Software Maintenance: Costly And Controllable
It always amazes me when I hear someone say they can estimate software maintenance just by taking a factor of development, or worse yet, just by dictating a fixed (generally too small) maintenance staff. I have been preparing a paper on estimating maintenance with SEER that will be available shortly. But the bottom line is: maintenance is a costly component; time/effort spent in development can drastically reduce maintenance costs; conversely, ignoring maintenance can increase total ownership costs dramatically. Virtually any IT system or other system with user interaction needs evolution to remain useful. I have some older talks on maintenance here
Thank you for reading “Dan on Estimating”, if you would like more information about Galorath’s estimation models, please visit our contact page or call us at +1 310 414-3222.
Related Posts Computer Generated
Have We Lost Our Ability to Estimate Software Size?
Following is an update to Galorath’s David DeWitt’s article on software sizing:
Have We Lost Our Ability to Estimate Software Size?
by David DeWitt
“I’ve Been Slimed!” – Dr. Peter Venkman, Ghost Buster
I can clearly remember that day I arrived at work – towards the end of the year 2003 – it was easily before 6am. I was leading a small team tasked with prototyping a test environment for a NASA proposal. I stood there amazed as I watched my two programmers demonstrate a completely reengineered satellite simulation environment. Wait – let me be clear – within only a few days – they rewrote close to 30,000 lines of FORTRAN and another 4,000 lines of assembly code.  How did they do it? They called it “goop.” “The hand cleaner?” I asked – rather befuddled.  No, they were referring a new development language by LabVIEW (National Instruments) called “GOOP” – short for Graphical Object Oriented Programming.
That was the day I decided to stop being a programmer. I was, at my ‘age,” no longer really interested in keeping up with the latest programming paradigms (and vernacular – such as “paradigm”). I decided to abandon the past and embrace my role as a program manager. But now, looking back I wish I had asked a few more questions.
Measuring Failure
In 1995 the Boston, Mass. – based IT project management research and consulting firm The Standish Group released their first CHAOS Summary report. The report quickly became an industry score card for measuring the success or failure of IT projects; due mostly in part to the astounding percentage of failed projects disclosed in the report. The report served as a wake-up call that appears to have been heard – the 10th anniversary CHAOS report announced that the percentage of failed projects had been reduced by more than half. But alas, within a mere five years, the number of failed projects is back on the rise; the 2009 Standish Group CHAOS report indicates that nearly 1 in 4 projects are doomed. But why?
Thank you for reading “Dan on Estimating”, if you would like more information about Galorath’s estimation models, please visit our contact page or call us at +1 310 414-3222.
Related Posts Computer Generated
The Sooner You Fall Behind, The More Time You Have To Catch Up
I received an email from the Josephson Institute of Ethics today that included this quote from a well known comedian: “The Sooner You Fall Behind, The More Time You Have To Catch Up.”
As I pondered the absurdity of the statement my mind focused on the many projects I have seen where this might have been taken seriously. I recall, many years ago, preparing an estimate for a new project, an in-house typesetting system. While this was not the most complicated software in the world, it took a lot at that time to do a decent job of typesetting with hyphenation, justification, kerning, leading, etc. all having to be implemented by hand generated code (how big is Knuth’s TEX application?). The customer had received a proposal from a trusted supplier (who did business reporting software) to build an entire system in just months. When confronted with the implausibility, the vendor’s only response was, “I just know I can do this.”  Thank goodness the customer didn’t go for it. If they had, what would have happened… After the original target day came and went there would have been a flurry… a descoping… more promises that “we are almost done, I just know it”… and after a year or two the project would probably have been canceled.
I recall another time, very early in my career… before parametric estimating, when we had a 4 terminal cluster system to develop. We had a functional spec and a (probably poor) estimate. We saw an ad in a computer magazine that said this particular programming language would cut costs to 10%. The supplier came out and guaranteed it: even bidding fixed price and just a few weeks for the entire job. I must admit I wondered how the vendor would do it… an assembly line type of setup where a team would pass information and where a chief programmer would allocate tasks or what. When the big day came one guy showed up. He worked about 24/7. The deadline came and went. Still no worries… it was the world’s answer to software and it was fixed price. Six months came and went. Now the vendor came in and said they couldn’t do it.  Four employees plus the vendor and 5 months later it was complete.
I have heard it said that if a cost performance index was below .95 or so, the project cannot catch up. While no one wants their projects to be in trouble, isn’t it valuable to understand what you can’t catch up?
Viable plans help make successful projects.
Thank you for reading “Dan on Estimating”, if you would like more information about Galorath’s estimation models, please visit our contact page or call us at +1 310 414-3222.
Related Posts Computer Generated
CIOs & Infrastructure Technology (IT) decisions
I received this short summary of how organizations have benefited from SEER for IT, written by Galorath’s Dale Martin, and thought it had some interesting points.
Â
How does the Chief Information Officer (CIO) make the right decision regarding IT? Do they simply just keep buying every bell and whistle that comes out of the computer world or do they have a way to make intelligent decisions for their company? Believe it or not, there are rational ways to make solid organizational decisions regarding your IT projects. Let me show you 3 examples of organizations that have maximized IT resources using a parametric model called SEER for IT (Information Technology).
SEER for IT is a new parametric model developed by Galorath Incorporated to capture the Total Cost of Ownership for an IT project. The foundation of this model centers around 12 different types of work breakdown structure (WBS) elements and a group of Knowledge Bases (KB) built on industry standards. Knowledge Bases are a collection of historical data organized into a Windows template for ease of use. The user selects and/or enters data into structure and framework to characterize the environment.  In most cases the user simply selects a WBS type and then selects the knowledge bases. After that, the user has to specify quantities and he gets a Rough Order Magnitude (ROM) estimate of the typical cost, effort, and schedule for this activity based on industry norms. If the user knows more information, then the model allows him to tailor the WBS element in more detail. It is a quick way to come up with cost, effort and schedule on IT projects with very little information up front, with a lot of industry data incorporated via knowledge bases to support the results.
Now let’s talk about how this tool can assist the CIO out in the real world. This model is being used currently by a major automotive manufacturer.  This major company took the right steps to fully utilize this new parametric tool. It completed the initial training by Galorath and has already built and validated the results against internal historical values. It is in the process of piloting a Joint IT Estimation Process in North America for projects proposed to be included in their 2010 business cycle plan.  This will allow them to integrate IT estimates into a unified project cycle plan for the requesting customer. Over time they will be able to look strategically across the enterprise and make decisions on dedicating resources to IT projects from a global view.  Â
A large Federal agency employed SEER for IT across its enterprise. First they received training and built over 70 estimates in the first year. They developed a process where they collected and built catalogs of their major IT activities.  Once all the estimates had been internally reviewed and validated, the estimates were merged into a portfolio. This estimate portfolio was then compared to available budget, resulting in a down select to about 30 projects. A further review identified 15 of those projects as being critical to the organization’s business objectives. This organization had been plagued with massive overruns in the past. They had failed to account for the operation and support of already started projects and the tail of activities and overlapping costs and activities. Using the SEER for IT tool as part of a formal estimating process brought about an organizational discipline that focused on a Total Cost of Ownership perspective.  It was able to maximize economies of scale of purchased hardware and software. Now this organization has the complete picture of its portfolio of projects and also the added benefit of all the collected corporate knowledge regarding ongoing IT activities to make solid decisions for the future.
SEER for IT has been used to assist in making competitive decisions to develop price to win strategies. One major defense contractor employed this model to estimate the industry average for developing a major project. The client then placed the estimated competition’s rates into the model to develop a winning bid strategy. If you have a good idea of what your competition is going to bid, then you can develop strategies to win. Specifically, they decided to utilize cheaper subcontractors in key areas to seize the advantage with just a small impact on their profit margin.Â
In conclusion, the CIO can use SEER for IT to evaluate Total Cost of Ownership cost, schedule and effort of new IT projects in a systematic, logical fashion while capturing the corporate knowledge of its ongoing activities. It can help allocate scarce resources to the most critical requirements. In addition, it can help the organization to develop price to win strategies to seize new opportunities for new business and also realize economies of scale for hardware and software purchases for its own projects.Â
SEER for IT simply “works” when it comes to IT decisions. Take a look at what SEER for IT can do for your company.
Thank you for reading “Dan on Estimating”, if you would like more information about Galorath’s estimation models, please visit our contact page or call us at +1 310 414-3222.
Related Posts Computer Generated
DoD Releases Reliability, Availability, Maintainability, and Cost Rationale Report Manual
I received notification of the new manual including Cost Rationale along with reliability, availability, and maintainability. This revision adds cost to the previous reliability, availability, maintainability document. Here is the email announcement:
The Office of the Secretary of Defense and the Joint Staff collaborated on the Reliability, Availability, Maintainability-Cost (RAM-C) Report Manual to assist combat developers, project managers, and engineers to design RAM into systems early in a program. The manual supports life cycle implementation of the Sustainment metric, for which the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (CJCS) issued new guidance in May 2007. The Sustainment metric consists of an Availability Key Performance Parameter (KPP) and two supporting Key Systems Attributes (KSAs): Reliability and Ownership Cost. The CJCS guidance requires programs under development to create a balance between RAM performance in the field and the related costs of providing that performance-a distinct paradigm shift within the acquisition community that, once fully implemented, should result in improved value for major acquisition programs.
http://www.acq.osd.mil/sse/docs/DoD-RAM-C-Manual.pdf
Additionally the manual discusses ownership cost as summarized below:
“Ownership Cost KSA. Ownership Cost provides balance to the sustainment solution by ensuring that the Operations and Support (O&S) costs associated with availability (e.g., maintenance, spares, fuel, support.) are considered in making program decisions. For consistency and to capitalize on existing efforts in this area, the Cost Analysis Improvement Group O&S Cost Estimating Structure will be used in support of this KSA. (See the structure at the following website: http://dcarc.pae.osd.mil/reference/osd_ces/ ndex.aspx). Appropriate sections of this document cover the specific elements involved in cost estimation.”
Thank you for reading “Dan on Estimating”, if you would like more information about Galorath’s estimation models, please visit our contact page or call us at +1 310 414-3222.
Related Posts Computer Generated
State Department Lifts ITAR Restrictions on SEER for Manufacturing Aerostructures Plug-in
We are pleased to have received the official notification that Galorath’s Plug-in for Aerostructures, formerly known as the Composites Affordability Initiative Plug-in, has been freed from restrictions for international sales. This means Galorath can offer SEER for Manufacturing – Aerostructures Edition to customers in any country with which the United States allows trade, as well as use by non-US citizens.
Galorath is proud to have worked with several leading American aerospace manufacturers (Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman and GE Aircraft Engines) in a major cooperative effort to develop the Aerostructures plug-in. The plug-in provides a method for quickly and accurately evaluating the cost of alternate composite materials and manufacturing processes.
Northrop Grumman, for example, Â provided a case study showing how SEER-DFM (Now SEER-MFG) helped make critical decisions and save costs on the Joint Strike Fighter.
Another paper discussed how SEER-DFM provides cost savings for aircraft design.
“Galorath’s Composites Affordability Initiative (CAI) model, which is sold separately as an add-in to SEER-DFM (AKA SEER-MFG), provides the most detailed and flexible modeling environment. This model is aerospace-focused, and offers state-of-the-art composites modeling. The CAI plug-in includes Composites Operations, Cure and Trim. Each of these three is treated as a distinct work element type, providing a great level of detail and modeling flexibility. The CAI plug-in also includes non-composite models: Fitup, Drill Operations, Fasten, Paste Bond, E-Beam Assembly, 3-D Reinforcement, Sheet Metal and SPF/DB.”
Â
Thank you for reading “Dan on Estimating”, if you would like more information about Galorath’s estimation models, please visit our contact page or call us at +1 310 414-3222.
Related Posts Computer Generated
You Can Manage What You Can’t Measure
It was good to see Tom DeMarco’s article in IEEE Computer magazine renouncing his famous statement, “You can’t manage what you can’t measure.” My old friend and now departed co-author, Mike Evans, used to grumble that of course you could (and had to) manage things you couldn’t measure… In fact many things in a project are not measurable. When Mike made this statement, invariably someone would blindly quote Tom DeMarco.Â
In IEEE Computer, Tom’s article “Software Engineering, An Idea Whose Time Has Come and Gone”, points out that many things can be managed that can’t be measured.
“Can I really be saying that it’s OK to run projects without control or with relatively little control? Almost. I’m suggesting that first we need to select projects where precise control won’t matter so much. Then we need to reduce our expectations for exactly how much we’re going to be able to control them, no matter how assiduously we apply ourselves to control.”
Now please don’t misquote me on this topic. Metrics are valuable for software projects as well as learning for the next one. But some of the items required to manage a project, such as morale, cannot be reduced to simple metrics. Tom goes on to say:
So, how do you manage a project without controlling it? Well, you manage the people and control the time and money.
Tom says that perhaps software engineering’s time has come and gone. This may be true for small, non-mission critical projects — hacking up a new web page or changing some simple application. But generally, software is getting more, not less, complex. Companies are suffering and spending up to 20% of their IT budgets on projects that are challenged or failed. We need agile. We need processes. We need measurement and improvement in the industry. And I agree wholeheartedly that projects should be those with the most business value.
Measure what matters. Manage both measurable and unmeasurable elements.
Thank you for reading “Dan on Estimating”, if you would like more information about Galorath’s estimation models, please visit our contact page or call us at +1 310 414-3222.