09.03.2015 Views

Architecture Evaluation - Department of Computer Information Systems

Architecture Evaluation - Department of Computer Information Systems

Architecture Evaluation - Department of Computer Information Systems

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

<strong>Architecture</strong> <strong>Evaluation</strong><br />

Qualitative and Quantitative


1. Overview and<br />

Introduction<br />

A. Target Program<br />

Summary<br />

B. Program<br />

Description<br />

B. Background<br />

and History<br />

C. Solicitation<br />

Schedule<br />

D. Opportunity<br />

Rating<br />

Summary<br />

E. Capture<br />

Program Status<br />

2. Marketing<br />

Activities<br />

A. Customer<br />

Organization<br />

and<br />

Environment<br />

E. Customer<br />

Source<br />

Selection<br />

Process<br />

C. Customer<br />

Hot Buttons<br />

and Selection<br />

Criteria<br />

D. Competitor<br />

Analysis<br />

F. Customer<br />

Analysis and<br />

Bidder<br />

Comparison<br />

F. Capture<br />

Program<br />

Status<br />

3. Program<br />

Requirements<br />

4. Planned<br />

Program<br />

5. Business<br />

Issues<br />

A. Scope <strong>of</strong> Work A. Win Strategy A. Desirability<br />

<strong>of</strong> Project/<br />

B. Overview <strong>of</strong><br />

Program<br />

Requirements<br />

C. Integrated<br />

Customer<br />

Solution<br />

Worksheet<br />

D. Customer<br />

Solution “Actions<br />

Required” Plan<br />

B. Teaming<br />

Approach<br />

C. Technical<br />

Approach<br />

D. Management<br />

and<br />

Organizational<br />

Overview<br />

E. Personnel and<br />

Staffing<br />

Approach<br />

F. Related<br />

Experience<br />

and Past<br />

Performance<br />

Approach<br />

G. Cost/Price<br />

Approach<br />

Task<br />

B. NDA/<br />

Teaming<br />

Agreements<br />

6. Proposal<br />

Requirements<br />

A. Proposal<br />

Manager and<br />

Key Team<br />

Members<br />

C. Cost to Bid C. Proposal<br />

Requirements<br />

D. Risk<br />

Analysis<br />

and<br />

Mitigation<br />

Plan<br />

7. Cost and<br />

Pricing<br />

A. Executive<br />

Cost Summary<br />

B. Proposal Plan B. Contingencies<br />

and Summary<br />

Volume Outline<br />

D. Special<br />

Requirements<br />

(i.e., Orals, E-<br />

mail, etc.)<br />

C. Material<br />

and/or<br />

Subcontractor<br />

Costs<br />

D. Fee and<br />

Operating<br />

Pr<strong>of</strong>it<br />

Summary<br />

E. Unusual<br />

Costing<br />

Factors/<br />

Concerns<br />

F. BAFO<br />

Requirements<br />

(Discounting,<br />

etc.)<br />

Term<br />

Percent Complete<br />

Cost Performance Index<br />

or Performance Factor<br />

To Complete<br />

Performance Index<br />

or Verification Factor<br />

Schedule Performance Index<br />

Schedule Correlation<br />

Independent Estimate<br />

At Completion<br />

Average Performance<br />

Average Expected<br />

Performance To Finish<br />

Symbol<br />

% Done<br />

CPI or PF<br />

TCPI or VF<br />

SPI<br />

SC or S/C<br />

IEAC<br />

P CUM<br />

P TO GO<br />

1)<br />

2)<br />

ACWP +<br />

Formula<br />

BCWP<br />

BAC<br />

BCWP<br />

ACWP<br />

BAC - BCWP<br />

EAC - ACWP<br />

BCWP<br />

BCWS<br />

PCUM<br />

SV<br />

BAC<br />

PF<br />

BAC - BCWP<br />

.8CPI + .2SPI<br />

BCWPcum<br />

Duration (wks or mos)<br />

Since ACWP Began<br />

BCWPcum<br />

Duration (wks or mos)<br />

From Time Now to<br />

Manager's Stated<br />

Completion Date<br />

Checklist Actions<br />

Ratio <strong>of</strong> work accomplished in terms <strong>of</strong> the total amount <strong>of</strong> work<br />

Ratio <strong>of</strong> work accomplished against money spent (an efficiency ra<br />

Done for Resources Expended)<br />

Ratio <strong>of</strong> work remaining against money remaining (Efficiency whic<br />

achieved to complete the remaining work with the expected remain<br />

Ratio <strong>of</strong> work accomplished against what should have been done (E<br />

Rating: Work done as compared to what should have been done)<br />

to do.<br />

ting: Work<br />

h must be<br />

ing money)<br />

fficiency<br />

Ratio <strong>of</strong> Schedule Variance (SV) in terms <strong>of</strong> average amount <strong>of</strong> wo<br />

rk<br />

accomplished (in weeks or months). It indicates a correlation t<br />

o program true<br />

schedule condition<br />

Calculation <strong>of</strong> a projected Estimate At Completion to compare wit<br />

h the CAM's<br />

Estimate At Completion:<br />

1) Ration <strong>of</strong> total work to be done against experienced cost eff iciency<br />

2) Sunk costs added to a ratio <strong>of</strong> remaining work against weight ed cost and<br />

schedule efficiencies<br />

Average rate at which work has been accomplished since work bega<br />

Average rate at which work must be accomplished in the future to<br />

date the CAM has forecasted for completion <strong>of</strong> the work.<br />

n<br />

finish on the<br />

<strong>Architecture</strong> Management & Planning<br />

Skills<br />

Inventory<br />

Corporate<br />

Fixed Asset<br />

Inventory<br />

Vendor &<br />

New Technology Research<br />

<strong>Department</strong>al<br />

Fixed Asset<br />

Inventory<br />

IT Hardware<br />

Inventory<br />

$<br />

$<br />

$<br />

$<br />

$<br />

$<br />

IT S<strong>of</strong>tware / Applications<br />

Inventory<br />

$ $<br />

$<br />

<strong>Architecture</strong><br />

Management<br />

& Planning<br />

Today…<br />

$<br />

$ $ $<br />

Network Map<br />

$<br />

$<br />

$<br />

Connectivity<br />

Diagrams<br />

Topology Map<br />

Business Unit &<br />

<strong>Department</strong>al<br />

Interviews<br />

Organizational<br />

Charts<br />

Project<br />

Inventories<br />

Data Element Term Acronym<br />

Framework or<br />

Reference Model<br />

Enterprise <strong>Architecture</strong>s<br />

Version<br />

Control<br />

Scheduled Work Budgeted Cost for Work Scheduled BCWS<br />

Earned Value Budgeted Cost for Work Performed BCWP<br />

Actuals Actual Cost <strong>of</strong> Work Performed ACWP<br />

Authorized Work Budget At Completion BAC<br />

Data Element Term Acronym<br />

Forecasted Cost Estimate At Completion EAC<br />

Work Variance Schedule Variance SV<br />

Cost Variance Cost Variance CV<br />

Completion Var Variance At Completion VAC<br />

Life Cycle<br />

Management<br />

Budgets<br />

.<br />

Buy<br />

List<br />

Standards<br />

Pr<strong>of</strong>essor<br />

Truex<br />

Configuration<br />

Management


Two Techniques<br />

<strong>Architecture</strong> Trade<strong>of</strong>f Analysis Method (ATAM)<br />

Qualitative approach to prioritizing requirements<br />

Cost Benefit Analysis Method (CBAM)<br />

Takes the output <strong>of</strong> the ATAM and adds economic<br />

analysis in the form <strong>of</strong> cost benefit trade<strong>of</strong>fs<br />

Enterprise <strong>Architecture</strong>s<br />

Pr<strong>of</strong>essor<br />

Truex


ATAM<br />

Multiple stakeholders and participants<br />

<strong>Evaluation</strong> team<br />

Project managers<br />

<strong>Architecture</strong> stakeholders<br />

What characteristics do you want in the team?<br />

Roles and attributes (c.f. pg 273)<br />

Enterprise <strong>Architecture</strong>s<br />

Pr<strong>of</strong>essor<br />

Truex


ATM outputs/deliverables<br />

<br />

Rank ordered priorities in the following forms:<br />

1. Concise architecture model<br />

2. Clear business goals <strong>of</strong> the architecture (system)<br />

3. Quality requirement scenarios (QRSs)<br />

4. Mapping <strong>of</strong> architectural decisions to QRSs<br />

5. Sensitivity analysis and trade<strong>of</strong>f points<br />

– How important is it and at what trade<strong>of</strong>f?<br />

E.g., back up database important to reliability, problem for<br />

security<br />

6. Risk analysis and risk theme clustering<br />

Enterprise <strong>Architecture</strong>s<br />

Pr<strong>of</strong>essor<br />

Truex


Example tabular ATAM output<br />

Quality Attribute Attribute refinement Scenarios<br />

Performance<br />

Transaction Response<br />

time<br />

Throughput<br />

Generating reports<br />

User updates patient acct.<br />

in less than .75 second<br />

Patient acct under peak<br />

load in response to chg <strong>of</strong><br />

add notification < 4 secs.<br />

Batch by midday<br />

Usability Pr<strong>of</strong>iciency training Experienced new hires up<br />

to speed in < 2wks<br />

Configurability<br />

Maintainability<br />

Enterprise <strong>Architecture</strong>s<br />

Normal operation<br />

Set payment plan real<br />

time with patient w/out<br />

delays<br />

No source code changes<br />

to change fee structures;<br />


CBAM -- Cost Benefit<br />

If each architectural decision has costs and trade<strong>of</strong>fs<br />

(risks)<br />

How do we evaluate economic value and necessity?<br />

Enterprise <strong>Architecture</strong>s<br />

Pr<strong>of</strong>essor<br />

Truex


CBAM (Benefits) vs. ATAM (trade<strong>of</strong>fs)<br />

ATAM identifies sets <strong>of</strong> key architectural decisions<br />

BAM quantifies them as to cost<br />

Scenarios<br />

Utility curves<br />

Best case and worst case scenarios compared to current and<br />

desired states<br />

Prioritizing scenarios via voting<br />

Enterprise <strong>Architecture</strong>s<br />

Pr<strong>of</strong>essor<br />

Truex


A model <strong>of</strong> Security Design<br />

Threats<br />

Control<br />

s<br />

Targets<br />

Enterprise <strong>Architecture</strong>s<br />

What are each <strong>of</strong> these elements?<br />

Pr<strong>of</strong>essor<br />

Truex


A model <strong>of</strong> Security Design<br />

Threats<br />

Control<br />

s<br />

Targets<br />

Destruction<br />

Modification<br />

Disclosure<br />

Avoidance<br />

Tolerance<br />

Mitigation<br />

Physical (Hardware, people…)<br />

Data<br />

Data Communications<br />

Enterprise <strong>Architecture</strong>s<br />

Pr<strong>of</strong>essor<br />

Truex


Intranet Security: instance<br />

example<br />

Intranet security is vital especially if connected to the<br />

Internet<br />

Security can be<br />

threatened (someone tries to break in)<br />

compromised (someone knows how to break in)<br />

breached (actually breaks in or infiltrates)<br />

Security threats can<br />

come from inside and outside<br />

be deliberate or accidental<br />

Enterprise <strong>Architecture</strong>s<br />

Pr<strong>of</strong>essor<br />

Truex


Types <strong>of</strong> Threats<br />

Threats to hardware<br />

Theft <strong>of</strong> equipment<br />

Tampering by disgruntled employees<br />

Destruction by natural accidents (fire, flood etc.)<br />

Ordinary wear and tear<br />

Threats to s<strong>of</strong>tware<br />

Deletion - accidental or deliberate<br />

Theft by user<br />

Corruption by virus or hardware malfunction<br />

Threats to information<br />

Corruption, theft or deletion <strong>of</strong> files<br />

Enterprise <strong>Architecture</strong>s<br />

Pr<strong>of</strong>essor<br />

Truex


Planning Intranet Security<br />

Defining security goals<br />

Protect what? (hardware? network? data?)<br />

Protect from whom? (users? outsiders?)<br />

Protect from what? (fire? natural disasters?)<br />

Cost effectiveness <strong>of</strong> measures<br />

Typical security goals include<br />

Preventing malicious damage to files and system<br />

Preventing accidental damage<br />

Protecting data integrity and confidentiality<br />

Preventing unauthorized access<br />

Providing appropriate disaster recovery<br />

Enterprise <strong>Architecture</strong>s<br />

Pr<strong>of</strong>essor<br />

Truex


Intranet Security: Access<br />

Control<br />

Isolating the server<br />

physically<br />

by specific protocol<br />

by specific IP address<br />

Password access<br />

Passwords should<br />

be mixture <strong>of</strong> upper and lowercase; be <strong>of</strong> sizable length; not<br />

be words found in dictionary<br />

be changed regularly<br />

be changed from vendor supplied defaults<br />

Other password issues:<br />

passwords <strong>of</strong> ex-users should be removed<br />

no more than two invalid attempts should be allowed<br />

Enterprise <strong>Architecture</strong>s<br />

Pr<strong>of</strong>essor<br />

Truex


Intranet Security Techniques<br />

Cryptography (or encryption): converting a message (plaintext)<br />

into a secret code (cyphertext) and the reverse process<br />

Can be public or private<br />

Firewall: a device that sits between the internal network and the<br />

outside Internet<br />

Can be packet filtering, proxy server or combination (dualhomed)<br />

Authentication: proving the identity <strong>of</strong> both clients and servers<br />

Non-repudiation: proving that a document was originated by the<br />

sender<br />

Enterprise <strong>Architecture</strong>s<br />

Pr<strong>of</strong>essor<br />

Truex


Use the model to assess and<br />

plan...<br />

Threats<br />

Control<br />

s<br />

Targets<br />

Destruction<br />

Modification<br />

Disclosure<br />

Avoidance<br />

Tolerance<br />

Mitigation<br />

Physical (Hardware, people…)<br />

Data<br />

Data Communications<br />

Enterprise <strong>Architecture</strong>s<br />

Pr<strong>of</strong>essor<br />

Truex


Security Planning and Design<br />

Grid<br />

Physical Data Data Comm.<br />

Destruction<br />

Disclosure<br />

Modification<br />

Intentional<br />

Accidental<br />

Intentional<br />

Accidental<br />

Intentional<br />

Accidental<br />

Enterprise <strong>Architecture</strong>s<br />

Pr<strong>of</strong>essor<br />

Truex


Risk (Cost) benefit analysis<br />

E C = P I * C I<br />

E v = B i - E C<br />

Overall utility <strong>of</strong> scenarios<br />

Where B i = ∑ j (b i,j X W j )<br />

Where bi,j is the benefit assigned to a strategy I given its effect on<br />

scenario j and where Wj is the weighting given to scenario j<br />

What is an inherent weakness in this formulation?<br />

Are traditional investment decision metrics adequate?<br />

Enterprise <strong>Architecture</strong>s<br />

Pr<strong>of</strong>essor<br />

Truex


Design benefits, costs and<br />

Return on Investment<br />

Question; How good is good enough?<br />

Once decided and costs are assigned then we compute<br />

the expected return on investment. That metric is, in<br />

turn, compared to organizational standards.<br />

ROI ==> R i = B i / C i<br />

Enterprise <strong>Architecture</strong>s<br />

Pr<strong>of</strong>essor<br />

Truex


CBAM steps<br />

1. Gather and group (Collate) scenarios<br />

2. Refine scenarios<br />

3. Prioritize scenarios<br />

4. Assign a utility to each<br />

5. Develop architectural strategies for each and assess<br />

expected quality attribute levels<br />

6. Determine utility value for each<br />

7. Derive expected benefit<br />

8. Choose strategies based on ROI<br />

9. Check choices with your intuition (common sense)<br />

Enterprise <strong>Architecture</strong>s<br />

Pr<strong>of</strong>essor<br />

Truex


Collected scenarios<br />

Response goals<br />

Refined Scenarios<br />

Assign utility<br />

c.f., pgs. 318-323<br />

Enterprise <strong>Architecture</strong>s<br />

Pr<strong>of</strong>essor<br />

Truex


Financial Analysis <strong>of</strong> Projects<br />

Financial considerations are <strong>of</strong>ten an important<br />

consideration in selecting projects<br />

Three primary methods for determining the<br />

projected financial value <strong>of</strong> projects:<br />

Net present value (NPV) analysis<br />

Return on investment (ROI)<br />

Payback analysis<br />

Enterprise <strong>Architecture</strong>s<br />

Pr<strong>of</strong>essor<br />

Truex


Net Present Value Analysis<br />

Net present value (NPV) analysis is a method <strong>of</strong><br />

calculating the expected net monetary gain or loss from<br />

a project by discounting all expected future cash inflows<br />

and outflows to the present point in time<br />

Projects with a positive NPV should be considered if<br />

financial value is a key criterion<br />

The higher the NPV, the better<br />

Enterprise <strong>Architecture</strong>s<br />

Pr<strong>of</strong>essor<br />

Truex


Net Present Value Example<br />

Excel file<br />

Enterprise <strong>Architecture</strong>s<br />

Pr<strong>of</strong>essor<br />

Truex


Return on Investment<br />

Return on investment (ROI)<br />

or income divided by investment<br />

ROI = (total discounted benefits - total discounted costs) /<br />

discounted costs<br />

The higher the ROI, the better<br />

Many organizations have a required rate <strong>of</strong> return or<br />

minimum acceptable rate <strong>of</strong> return on investment for<br />

projects<br />

Enterprise <strong>Architecture</strong>s<br />

Pr<strong>of</strong>essor<br />

Truex


Payback Analysis<br />

Another important financial consideration is<br />

payback analysis<br />

The payback period is the amount <strong>of</strong> time it will<br />

take to recoup, in the form <strong>of</strong> net cash inflows,<br />

the net dollars invested in a project<br />

Payback occurs when the cumulative<br />

discounted benefits and costs are greater than<br />

zero<br />

Many organizations want IT projects to have a<br />

fairly short payback period<br />

Enterprise <strong>Architecture</strong>s<br />

Pr<strong>of</strong>essor<br />

Truex


NPV, ROI, and Payback<br />

Analysis for Project 1<br />

Excel file<br />

Enterprise <strong>Architecture</strong>s<br />

Pr<strong>of</strong>essor<br />

Truex


NPV, ROI, and Payback<br />

Analysis for Project 2<br />

Excel file<br />

Enterprise <strong>Architecture</strong>s<br />

Pr<strong>of</strong>essor<br />

Truex


Weighted Scoring Model<br />

A weighted scoring model is a tool that provides a<br />

systematic process for selecting projects based on many<br />

criteria<br />

First identify criteria important to the project selection process<br />

Then assign weights (percentages) to each criterion so they add up<br />

to 100%<br />

Then assign scores to each criterion for each project<br />

Multiply the scores by the weights and get the total weighted scores<br />

The higher the weighted score, the better<br />

Enterprise <strong>Architecture</strong>s<br />

Pr<strong>of</strong>essor<br />

Truex


Sample Weighted Scoring Model for<br />

Project Selection<br />

Excel file<br />

Enterprise <strong>Architecture</strong>s<br />

Pr<strong>of</strong>essor<br />

Truex

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!