1 / 23

CAT Executive Review

CAT Executive Review. Team 3: Lions. Cycle 2 Key Lessons: Quality. Quality Metrics. Goals >85% defects found prior to compile Requirements functions included at project completion: 100% Error in estimated product size: <30% Error in estimated development hours: <30% No Compile Defects.

chavi
Download Presentation

CAT Executive Review

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. CAT Executive Review • Team 3: Lions

  2. Cycle 2 Key Lessons:Quality

  3. Quality Metrics • Goals • >85% defects found prior to compile • Requirements functions included at project completion: 100% • Error in estimated product size: <30% • Error in estimated development hours: <30% • No Compile Defects • Actuals • ~98% defects found prior to compile • Meeting minutes created for every meeting • Size/Time estimation errors: < 30% • 100% requirements functions included at project completion • No Compile Defects

  4. Process Quality Index

  5. Cycle 1 Defect Types

  6. Inspection Results • SRS Document • 7 defects in 37 pages • Injected: Authoring of SRS • SDS Document • Inspection 1 • 10 defects in 21 pages • Injected: Authoring of SDS

  7. Design, Code, Testing Quality • Design, Code and Testing Quality Metrics • Design time > Code time • Design review time is at least half Design time • Code review time is at least half Code authoring time • Code review has less than 200 lines per hour • Find more than 3 defects per hour • Find 0 defects during Compile • Find 0 defects in Unit Testing • Team 3 Design Phase • DLD authoring time: 894 minutes • Code authoring time: 552 minutes (62% of DLD time) • Code review time: 649 minutes (118% of Code Author time) • Average code review lines/hour: 90.2 (less than 200lines/hour) • Average defect/hour rate: 3.5 (more than 3/hour) • Total Defects in Compile: 0 • Total Defects in Unit Testing: 2 These metrics indicate a high quality product

  8. Integration and System Testing • Integration Testing • The Use Class was being called incorrectly by the IPUT Class. (Use instead of USE) • Def-Use-Path Class did not initialize an array.

  9. Integration and System Testing (cont’d) • System Testing • The Def-Use-Path Class does not display the proper paths.

  10. Cycle 1 Key Lessons:Schedule

  11. Work Breakdown Structure

  12. Time Estimation • Cycle 1 Earned Value reached 100% approximately one week before planned. • Estimated hours turned out to be a higher estimate than actual values (302:20 vs 237:54).

  13. Time Estimation (contd.) • Code Review took more time than anticipated which was 191% of planned time. • Code Inspection took less time than anticipated which was only 44% of planned time. • Our estimations during the second cycle was much more faithful to our planned timed compared to the time estimations from the first cycle. • This was due to having some data from the first cycle.

  14. Size Estimation • Document sizes were based on actual industry experience. • Planned LOC from the STRAT form was 1154 LOC • Actual added LOC for this cycle was 976 LOC • The team’s size was 84% of the estimated size.

  15. Cycle 1 Key Lessons:Productivity

  16. Productivity • Total time spent was 239 hours • Total LOC produced was 976 Therefore... • Achieved a productivity of 976/239 or 4.08 LOC/hour

  17. Cycle 1 Key Lessons:Customer Satisfaction

  18. During the first cycle,Team 3 has obtained conditional approval from the customer in regards to the Software Requirements Specification for the CAT software. Customer Satisfaction

  19. Cycle 2 Process Changes and Results

  20. Problems: We found that our STP and ITP were not of great quality ITP did not test all possible links between classes. STP wasn’t purely requirements based. STP and ITP Process • Proposal: • Remove the STP and ITP Walkthrough • Add a STP and ITP formal inspection • Results • 12 Defects found during STP and ITP Inspections Team Process Improvements

  21. Problems: Engineer’s DLD did not match HLD DES diagrams or added functionality which caused the program to fail. DLD Integrity • Proposal: • Provide a checklist for the DLD Inspection portion of the Implementation Script. • Results • 44.6% Defect removal just from DLD Inspection alone. Team Process Improvements

  22. Peter Scucces Time Estimation Accurate reporting of team status Andrew Phelps Task Delegation Team moderation Improve Inspection Simon Baik Proper recording of Defects Management of personal work • Mahendra Ahuja • Proper recording of Defects • Configuration Control Management • Ryan Pham • Following Time Estimations • Proper recording of Defects • James Kim • Following Time Estimations • Delegation of Tasks Individual Improvements

  23. Questions?

More Related