Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

IT Confidence 2013 - Spago4Q presents a 3D model for Productivity Intelligence

The presentation supported the speech focusing on a 3D corporate performance monitoring model based on Spago4Q, delivered by Spago4Q development team, at IT Confidence 2013 in Rio de Janeiro (Brazil) on 3rd October 2013.

  • Login to see the comments

  • Be the first to like this

IT Confidence 2013 - Spago4Q presents a 3D model for Productivity Intelligence

  1. 1. Application Lifecycle Management and process monitoring through an integrated and low-cost solution, mainly based on Open Source Software Products 1°International Conference on IT Data collection, Analysis and Benchmarking Rio de Janeiro (Brazil) - October 3, 2013 N. Bertazzo, D. Gagliardi,N. Bertazzo, D. Gagliardi, S. Oltolina,S. Oltolina, G. RuffattiG. Ruffatti Engineering GroupEngineering GroupInsert here a picture
  2. 2. 2IT Confidence 2013 – October 3, 2013 ALM and… G1. Measuring company performances through an effective SPI program G2. Adopting a multi-dimensional performance model deployed mostly with 3D instances G3. Implementing an integrated and low cost – OSS based – solution for the measurement and governance of software product & process quality Presentation Goals
  3. 3. 3IT Confidence 2013 – October 3, 2013 Which is users’ & customers’ level of satisfaction? How productive is my organization? Is there REALLY a way to measure performance? Which is the quality level of my product? How can I improve the development process? How can I compare different labs? TopTop ManagerManager Is my project on track? How can I improve performance? ProjectProject ManagerManager QualityQuality ManagerManager Which are corporate audits results? Introduction The problem: Managers’ needs
  4. 4. 4IT Confidence 2013 – October 3, 2013 Engineering At a glance
  5. 5. 5IT Confidence 2013 – October 3, 2013 Technical, Innovation & Research Division Engineering’s Software Labs (ESL) PRODUCTION ESL3: Application Management ESL1-2: Project development RFPs technical support MANAGED OPERATIONS Infrastructures & System Services Architectural design Research & Development Competence Centers Resource management Business Units (BUs) for different market sectors Account Managers Sales Managers Service Desk Business Analysis Project ManagersBusiness Competence Center Worldwide Customers Background Engineering production organization Managers’ needs
  6. 6. 6IT Confidence 2013 – October 3, 2013 • Continuous Quality Improvement in Engineering's projects • Unified Infrastructure supporting quality processes granting flexibility and adaptability • CMMI-DEV and ISO certifications, as independent method to validate the compliance of processes and infrastructures with quality standards • Set-up of Engineering Software Labs (ESLs) to enhance and measure productivity and improve quality practices Background Compliance of SPI to quality systems …
  7. 7. 7IT Confidence 2013 – October 3, 2013 Interaction & Information sources (quant. & qual. data)
  8. 8. 8IT Confidence 2013 – October 3, 2013 • Three dimensions of analysis: 1. Economical (EE) 2. Social (SS) 3. Technical (TT) QEST model: 3 dimensions •Performance values for each dimension allow to identify process areas that need improvements
  9. 9. 9IT Confidence 2013 – October 3, 2013 • Spago4Q, the open source platform to measure, analyze and monitor quality of products, processes and services The model • QEST nD model, a conceptual framework for measuring process performance based on multiple analysis dimensions The tool Productivity Intelligence
  10. 10. 10IT Confidence 2013 – October 3, 2013 The model (1): QEST Method: Performance is expressed as the combination of the specific ratios selected for each of the 3 dimensions of the quantitative assessment (Productivity - PR) and the perceived product quality level of the qualitative assessment (Quality - Q) Performance = PR + Q Model: QEST (Quality factor + Economic, Social & Technical dimensions) is a “structured shell” to be filled according to management objectives in relation to a specific project Such a model has the ability to handle independent sets of dimensions without predefined ratios and weights - referred to as an open model
  11. 11. 11IT Confidence 2013 – October 3, 2013 The model (2): geometrical indicators It is possible to measure performance considering at least 3 distinct geometrical concepts: • Distance between the tetrahedron base center of gravity and the center of the plane section along the tetrahedron height – the greater the distance from 0, the higher the performance level; • Area of the sloped plane section – the smaller the area, the higher the performance level; • Volume of the lowest part of the truncated tetrahedron – the greater the volume, the higher the performance level. • Target: measuring project performance (p) using 3 distinct viewpoints • Input Data: list of weighted ratios for each dimension and quality questionnaires • Output Data: an integrated normalized value of performance
  12. 12. 12IT Confidence 2013 – October 3, 2013 • Integrated quantitative and qualitative evaluation from 3 concurrent organisational viewpoints • A 3D geometrical representation at a single project phase (usually after the project is completed) •Use of de facto and de jure standards (e.g. ISO/IEC 9126 for the Quality Factor  now ISO/IEC 25010:2011) • Performance Measurement Model to use for consolidating Balanced Scorecard (BSC) measurement outcomes • Extension of the original 3D model to n possible dimensions- perspectives  QEST nD through the simplexsimplex as the mechanism to solve the problem from the 4th dimension on The model (3): key features
  13. 13. 13IT Confidence 2013 – October 3, 2013 The tool: Spago4Q
  14. 14. 14IT Confidence 2013 – October 3, 2013 • QEST model is fully supported by Spago4Q • The procedure is coherent with the PMAI (Plan-Measure-Assess- Improve) cycle:  PLAN, defining a set of metrics, based on the GQM approach, and possible dimensions of analysis (perspectives) characterizing the analysis  MEASURE, including the collection of data, and the computation of metric values and global performance value  ASSESS, presenting results through dashboards and reports  IMPROVE, analyzing in detail each value that is less than the expected thresholds, in order to find possible problems or bottlenecks from a process-based viewpoint The integrated environment: QEST & Spago4Q
  15. 15. 15IT Confidence 2013 – October 3, 2013 The ESL model selected goals for each analysis dimension: 1. Economical (EE) E.G1 Reduce the effort of corrective maintenance (corrective + preventive,  ISO/IEC14764:2006) E.G2 Improve ESL resource/assets allocation E.G3 Reduce effort due to hardware system unavailability (‘downtime’) E.G4 Reduce rework (Analysis/Design SLC phases) E.G5 Improve productivity (note: different ‘sizing’ units) 2. Social (S) S.G1 Reduce the number of non-conformity issues (QA inspection) S.G2 Improve artifacts reuse (functional reuse) S.G3 Evaluate training skills for organizational resources S.G4 Improve customer satisfaction (e.g. Customers/Prospects, Business Units, Developers) S.G5 Improve knowledge sharing (“social 2.0”, communities) 3.Technical (TT) T.G1 Reduce the resolution time for defects and technical issues T.G2 Reduce the number of pre-delivery defects (as in ODC analysis) T.G3 Improve delivery time for deliverables T.G4 Improve code quality T.G5 Improve the testing process (e.g. coverages, # req’s, # tests, ...) 3D analysis: main goals
  16. 16. 16IT Confidence 2013 – October 3, 2013 Metric ID Metric Desc Formula Source E.M1.1 Incidence of corrective maintenance effort Corrective Maintenance Effort/Development Effort ALM & prj registry E.M2.1 Allocation of ESL resources Nr. of Res (hours) allocated on prj/Tot of Res (hours) ALM & Corp. Systems E.M3.1 Hardware System Availability Percentage System Availability System Monitoring E.M4.1 Incidence of rework Rework Effort / Development Effort ALM & prj registry E.M5.1 Development capability FP/Effort ALM & prj registry S.M1.1 n. Of Non Conformity issue % of NC for project ALM & QA Registry S.M2.1 Incidence of artifact reuse Nr downloads/tot nr of artifacts stored Component repo S.M3.1 Skill improvement % new (or modify) skills for resource Skill management tool S.M4.1 Customer Satisfaction Results of survey Survey tool S.M5.1 Knowledge sharing improvement % of interaction with collab. tools Collaboration tools T.M1.1 Incidence of defects % nr. of defects (errors + defects) for project ALM T.M2.1 Defects Mean Resolution Time Tot. resolution time/Tot. defects ALM T.M3.1 Incidence of delayed deliverables % nr. delayed deliv. / Tot. deliverables ALM T.M4.1 Code Quality Results of automatic static test Code analysis tool T.M5.1 Testing process improvement Test coverage ALM 3D analysis: metrics
  17. 17. 17IT Confidence 2013 – October 3, 2013 ESL Chief Manager ESL Lab Manager Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Project Manager (PM) 3D view: drill-down through the organizational levels PRJ n ESL ESL 1 ESL 2 ESL 3 PRJ 1 PRJ n PRJ 1 PRJ n PRJ 1 Project developmentProject development Application maintenanceApplication maintenanceProject developmentProject development Engineering’s Software LabsEngineering’s Software Labs Top Manager (TM)
  18. 18. 18IT Confidence 2013 – October 3, 2013 3D view: Level 1 - TM dashboard – sample #1  Unified view on Engineering Software Labs  Global performance indicator  Performance comparison (time, labs)
  19. 19. 19IT Confidence 2013 – October 3, 2013 3D view: Level 1 - TM dashboard – sample #2
  20. 20. 20IT Confidence 2013 – October 3, 2013 Metrics Reqs & Bugs Risks Tasks & Issues Docs  Detailed view  Tracking and trends A single dimension view: Level 3 - PM dashboard
  21. 21. 21IT Confidence 2013 – October 3, 2013 A single dimension view: Level 3 - PM ALM tool
  22. 22. 22IT Confidence 2013 – October 3, 2013 A single dimension view: Levels 1/2 - QA audits
  23. 23. 23IT Confidence 2013 – October 3, 2013 Users & customers feedbacks are now integrated with corporate data Finally I know how productive my organization is! Finally we can REALLY measure performance! I can monitor the quality level of my product The development process is under control and I can improve it! Now I can compare Labs performance! TopTop ManagerManager I know if my project is on track & I can identify issues Conclusions Productivity Intelligence enables performance improvement ProjectProject ManagerManager QualityQuality ManagerManager Through audit dashboards, corporate QA is under control
  24. 24. 24IT Confidence 2013 – October 3, 2013 • Improve reports and KPIs  Introduce/improve reports for new/modified information needs  Dynamical update for thresholds • Integrate tools to collect soft factors measures and indicators from two categories of ESL customers using on-line surveys:  “external customer”: feedback on the perceived product quality  “internal customer”: feedback on the actual process quality from project managers of the various Business Units • Build new KPIs on data coming from the Infrastructure Enhancing Project that collects issues and suggestions by the ALM users  e.g. in the BSC ‘Learning & Growth’ perspective Next steps
  25. 25. 25IT Confidence 2013 – October 3, 2013 25  Buglione L., Misurare il Software. Quantità, qualità, standards e miglioramento di processo nell’Information & Communication Technology, FrancoAngeli, 3/ed, 2008, ISBN 978-88-464-9271-5  Buglione L. & Abran A., QEST nD: n-dimensional extension and generalisation of a Software Performance Measurement Model, International Journal of Advances in Engineering Software, Elsevier Science Publisher, Vol. 33, No. 1, January 2002, pp.1-7  Spago4Q website and resources:  Contacts & Info: References
  26. 26. 26IT Confidence 2013 – October 3, 2013 Q && A Muito obrigado pela vossa atençaoMuito obrigado pela vossa atençao!! Thanks for your attentionThanks for your attention!! ALM and...
  27. 27. 27IT Confidence 2013 – October 3, 2013 Our Contact Data Nicola Bertazzo Daniele Gagliardi Gabriele Ruffatti Sergio Oltolina ALM and...