page 1 copyright profes consortium blanko’98 profes product focused improvement of embedded...

Copyright PROFES Consortium

Blanko’98

PROFESPROFES ProProductduct F Focused Improvementocused Improvement ofof

EEmbeddedmbedded S Software Processesoftware Processes

Blanko’98

Seija Komi-SirviöVTT Electronics


Blanko’98

Table of Contents

• Introduction

• Objectives of the PROFES methodology

• Overview of the PROFES methodology

• Overview of some PROFES elements

• Experiences with the PROFES methodology

• Conclusions


Blanko’98

PROFES project• Product driven process improvement

• Esprit project

• January 97 - June 99

• 3.2 MECU

• EU funding 1.7 MECU

• 303 personmonths


Blanko’98

Project ConsortiumCombination of highly skilled methodology providers and practitioners with expertise in process improvement:– Dräger Medical Technology, The Netherlands

- Application Developer– Ericsson, Finland - Application Developer– Etnoteam S.P.A., Italy - Method Provider– Fraunhofer IESE, Germany - Method Provider– Schlumberger Retail Petroleum

Systems, France - Application Developer– University of Oulu, Finland - Method Provider– VTT Electronics, Finland, - Project Leader

- Method Provider

Industrial follow-up group in Finland


Blanko’98

Parallel Applications• Three parallel industrial applications which

are replicated twice– Medical instruments, retail petroleum systems,

and telecommunication systems

• Parallel experiments are used in order to– Facilitate a higher degree of formality in the

experimental design– Improve the external validity and statistical

significance of obtained results– Augment knowledge transfer between the

industrial companies involved


Blanko’98

What customers ask for?

TIMETO

MARKET

COSTS

QUALITYReliability,

maintainability, usability...


Blanko’98

What is Missing?• Knowledge of the cause-effect link

between process and product attributes

• Ability to predict and monitor results of investments in process improvement and technology

• Data on proven effectiveness of process improvement approaches and use of specific technology

• Ability to learn from experience


Blanko’98

Key Objectives• To link customer-oriented product factors to process

characteristics– Focus on improvements to those characteristics of the

process that are critical for product quality

• To combine and enhance the strengths– goal-oriented measurement– process assessment– product and process modelling and – experience factory

• To support evaluation of cost-benefits• To support learning and re-use of experience• To address the embedded system domain


Blanko’98

How they are achieved?

• A model of product and process dependencies (PPD)

• A suggested improvement cycle

• A cost-benefit model


Blanko’98

PROFES modularity• It is possible to use only the parts which

are relevant to an organisation

• Organisations can choose the method they want to apply for:– process modelling– process assessment (SPICE conformant)– product assessment


Blanko’98

• ISO 9126 (Product)

• ISO 15504, SPICE (Process)– BOOTSTRAP 3.0 (SPICE conformant)

• GQM (Measurement)

• QIP (Improvement activities)

• Experience Factory (Reuse)• Product assessment and Process modelling (No

specific method is recommended)

Background Standards & Methods

PPD (Product Process Dependency) Models


Blanko’98

• ISO 9126 is adopted as reference for definition of quality characteristics and sub-characteristics

• No specific method for product assessment is recommended

• GQM can be used to define specific product goals to be evaluated

Approach to Product Quality


Blanko’98

ISO 9126

Functionality SuitabilityAccuracyInteroperability

ComplianceSecurity

Reliability MaturityRecoverability

Fault tolerance

Usability UnderstandabilityLearnability

Operability

Efficiency Time behaviour Resource behaviour

Maintainability AnalysabilityChangeability

StabilityTestability

Portability AdaptabilityInstallability

ConformanceReplaceability

Characteristics Sub-characteristics


Blanko’98

Which Process Assessment?

• Several assessment methods are

available– CMM

– BOOTSTRAP

– Trillium

–…..

• PROFES recommends a SPICE

conformant assessment


Blanko’98

Goal-Oriented-MeasurementTypical difficulties when performingmeasurement programmes:• Unnecessary and too much data is collected.

• Inadequate and / or insufficient data is collected.

• Collected data is not used properly.

People are not motivated for providing data.

• The usefulness of measures cannot be judged out of context.

Measurements have to be chosen, customised, and used according to goals of interest and the context/environment.

Goal-oriented measurement according to the Goal/Question/Metric (GQM) approach.


Blanko’98

The Elements of GQMGQM has four elements: Goals, Questions, Models and Measures:

Goal

Q1Model1

Q2Model 2

Q3Model 3

Q4...

M1 M2 M3 ...

Def

initi

on

Interpretation


Blanko’98

Product/Process Dependencies (PPDs)

Which software processesor development practices

which software product quality

yield ?

… in which context situation?

Inspections

GQMUML

Case Tools

ReliabilityCost

etc..

Maintainability

Time to Market

etc..

etc..Large Projects OO Development

Unstable Requirements

Verification

Planning


Blanko’98

Product - Process - axis

Boots

trap

Boots

trap GQM

GQM

QIP/E

F

QIP/E

F

ISO9126

ISO9126

PRODUCT PROCESSPPD


Blanko’98

The PPD-EP

• PPD-EP (Product Process Dependency Experience Package):– helps in the selection of process

improvement actions driven by product quality targets

– can be continuously enhanced by including additional product-process links experimentally validated using GQM

– accumulates software engineering best practices


Blanko’98

PPD Development and Usage

Experience Base

1 2

Improvement Programme

Evaluate &Update PPD Models

Retrieve &Reuse PPD Models

3Develop &

Tailor PPD Models

•Data Analysis •Knowledge Acquisition•Validation


Blanko’98

An example of building and using PPD-EP

E x p e r i e n c e B a s e

Q u a l i t y C h a r a c t e r i s t i c I m p r o v e m e n t G o a l

R e l i a b i l i t y 5 0 % r e d u c t i o n o f s wr e l a t e d d e f e c t

U s e s e l e c t e dP P D - E P f o rm a k i n g p r o c e s sc h a n g e

B U I L D P P D - E P

C o n s t r u c t i o n

V a l i d a t i o n

B u i l d a P r o d u c t - P r o c e s sD e p e n d e n c y E x p e r i e n c eP a c k a g e b a s e d o n Q u a l i t yC h a r a c t e r i s t i c s

P u t t h e v a l i d a t e d P P D - E Pi n t o a n e x p e r i e n c e b a s e

E v a l u a t e t h eP P D M - E P im p a c t

“ T o o m a n y s o f t w a r e e r r o r s a r er e p o r t e d b y o u r c u s t o m e r s ”

1 s t

Q t r

2 n d

Q t r

3 r d

Q t r

4 t h

Q t r

P P D - E P . 1

P r o d u c t Q u a l i t y R e l i a b i l i t yP r o c e s s E N G . 6 S o f t w a r e I m p l e m e n t a t i o n a n d T e s t i n gP r a c t i c e S o f t w a r e C o d e R e a d i n g

V i e w p o i n t S o f t w a r e E n g i n e e rE n v i r o n m e n t C o m p a n y A , P r o j e c t A A

S t a t u s V a l i d a t e d

C O N T E X TC F . 1 C o d e s i z e ( L O C ) > 2 0 0 , 2 0 0 - 5 0 0, < 5 0 0C F . 2 E x p e r i e n c e o f p r o j e c t t e a m L o w a v e r a g e h i g hC F . 3 O v e r a l l t i m e p r e s s u r e L o w a v e r a g e h i g hC F . 4 P r e p a r a t i o n t i m e ( h ) > 1 , 1 - 4 , < 4

S W D e f e c td e n s i t y


Blanko’98

An example of a PPD-EPPPD-EP.1.3.1Product Quality ReliabilityProcess ENG.3 Software Requirements AnalysisPractice Software InspectionsViewpoint Software EngineerEnvironment PROFES-A

Status Preliminary

Context

CF.1 Size of inspection team 1-2 3-5 6-8 9-10CF.2 Experience of inspection team low average highCF.3 Problem treatment of

inspection teampragmaticdetailed

CF.4 Complexity of inspecteddocument

low average highvery_high

CF.5 Size of inspected document small average largevery_large

CF.6 Management commitment low highCF.7 Overall time pressure low average highCF.8 Module affected by new

hardwareold_hw new_hw

CF.9 Module developed externally internallyexternally

Notes & Comments

This PPD-EP addresses the interrelation between documentcomplexity and characteristics of the inspection team.For complex documents, the team needs to have average size,high experience level, and a pragmatic problem treatmentattitude.Otherwise, requirements inspections of complex documentsare not regarded to be effective.


Blanko’98

Benefits from PPD models

PPD models provide – Well-organised planning and evaluation of

product-driven software process improvement

– Reduction of overhead cost for improvement programmes

– Easy access to software engineering best practices

– Acquisition and reusability of organisational knowledge and experience


Blanko’98 PROFES

Experience Factory - Why ?Projects and organisations have different aims:• Projects: to develop software products according to predefined

requirements, costs and time constraints.

• Organisations: to improve their products over time, to avoid making the same mistake twice, to perform re-use wherever advantageous.

Reuse of experiences

across projects is needed Projects cannot be expected to

“manage” corporate experience A separate organisational unit is

required: the Experience Factory (EF)


Blanko’98 PROFES

Types of “Experience”

• Experience is packaged in the form of models


Blanko’98

The Improvement Cycle

• The improvement cycle provides guidelines to:– effectively combine process assessment,

goal oriented measurements and process modelling

– package experience for re-use– define hypothesis and validate them to

feed the PPD-EP


Blanko’98

The PROFES improvement Cycle- Motivation presentations to achieve commitment- Preliminary product quality needs identification- Process assessment and descriptive process modelling- Product assessment and characterisation

- Product improvement goal setting- Select or build PPDs

- Improvement planning- Prescriptive process modelling- Measurement planning- Process changes implementation

- Continuous measurement and quality monitoring

- Measurement data analysis- Process re-assessment and interpretation- PPD evaluation

- Packaging and storing experiences for reuse

SET G

OA

LS

PLAN

AN

ALY

SE

CHARACTERISEPACKAGE

EXECUTE

Prod

uct-Process-Dependency

PPD

PRODUCT

Org

anisa

tional and Project Processes

PROCESS


Blanko’98

Organisational and Project Level • Improvement at organisational level :

– definition of overall product improvement goals

– planning of the overall improvement programme

– definition and implementation of organisational solutions

– selection of pilot projects

– monitoring of improvement programme

– organisational learning

•Improvement at project level:

– implementation and evaluation of suggested improvement solutions

– achievement of product improvement goals


Blanko’98

The Cost-Benefit Model

• The cost-benefit model is a repository of costs-benefits data based on use of improvement methods

• It can be enhanced and tailored to specific environments


Blanko’98

Exploitable Results• User Manual and PROFES book

• Consultancy service package

• Presentation and training material

• Tools to support the PROFES methodology

• A core PPD repository

• A core cost-benefit model


Blanko’98

Conclusion• PROFES integrates and enhances well known

methods – assessment, measurement, product & process

modeling

• PROFES supports industry in– focusing investments in process improvement on

customer driven product quality objectives– PPD repository & learning and re-using experience

page 1 copyright profes consortium blanko’98 profes product focused improvement of embedded...

Documents