection gives insight into development phase quality; this is
further explained in a later section.
Detection of defects is done via inspections and test during all phases of the project. In Figure
5 the down arrows show detection. Also, the thickness of the arrow from left to right, which
represents the number of latent defects in the product, is reduced. Measuring detection
provides insight into the effectiveness of verification phases. Detection rate is also called
yield:
yield (X) = (# defects removed in phase X) / ((# defects from phase X-1) + (#
defects injected in phase X))
By measuring injection and detection, a project can track the number of defects in the product
and determine if there are quality risks and what the origin is, for example, too many defects
introduced in the product and/or insufficient testing to capture the defects before delivery to
the customer. The farthest right arrow represents the number of latent defects in the product
version that is delivered to the customer. This arrow should be as thin as possible.
P roc es s
Inputs and outputs
Influenc ing fac tors
M eas urem ent
De fe cts In trod u ce d
(d ocu m e n ta tio n,
cod e )
De fe cts De te cte d
(Insp e ctio n, te st)
(Un )ha pp y custo m e rs
De sig n P ro ce ss
Co m p e te n ce , skills
T o ols, e n viro nm e n t
T e st P ro ce ss
Co m p e te n ce , skills
Te st Ca p a city
T o ols, e n viro nm e n t
Re side nt De fe cts in
De live re d P ro du ct
Re side nt De fe cts in
De sign Ba se
De te ction Ra te
De fe ct De nsity
F a ult S lip T hrou gh
De fe ct L e ve l
De fe ct Cla ssifica tion
Figure 6 Process view
Several measurements are defined in the model (see figure 6):
• Defect density: Number of inserted defects per phase, insight on development quality
• Detection rate: Percent of defects detected, insight in effectiveness of verification
11. A ProactiveAttitude Towards Quality: The Project Defect Model Linders & Sassenburg
- 11 -
• Fault slip through: Percent and number of defects not detected in the phase they were
injected
• Defect classification: Defect type, determination where the defect should have been
found
• Defect level: Number of latent defects in the released product
By analyzing the measurements for one or more phases, conclusions can be drawn regarding
the quality of the product. Based on these conclusions, actions can be taken to steer quality
based on quality targets defined for the product. More information about the defect model can
be found in (Linders 2003).
Estimating Quality
Quality predictions from the model are based on estimates of the number of defects to be
made and found. Making these estimates is not easy. The best way to learn to estimate is by
doing it frequently, and collecting data to validate the estimates. This is a similar process to
that of estimating delivery dates or budgets; initial estimates are difficult, but after a while
experience is gathered and estimates will improve.
Which factors are important for defect estimates? Following is a list of those that are the most
relevant:
• Product size
• Product complexity
• Project team competence
• Project constraints
• Development environment
Estimating the number of defects expected to be injected and found can be performed in a
way similar to budget or time estimates. For instance, the product to be developed can be
compared with a similar product that was developed earlier; historical data from earlier
projects can then serve as the basis to derive the estimates. The figures are adjusted based on
the competence of the team compared to the team that developed the previous product. In this
way, initial estimates are made, which can be tuned during the development of the product
based on actual data.
12. A ProactiveAttitude Towards Quality: The Project Defect Model Linders & Sassenburg
- 12 -
An organization produces software with a number of defects between statistical limits based
on the maturity of its development processes (see the CMMI®
for more information about
quantitative management (SEI 2002)). Depending on the maturity of the organization, the
distance between the limits becomes smaller and the reliability of defect estimates increases.
Additionally, the defect injection and detection profile across the development phases
becomes repeatable, which makes it possible to estimate the number of defects in a future
phase when one or more phases are finished. Based on these estimates, defect control limits
can be defined. When the actual number of defects goes over a limit, it signals a potential
quality risk to be investigated.
Steering on Defect Data
During the project, defect data are collected into the model. The defect database in the model
comprises all defects that have been found, both from inspection and testing. Detailed data of
every defect are entered, including a slogan (one-line description of the defect), references,
phase detected, and phase inserted. Based on these defect data the defect flow is measured,
that is, the number of defects made in a certain phase, and the number of defects found. These
defect counts are compared with the estimates, and differences are calculated.
So one has the estimates on defects, and initial data in the project. But how can one actually
steer the project with it? The authors apply the approach of feedback and analysis sessions,
based on learning theory (see Solingen and Berghout 2001), which is very effective.
Depending on the availability of data, feedback sessions are held once or twice a week. The
design leaders, test leaders, and the quality engineer attend the sessions. The Excel file
containing the model and all defect data are used to do online analysis, and to adjust estimates
where needed. Since the sheet contains all calculations, re-estimating immediately results in
adjustment of delivery and release quality levels.
The role of the quality engineer is to present the data, and ask the design and test leaders if the
data match with their understanding of the project and the quality of the product. Quality
engineers must be supportive in providing the data, but must also be critical during the
analysis. When conclusions do not match with the data, they should not give up, but instead
ask the design and test leaders how they came to their conclusion, and how they can explain
that they don’t match. Often it is useful to combine several measurements to explore issues
from different views. It makes it possible to dig deeper, and to get a better explanation of the
13. A ProactiveAttitude Towards Quality: The Project Defect Model Linders & Sassenburg
- 13 -
situation. Also, a quality engineer can ask more questions, thus ensuring that conclusions
match with the data, and are not brought up just to have a conclusion without proper analysis.
An example on discussing data in a feedback session is the adjustment of detection estimates.
If, for instance, a phase detection rate of 50 percent is expected, and 45 percent of the
expected defects are detected halfway through the phase (that is, when 10 of the 20 planned
test cases are done), then either the number of defects that is inserted is higher than initially
expected, or the actual detection rate is higher – testing is more effective then expected. If the
first is true, then there is a quality risk in the product since more defects have been made.
Also, it gives a signal usable to improve the process phase where the defects were injected, to
reduce defect injection in a next increment. However, if the estimated injection level is still
valid and thus the resulting detection rate is higher, further investigation is warranted to
understand how this is accomplished. That makes it possible to learn and improve verification
in other projects, based on the positive experiences from this one.
The sessions stimulate discussion quality and the development approach between design and
test leaders. Misconceptions become clear, which result in adjustment of priorities, more or
less test cases, extra inspections, and other actions that improve quality. Since the people
attending the meeting are steering the teams, they can implement decisions after the meeting,
although occasionally they have to check with the project manager to see if there are
implications on lead-time or budget. The data from the defect model help them to get more
control, and make decisions earlier; in the end, this saves the project time and money.
EXPERIENCED BENEFITS
The model was developed and verified in a pilot project (see Linders 2003). This project was
executed during 2001 and 2002. The project resulted in a prediction that the product should
contain 21 latent defects, which customers would find during six months after release of the
product. In reality, customers reported 20 defects. Other projects have not yet reached the end
of the six-month customer period, but current estimates for those projects are also close to the
initial estimates given at release of the product.
During the pilot project, the model signaled quality issues that were analyzed, the major ones
being:
14. A ProactiveAttitude Towards Quality: The Project Defect Model Linders & Sassenburg
- 14 -
• Slip through of requirement defects; this was stopped after thorough architecture
inspections
• Improvement of inspection meetings through moderator and inspector coaching and
better planning
• Improvement of inspection preparation through improvement of checklists
• Better release decision; requirement risks where known and accepted by product
management
One may question how the model supported solving such issues. Look, for example, at the
release decision. Data from defects detected in phases showed that test phases discovered
defects that could have been found earlier. Function test found many inspection defects, while
system test discovered a lot of function test defects. Defect analysis made clear what kinds of
defects were missed, and the inspection and early test processes were improved. Based on
trigger analysis with orthogonal defect classification, the authors also determined test
progress. Together with a requirement-based test matrix, the project predicted where
requirements are sufficiently verified, and where there are risks of latent defects. Test focus
and scope were improved during the project, based on data from the model, and remaining
quality risks are on requirements that are seldom used. Based on the available data, product
management made a solid release decision. Inflow of defects after release confirmed this
decision. The product has been sold and installed at many customer sites, without any major
issues, and customers are very satisfied.
In the ongoing projects there are similar benefits. Inspections improve during the project and
prevent defect slip through to test, function test finds defects before shipping to system test,
and process improvement and re-enforcement of design rules lowers the number of defects
inserted. Final figures will be available in a future paper, which will give more insight in the
sources of defects and the effectiveness of inspection and test activities from eight projects
where the model has been applied.
The project defect model is beneficial for projects. The measurements help estimating,
planning, and tracking quality during the projects. These quality data are used in the projects
together with time and cost data, to improve decision making. The model identifies quality
risks at an early stage, helping the projects taking corrective actions and decisions on product
release and maintenance capacity planning. Also, the design and test teams using the model
15. A ProactiveAttitude Towards Quality: The Project Defect Model Linders & Sassenburg
- 15 -
gain significant quantitative insight into their design and test processes that is used in future
projects.
CONCLUSIONS
In this article, the authors have explored a proactive approach to quality during product
development. They concluded that whatever product development strategy is chosen, it is
worth to pursuit a high quality level This is especially true for the early project phases. In
practice, the focus on quality tends to be relatively low during product development and
increases during the later testing phases. Detecting and removing defects during testing is
limited and expensive. It exposes the software manufacturer to unwanted risks when releasing
software products. A more proactive attitude toward managing quality is needed.
The presented project defect model allows a software project to actively manage quality from
start until completion. It gives insight in the development stages where defects are introduced
in the product, and it measures the effectiveness of defect detection. The presented case study
shows that the model has been beneficial to projects. In particular, feedback sessions of defect
data analyzed by the team proved to be very powerful.
Two closing remarks are necessary. First, applying the project defect model requires mature
development processes. Very immature organizations will have no stable basis for detailed
measurements, which severely hampers the process of obtaining reliable data. Furthermore,
no historical data will be available to define thresholds. These organizations can only benefit
from the model when they first invest in a mature development process. Second, when
applying the model optimum it is of interest to explore the trade-off between appraisal cost
(prerelease defect detection), rework cost (prerelease defect removal) and operational cost
(post-release defect removal). This broadened view takes into account quality-related
activities during the entire product life cycle, development, and operations. By extending the
model in the future with cost data, it will evolve into a true implementation of a cost of quality
model.
16. A ProactiveAttitude Towards Quality: The Project Defect Model Linders & Sassenburg
- 16 -
REFERENCES
Card, D. N. 1995. Is timing really everything? IEEE Software Magazine 12, no. 5: 9-22.
Denning. 2001. The profession of IT: Crossing the chasm. Communications of the ACM 44,
no. 4: 21-25.
Fenton, N., and M. Neil. 1999. A critique of software defect prediction research. IEEE
Transactions on Software Engineering 25, no. 5.
Gokhale et al. 1996. Important milestones in software reliability modelling. Communications
in Reliability, Maintainability and Serviceability, SAE International.
Humphrey, W. S. 1989. Managing the software process. New York: Addison-Wesley.
Kan, S. H. 2003. Metrics and models in software quality engineering. New York: Addison-
Wesley.
Linders, B. 2003. Controlling product quality during development with a defect model.
European SEPG 2003, London.
Moore, G. 1995. Crossing the chasm. New York: Harperbusiness.
RTI. 2002.The economic impacts of inadequate infrastructure for software testing. Planning
Report 02-3, Prepared by RTI for National Institute of Standards and
Technology, U.S. Department of Commerce.
Sassenburg, J. A. 2002. Reviews, why and how? Informatie (October): 16-21 (in Dutch).
Sassenburg, J. A. 2003. When can the software be released? In Proceedings of the European
SEPG, London.
SEI. 2002. CMMI for software engineering: Staged representation, Technical Report ESC-
TR-2002-029. Pittsburgh: Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon
University.
17. A ProactiveAttitude Towards Quality: The Project Defect Model Linders & Sassenburg
- 17 -
Solingen, R. V., and E. W. Berghout. 1999. The goal/question/metric method: A practical
guide for quality improvement of software development. New York: McGraw-
Hill.
Solingen, R. V., and E. W. Berghout. 2001. On Software engineering and learning theory:
Facilitating learning in software quality improvement programs. In Handbook
of Software Engineering and Knowledge Engineering, volume 1. River Edge,
N.J.: World Scientific.
Wallace, D., and C. Coleman. 2001. Hardware and software reliability: Application and
improvement of software reliability models. Software Assurance Technology
Center, Report 323-08, NASA.
BIOGRAPHIES
Ben Linders is specialist of operational development & quality at Ericsson R&D, in the
Netherlands (www.ericsson.nl). He has a bachelor’s degree in computer science, and has done
a master’s study on organizational change. His focus is on implementing high-maturity
practices, with the aim of improving organizational performance, bringing business benefits.
Since 2000 he has lead the Defect Prevention program. He has defined and applied a project
defect model, used for quantitative management of the quality of products and effectiveness
of verification. He can be reached by e-mail info@benlinders.com.
Hans Sassenburg received a master’s of science degree in electrical engineering from the
Eindhoven University of Technology in 1986 (The Netherlands). He worked as an
independent consultant until 1996, when he cofounded a consulting and training firm (Alert
Automation Services b.v.). From 1996 until 2001 he worked as a guest lecturer and assistant
professor at the Eindhoven University of Technology. In 2001 he moved to Switzerland
where he founded the consulting firm SE-CURE AG, (www.se-cure.ch), offering services in
the field of applied business/software metrics. Having finished his first book, he started his
doctoral research at the Faculty of Economics at the University of Groningen (The
Netherlands) designing a model to support release decision making for strategic software
applications. He can be reached at +41 33 733 4682, or by e-mail hsassenburg@se-cure.ch.