sm team software process, tsp, personal software process ...•training challenges – psp sm...

SM Team Software Process, TSP, Personal Software Process, and PSP are service marks of Carnegie Mellon University® CMMI is a registered mark of Carnegie Mellon University

•Background

•TSP Implementation Challenges

– For SW Outsourcing Organizations (SOO)

– For Very Small SOO (VSSOO)

© 2009 ITESM, Rafael Salazar

– For Very Small SOO (VSSOO)

•Our experience with 3 Mexican VSSOO

•Results

•Conclusion

•2002: Mexican government launched a National Development Plan called PROSOFT

– To improve the IT industry, increasing competitiveness in all IT sectors

•2006: Tecnológico de Monterrey, SEI and


•2006: Tecnológico de Monterrey, SEI and PROSOFT started the “Mexican TSP Initiative”

– To position Mexico as the world leader in SW Quality

– First phase was a success

– Results published as an SEI Technical Report (“Deploying TSP on a National Scale: An Experience Report from Pilot Projects in Mexico”, CMU/SEI-2009-TR-011)

•2006 OECD report:

– 92% of all Mexican companies are small

enterprises (less than 50 employees)

•2004 Prosoft report:


•2004 Prosoft report:

– 83% of Mexican SW Outsourcing Organizations

(SOO) have less than 50 employees

– 41% have less than 10 employees (what I call

“very small SOO” or VSSOO)

•Prosoft developed MOPROSOFT

– Process certification model for VSSOO

– Based on CMMI® and ISO-15504

– Focuses in business related processes, but does not dig “enough” into SW development processes


not dig “enough” into SW development processes

•Premise behind the “Mexican TSP Initiative”

– For VSSOO TSP should be easy to implement and will provide fast results in “very high SW Quality”

– But… it will not be free of new challenges

•TSP introduction in itself has challenges

•Most of the actual experience comes from introducing TSP in:

– Internal SW development organizations (like NAVAIR or Microsoft IT)


NAVAIR or Microsoft IT)

– Organizations that develop packaged software products (like Intuit or Adobe)

•There is few experience in introducing TSP in organizations that outsource software development (SOO)

• High dependency in selling cycles

– Short time notice to start a SW project (bidding process)

– Having people “sitting on the bench” is prohibitive

• Customers (buyers) are not convinced

– Not willing to pay for what they consider “overhead” tasks (i.e. launch, checkpoints, post-mortems)


(i.e. launch, checkpoints, post-mortems)

– Focused on short-term “low-cost” (rather than high-quality)

– Chaos in its internal organization (not disciplined)

– Tight project “control” (i.e. people outsourcing)

• Organizational structure is very sensitive to cost

– “Cheap” programmers

– Expert “management” (high turnover between projects)

– Employees “pay” for inefficiencies (difficult to see an ROI)

• Training challenges

– PSPSM training = closing all the company for 2 weeks

• Pilot projects challenges

– Most of the projects are very small (2-3 person, 1-3 months)

– Not too many projects (a lot of people outsourcing)

– The owner could be management + team leader (+ coach)


– The owner could be management + team leader (+ coach)

• Financial challenges

– Cash flow restrictions

– Very high cost to achieve self sufficiency (having an internal TSP coach)

• Initial training cost ≈ 1 year of programmer’s salary

• SEI annual fee ≈ 5 months of programmer’s salary

•Fast TSP introduction in all the organization

– If the owner of the company is “truly” convinced, you have achieved 60% of success (you get another 30% from a willing-to-try buyer)

•Very easy to bring process focus & discipline


•Very easy to bring process focus & discipline

– TSP is a “template” of proven SW processes

– A TSP team of 4 people = half the organization with standards & process discipline

•TSP should help them to move from people outsourcing � project outsourcing

•Second half of 2008:

– Tec de Monterrey had the opportunity to introduce TSP in 3 VSSOO (organizations A, B, and C)

– All with less than 10 engineers


– One of them (Org. C) had a single customer / project

•3 different approaches to deal with challenges

– Org. A: Our normal and complete TSP introduction

– Org. B: “Staged” PSP training & no internal coach

– Org. C: Postponing PSP Advanced training & no internal coach

• Required TSP/PSP training:

– Leading a Development Team: 4 consecutive mornings

• Advantage: managers can work on the afternoons

– PSP Fundamentals: Fridays & Saturdays for 3 consecutive weeks and just before the launch

• Advantages: engineers work from Monday to Thursday, have


• Advantages: engineers work from Monday to Thursday, have an extra day of class, and are trained close to the launch

– PSP Advanced: same structure of PSP Fundamentals, starting in week 3-4 of the first pilot project

• Advantage: the team plan includes this training, and they complete PSP training very early in the pilot project

• TSP pilot projects:

– 2 sequential pilot projects (instead of parallel pilot projects)

– Small projects (2-3 months in duration)

•Training & certification of at least one internal TSP coach:– TSP coach candidate:

• Is the team leader in the first pilot project

• Takes all PSP training with the team


• Takes all PSP training with the team

• Gets PSP certified

• Takes Coach Training Course before the 2nd pilot project starts

• Is observed launching the 2nd pilot project

– External TSP coach:

• Coaches the first pilot project

• Mentors the internal coach in the 2nd pilot project

•Could not get “permission” from the customer to take their people out for 3 consecutive Fridays for PSP Fundamentals

•We tried a new approach


– Instead of 3 consecutive weeks � 3 cons. months

– For the people not to forget what they have learned:

• We told them to use in their daily work what they have just learned

• We had “weekly meetings” to answer any question and encourage PSP usage

•Did not “have time” to take PSP Advanced within the 1st pilot project

•Decision: PSP Advanced after 1st pilot project

– It was a “large” project (for VSSOO standards)

• Team = all of Org. C


• Team = all of Org. C

• 22 weeks

– But… the customer asked for more functionality

• Project finished in 40 weeks (2 cycles)

•Now that a 2nd project has started

– They started taking PSP Advanced in week 3

Org. A Org. B

People trained in PSP 8 7

People certified in PSP 8 7

People certified in 1st opportunity 6 (75%) 5 (71%)

People certified in 3rd opportunity 0 (0%) 2 (29%)


People certified in 3 opportunity 0 (0%) 2 (29%)

% compile time (P1-P7, % reduction) 5-0.5, 90% 8-0.1, 99%

% unit test time (P1-P7, % reduction) 23-12, 48% 15-7, 53%

Def/KLOC in compile (P1-P7, % red.) 28-6, 78% 13-3, 77%

Def/KLOC in test (P1-P7, % red.) 48-12, 75% 16-8, 50%

LOC/hr (P1-P7, % reduction) 49-25, 49% 58-27, 53%

Yield (P1-P7) 30-79 17-76

NOTE: Training for Org. C has not finished

• Results are mixed, but for Org. B (staged training):

– “Weekly meetings” did not work

• They didn’t use PSP in their daily work tasks

– 2 people struggled in their certification exam

• But maybe it was a language problem (in English)


• But maybe it was a language problem (in English)

• Org. C used TSP for 40 weeks with PSP Fund. only

– They struggled with design and design reviews

• Now that they are taking PSP Adv. they think that:

– They would have done better in the first TSP project if they had taken PSP Advanced

– They do not recommend leaving PSP Adv. for the last

Org. A Org. B Org. C

Team members 4 4 7

Number of Weeks 25 12 24

LOC 10,728 3,862 5,622

LOC/hr 7.0 19.2 4.0


LOC/hr 7.0 19.2 4.0

Task hours/week/person 15.3 9.6 9.2

% plan change (in time) +77% +15% +3.1%

% plan change (in LOC) +160% +132% -13.2%

Def/KLOC in System Test 0.75 0.29 3.86

Def/KLOC in Acceptance Test 0.37 NA 2.65

Process Quality Index 0.58 0.33 0.05

•Postponing PSP Advanced training

– One of my strongest conclusions

•“Weekly meetings” for staged training

•Leaving the company not-self-sufficient


•Leaving the company not-self-sufficient

– Leaving the company without an internal coach

• Using our normal and complete TSP introduction

– Training: mornings for LDT and Fri-Sat for PSP

– Starting PSP Advanced on week 3-4 of 1st pilot project

– Training & certifying at least one internal TSP coach

• Senior management’s belief and passion


• Senior management’s belief and passion

– Even when this is true for any TSP introduction, it is essential for VSSOO

– I once heard Watts Humphrey say that the key success factors to introduce TSP are “coaching, coaching, coaching, and management”

• My experience tells me: “senior management, senior management, senior management, and coaching”

•Very high costs for internal TSP coaches

– Specially for VSSOO

•How to “convince” buyers (customers)

– TSP is not a “methodology”


– TSP is not a “methodology”

– Quality comes first (not short term costs)

– Moving from “people” outsourcing to “project”

outsourcing

sm team software process, tsp, personal software process ...•training challenges – psp sm...

Documents