CHAOS: A Recipe for Success - Software and Systems Engineering

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Does Formal ProjectManagement Have Value?In 1986 Alfred Spector, former president of TransarcCorporation, co-authored a paper comparing bridgebuilding to software development. The premise was thatbridges are normally built on time, on budget, and do notfall down. Software, on the other hand, never comes inon time or on budget, and it always breaks down.One of the reasons bridges are built on time, on budget,and structurally sound is the extreme detail of design.The design is frozen, and the contractor has littleflexibility in changing the specs. However, in today’sdynamic business environment, a frozen design doesnot accommodate rapid changes in business practices.A more flexible model is required.Another difference is that when a bridge collapses, theevent is thoroughly investigated, and a report is writtenon the cause of the failure. In software development,until recently, failures were covered up, ignoredor rationalized.Project management, used successfully for decades inthe construction industry, is still an evolving disciplinein information technology.Eighty CIOs in workshop sessions at both CHAOSUniversity ® ’98 and European CHAOS ’98 discussedthe value of formal project management disciplinesand the merits of adopting formal project managementprocesses to large scale software development. Inother words, why bother?CHAOS participants said that a formal projectmanagement process is the only way large-scalesoftware development can be structured for success.All-encompassing methodologies address the typicalarray of development problems such as inadequateplanning, inadequate user input, unstable requirements,evolving technology, loose specifications andunrealistic cost estimates.Like scaffolding, project management supports definedroles and responsibilities to achieve project objectives.The project framework is procedural, rigorous,standardized and documented. Standards arerepeatable. Monitoring, reporting and change orderprocedures are in place. Resources can be allocatedfor maximum effect.Formal project management provides a realistic pictureof the project and the resources committed to it.Certain steps and procedures are reproducible andreusable; thus minimizing the tendency to reinvent thewheel, and maximizing project-wide consistency.Lessons learned can be incorporated into activeprojects. The process encourages go/no go decisioncheck points, so a project team can proceed with ahigher confidence level, or steps can be halted oraltered to fit changing requirements. This abilityto adjust in real time reduces project risk andenhances skills.Predictability is a big benefit, CIOs said. Predictabilityreduces uncertainty, making use of resources moreefficient. A project manager has the ability to predictand manage human and capital resource issues; andcan also direct user expectations.Formal project management adds value by mitigatingrisk in almost any development effort. But projectmanagement is valuable in other circumstances, too,such as in complex situations, when certainty isneeded, or when projects require an extended time tocomplete. Formal project management processesdiminish the level of complexity and reduce thecorresponding program risk when structured andcontrolled implementations are planned. That reducedrisk includes this project, future projects andoverall business.Project management is most valuable when planningnew projects or enlarging existing ones. However, notall projects warrant formal project managementtechniques. Project management adds no value to small,simple projects. Emergency, time-critical projects thatrequire quick delivery bog down under the weight offormal project management techniques. In very maturesituations, where sound processes already exist, formalproject management adds nothing, and projectmanagement probably should not be used wheninnovation is required, or when the overhead isgreater than the project value.THE STANDISH GROUP INTERNATIONAL, INC. 8COPYRIGHT ©1999
Project Estimating:Lucky or LousyYogi Berra once quipped, “Predictions are hard,especially about the future”. Countless times duringfocus groups, project group therapy sessions andfailure post mortems, IT executives echoed, “We didour best estimate, we doubled it, added some more,and we still missed the mark”.Project and program estimating is nothingmore than predicting the futureoutcome of a project or program.It is difficult.In this regard, there are only two kinds of estimates:“Lucky” or “Lousy”. Frequently, different peoplemake these estimates at different times usingdifferent methods. Clearly a more standardestimating process could generate significantimprovements.One must be realistic; there isno such thing as a reliableestimate. Learning to workbetter with poor estimatesrather than developing betterestimating techniques iscrucial. Nevertheless, projectmanagers who recognize theirlimitations can use someformal estimating tools andthese tools can greatlyimprove their luck.Many tools offer acombination of statistical andjudgment forecasts. Thesetools combined with aniterative process developmentstyle enable a projectmanager to react correctly tothe changing programenvironment. Thus, theestimating process itself is iterative through thelife of the project. This will give little comfortto the financial officer trying to decide onfunding the project in the first place. It isimperative to know if there is a kill switch andhow it gets pulled.COPYRIGHT ©19999THE STANDISH GROUP INTERNATIONAL, INC.
Page 3 and 4: The Standish Group believes three k
Page 5 and 6: The Triad of Project ManagementWhat
Page 7: The Project Manager should be a“G
Page 11 and 12: Portability: Any project manager ca

CHAOS: A Recipe for Success - Software and Systems Engineering

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?