Demystifying High Maturity Implementation Using

Statistical Tools & Techniques

-Sreenivasa M. Gangadhara
Ajay Simha
Archana V. Kumar
(Honewell Technology Solutions Lab)
.

1 File Number
 Demystifying High Maturity
Implementation Using Statistical
Tools & Techniques
1st International Colloquium on
High Maturity Best Practices 2010
21st May, 2010
 Introduction

• Interpretation & implementation of High Maturity practices in projects is a

challenge
• This paper attempts to “Demystify” the High Maturity Implementation by
using simple Statistical & Simulation Tools & Techniques
• The analytical approach presented in this paper is one of the many best
practices used in the organization
• Project’s specific dynamics needs to be factored when applied to projects

3 File Number
 Key Takeaways…

At the end of this presentation, we will see one of the ways of…
• Assessing the confidence of project in meeting the project’s multiple goals
• Identifying the Critical Sub-Process with Quantitative justification
• Setting Quantitative project improvement goal
• Defining Sub-Process level Model and arriving at Critical & Controllable factors
• Arriving at “Probabilistic” Model from a “Deterministic” Model
• Doing “What-if” analysis for a proposed process improvement
• Demonstrating whether the proposed solution will meet the project’s objective
(end process result), before deploying the solution
• Demonstrating the usage of models at different stages of the project lifecycle
• Demonstrating that the improved process is statistically significant

4 File Number
 Multi Goal Simulation Model

(Getting the confidence at the beginning of the project)

5 File Number
 Problem Statement

• We have a new product release, in a similar product line

• Estimated Size of project is 195 Requirements
• Estimated Effort of project is 140 Person Months
• Goal is to complete the project
- Within 5% effort variance even in the worst scenario
- With a Quality goal of NOT more than 0.1 defects / requirement after
release

What is the confidence that the team has in

meeting this project Goal…???
6 File Number
 Prediction Model

Note: Model is designed by using Crystal Ball Simulation Tool

Input factor distributions are arrived from the performance baseline

7 File Number
 Certainty Levels

Prediction:
• 94.45% certain project will complete in 140 person months
• 98.71% certain project will complete with 5% more effort
• 82.83% certain project will complete with 5% less effort
• Project can deliver the product with a Quality Goal of 0.1
Defects / Req with a certainty of 78.51%

8 File Number
 Model Representation
Effort Component Defect Component

Req Analysis & Dev Defect Injection Rate

-
+
Req Review Defect Removal Efficiency Defect Detection Rate
(DRE)
+ =
Req Rework Defect Fix Rate X Defect Leakage Rate

+ +
Design Defect Injection Rate
-
+
Design Review Defect Removal Efficiency Defect Detection Rate
(DRE)
+ =
Design Rework
Defect Leakage Rate

+ +
Input Assumptions
Historical Performance Baseline Measures:
• Effort / Req for each of the Development, Review, Test execution phases
Calculations
• Defect Injection Rate for each of development phases
• Defect Removal Efficiency (DRE) Rate for each of Review & Test phases
Detected Detected
• Defect Fix Rate of defects for each of the phases DRE = -------------------- = -----------------------
Total Present (Injected + Leaked)

9 File Number
 Control Factors…

• Control Injection Rate (Reduce Injection Rate)

- Adopt the best Development Process from the existing Process
Composition which takes less effort and injects less defects

• Control Detection Rate (Increase Detection Rate)

- Adopt the best Review Process from the existing Process Composition
which takes less effort and uncover more defects

Next step is to find the control factors at sub-process level

10 File Number
 Critical Sub-Process Identification

(Finding the area of concern from Historical Data)

11 File Number
Historical Project Data Set
Defects Detected – Phase-wise
Design
Req Review Code Review Post Release
Module / Feature # of Req Review DIT Defects SIT Defects
Defects Defects Defects
Defects
Exception Service 22 18 9 22 17 42 4
External Interface 21 12 10 18 13 48 1
DL Scheduler 28 25 11 24 19 70 1
Alert registry module 24 8 5 22 19 43 2
Rendering 19 15 5 17 10 30 1
GGF 29 6 7 23 22 58 3
Launchpad 17 6 3 15 8 28 1
CCD 27 9 2 28 14 41 1
Semaphore Service 23 10 4 23 18 52 1
FSS 19 7 1 19 14 38 2
File System Service 13 11 3 15 6 33 0
ECLF 15 14 5 14 9 30 1
Socket Library 24 5 8 22 20 60 1
Installation 18 8 3 18 14 41 1
GPC 21 9 3 18 11 35 2
MTL 24 12 8 19 14 48 1
Alert response module 16 8 2 15 13 32 0
Notification Service 22 14 5 22 11 55 1
Blackberry Thick Client 13 6 8 13 10 22 1
Power Backup service 29 12 5 25 20 52 2
Share Point Client 12 15 8 12 9 18 1
Process Service 23 26 10 18 15 31 1
Platform Resource Service 13 11 6 13 6 17 1
Power on/off 20 8 2 16 15 32 0
Thread Service 27 7 11 25 12 36 1
License Management 27 14 5 25 14 41 1
Periodic IPC Service 15 7 4 15 8 27 2
PDD 13 9 3 11 7 21 1
CALF 23 13 10 20 12 37 2
Alert System 26 4 2 24 13 35 3

Empirical Data Set

12 File Number
Defect Density
Defects Detection Density – Phase-wise
Post
Module / Feature Req DD Design DD Code DD DIT DD SIT DD
Release DD
Exception Service 0.818 0.409 1.000 0.773 1.909 0.182
External Interface 0.571 0.476 0.857 0.619 2.286 0.048
DL Scheduler 0.893 0.393 0.857 0.679 2.500 0.036
Alert registry module 0.333 0.208 0.917 0.792 1.792 0.083
Rendering 0.789 0.263 0.895 0.526 1.579 0.053
GGF 0.207 0.241 0.793 0.759 2.000 0.103
Launchpad 0.353 0.176 0.882 0.471 1.647 0.059
CCD 0.333 0.074 1.037 0.519 1.519 0.037
Semaphore Service 0.435 0.174 1.000 0.783 2.261 0.043
FSS 0.368 0.053 1.000 0.737 2.000 0.105
File System Service 0.846 0.231 1.154 0.462 2.538 0.000
ECLF 0.933 0.333 0.933 0.600 2.000 0.067
Socket Library 0.208 0.333 0.917 0.833 2.500 0.042
Installation 0.444 0.167 1.000 0.778 2.278 0.056
GPC 0.429 0.143 0.857 0.524 1.667 0.095
MTL 0.500 0.333 0.792 0.583 2.000 0.042
Alert response module 0.500 0.125 0.938 0.813 2.000 0.000
Notification Service 0.636 0.227 1.000 0.500 2.500 0.045
Blackberry Thick Client 0.462 0.615 1.000 0.769 1.692 0.077
Power Backup service 0.414 0.172 0.862 0.690 1.793 0.069
Share Point Client 1.250 0.667 1.000 0.750 1.500 0.083
Process Service 1.130 0.435 0.783 0.652 1.348 0.043
Platform Resource Service 0.846 0.462 1.000 0.462 1.308 0.077
Power on/off 0.400 0.100 0.800 0.750 1.600 0.000
Thread Service 0.259 0.407 0.926 0.444 1.333 0.037
License Management 0.519 0.185 0.926 0.519 1.519 0.037
Periodic IPC Service 0.467 0.267 1.000 0.533 1.800 0.133
PDD 0.692 0.231 0.846 0.538 1.615 0.077
CALF 0.565 0.435 0.870 0.522 1.609 0.087
Alert System 0.154 0.077 0.923 0.500 1.346 0.115

Defect Density = # of Defects / # of Requirements

13 File Number
Process Representation

Y (PR DD)

Y1 (Req DD) Y2 (Des DD) Y3 (Code DD) Y4 (DIT DD) Y5 (SIT DD) Y6 (PR DD)

Requirement
Design Phase Code Phase DIT Phase SIT Phase Release Phase
Phase

Which sub-process
needs attention?

14 File Number
Investigating Defect Removal Activities
Descriptive Statistics: Defect Detection Density

15 File Number
Investigating Defect Removal Activities
Control Chart: Defect Detection Density

I Chart of DD by Phase
Req Design Code DIT SIT Post Release
3.0

2.5

2.0
Individual Value

1.5
1

1.0

0.5
1
_
UCL=0.177
0.0 X=0.064
LCL=-0.049

1 19 37 55 73 91 109 127 145 163

Observation

Is SIT a Critical Sub-Process…!!!???

16 File Number
Investigating Defect Removal Activities
Trend Chart: Defect Detection Density

3.000

2.500

2.000

1.500

1.000

0.500

0.000
Req DD Design DD Code DD DIT DD SIT DD Post Release DD

17 File Number
Investigating Defect Removal Activities
Trend Chart: Defect Detection Density

3.000

2.500

2.000

1.500

1.000

0.500

0.000
Req DD Design DD Code DD DIT DD SIT DD Post Release DD

Min Max Average

Min, Max and Mean values representation

18 File Number
Investigating Defect Source
Identifying the Defect Injection phase & classifying them accordingly…

Req Review Defects Design Review Defects Code Review Defects DIT Defects SIT Defects Post Release Defects

Design Req Design Code Req Design Code Req Design Code Req Design Code
Module / Feature # of Req Req Defects Req Defects
Defects Defects Defects Defects Defects Defects Defects Defects Defects Defects Defects Defects Defects
Exception Service 22 18 2 7 3 2 17 7 6 4 22 15 5 1 0 3
External Interface 21 12 1 9 2 3 13 6 5 2 24 12 12 1 0 0
DL Scheduler 28 25 2 9 2 4 18 9 7 3 34 20 16 0 1 0
Alert registry module 24 8 0 5 1 3 18 9 7 3 20 7 16 1 0 1
Rendering 19 15 1 4 0 3 14 5 4 1 12 8 10 0 0 1
GGF 29 6 1 6 3 2 18 9 7 6 32 12 14 1 0 2
Launchpad 17 6 0 3 0 2 13 4 2 2 13 7 8 1 0 0
CCD 27 9 0 2 3 3 22 7 5 2 11 9 21 0 0 1
Semaphore Service 23 10 1 3 2 4 17 7 9 2 27 6 19 0 1 0
FSS 19 7 1 0 1 4 14 7 4 3 13 11 14 1 0 1
File System Service 13 11 0 3 1 1 13 3 1 2 15 8 10 0 0 0
ECLF 15 14 2 3 2 3 9 5 2 2 17 4 9 0 0 1
Socket Library 24 5 2 6 1 3 18 11 4 5 29 9 22 0 1 0
Installation 18 8 0 3 2 3 13 6 4 4 18 8 15 1 0 0
GPC 21 9 1 2 3 0 15 6 4 1 16 11 8 0 1 1
MTL 24 12 1 7 2 2 15 7 4 3 20 3 25 0 1 0
Alert response module 16 8 1 1 1 1 13 6 5 2 12 5 15 0 0 0
Notification Service 22 14 0 5 5 2 15 4 4 3 15 17 23 1 0 0
Blackberry Thick Client 13 6 1 7 1 1 11 4 4 2 10 2 10 1 0 0
Power Backup service 29 12 0 5 2 5 18 9 6 5 15 11 26 1 1 0
Share Point Client 12 15 2 6 5 1 6 4 4 1 8 4 6 0 0 1
Process Service 23 26 3 7 1 3 14 5 3 7 16 4 11 0 0 1
Platform Resource Service 13 11 0 6 3 1 9 3 1 2 7 3 7 1 0 0
Power on/off 20 8 0 2 2 2 12 5 6 4 12 2 18 0 0 0
Thread Service 27 7 1 10 1 2 22 6 5 1 15 9 12 1 0 0
License Management 27 14 0 5 2 2 21 6 5 3 14 9 18 0 0 1
Periodic IPC Service 15 7 0 4 1 1 13 2 4 2 9 7 11 0 1 1
PDD 13 9 1 2 2 5 4 3 3 1 11 3 7 0 0 1
CALF 23 13 1 9 1 2 17 4 4 4 14 11 12 1 0 1
Alert System 26 4 0 2 0 3 21 6 3 4 20 6 9 1 1 1

19 File Number
Investigating Defect Source
Defect Injection Density:
Phase wise defects Phase wise Defects Density

Module / Feature # of Req Req Design Code Req DD Design DD Code DD

Exception Service 22 53 30 29 2.409 1.364 1.318

External Interface 21 46 29 27 2.190 1.381 1.286
DL Scheduler 28 72 41 37 2.571 1.464 1.321
Alert registry module 24 39 22 38 1.625 0.917 1.583
Rendering 19 33 19 26 1.737 1.000 1.368
GGF 29 52 27 40 1.793 0.931 1.379
Launchpad 17 24 14 23 1.412 0.824 1.353
CCD 27 30 19 46 1.111 0.704 1.704
Semaphore Service 23 47 23 38 2.043 1.000 1.652
FSS 19 30 19 32 1.579 1.000 1.684
File System Service 13 30 13 25 2.308 1.000 1.923
ECLF 15 40 12 21 2.667 0.800 1.400
Socket Library 24 48 23 45 2.000 0.958 1.875
Installation 18 35 18 32 1.944 1.000 1.778
GPC 21 35 18 25 1.667 0.857 1.190
MTL 24 42 17 43 1.750 0.708 1.792
Alert response module 16 28 12 30 1.750 0.750 1.875
Notification Service 22 39 28 41 1.773 1.273 1.864
Blackberry Thick Client 13 23 14 23 1.769 1.077 1.769
Power Backup service 29 39 28 49 1.345 0.966 1.690
Share Point Client 12 34 15 14 2.833 1.250 1.167
Process Service 23 51 17 33 2.217 0.739 1.435
Platform Resource Service 13 25 11 18 1.923 0.846 1.385
Power on/off 20 27 12 34 1.350 0.600 1.700
Thread Service 27 31 26 35 1.148 0.963 1.296
License Management 27 36 21 43 1.333 0.778 1.593
Periodic IPC Service 15 19 17 27 1.267 1.133 1.800
PDD 13 26 13 13 2.000 1.000 1.000
CALF 23 34 26 34 1.478 1.130 1.478
Alert System 26 31 15 35 1.192 0.577 1.346

20 File Number
Investigating Defect Source
Trend Chart: Defect Injection Density

3.000

2.500

2.000

1.500

1.000

0.500

0.000
Req DD Design DD Code DD

21 File Number
Investigating Defect Removal Activities
Trend Chart: Defect Detection Density

3.000

2.500

2.000

1.500

1.000

0.500

0.000
Req DD Design DD Code DD DIT DD SIT DD Post Release DD

Min Max Average

22 File Number
Comparing Detection with Injection
Trend Chart: Comparing Defect Density of Detection with Injection

3.000

2.500

2.000

1.500

1.000

0.500

0.000
Req DD Design DD Code DD DIT DD SIT DD Post Release DD

Min Max Average Min Max Mean

Improvement Opportunity

23 File Number
Sub-Process Identification
Comparing Detection with Injection Defect Density:

Requirement
Design Phase Coding Phase
Phase
Min 0.154 0.053 0.783
Defect Detection
Max 1.250 0.667 1.154
Density
Mean 0.559 0.280 0.925
Min 1.111 0.577 1.000
Defect Injection
Max 2.833 1.464 1.923
Density
Mean 1.806 0.966 1.533
Mean Difference 1.247 0.686 0.608

Requirement phase Defect Density “Mean” is

relatively more compared to that of other phases

Requirement Phase
needs an attention
Requirement Phase is the Critical Sub-Process
24 File Number
 Sub-Process Identification
Statistical Justification: Test of Hypothesis H0: μ1 = μ2
H1: μ1 ≠ μ2
Variance DD between Injection
to Detection
If P ≤ 0.05, Reject H0
Module / Feature Req Design Code
If P > 0.05, Accept H0
Exception Service 1.591 0.955 0.318
External Interface 1.619 0.905 0.429
DL Scheduler 1.679 1.071 0.464
Alert registry module 1.292 0.708 0.667
Rendering 0.947 0.737 0.474
GGF 1.586 0.690 0.586
Launchpad 1.059 0.647 0.471
CCD 0.778 0.630 0.667
Semaphore Service 1.609 0.826 0.652
FSS 1.211 0.947 0.684
File System Service 1.462 0.769 0.769
ECLF 1.733 0.467 0.467
Socket Library 1.792 0.625 0.958
Installation 1.500 0.833 0.778
GPC 1.238 0.714 0.333
MTL 1.250 0.375 1.000
Alert response module 1.250 0.625 0.938
Notification Service 1.136 1.045 0.864
Req phase DD is different
Blackberry Thick Client 1.308 0.462 0.769
Power Backup service 0.931 0.793 0.828
from Design & Code
Share Point Client 1.583 0.583 0.167
Process Service 1.087 0.304 0.652
Platform Resource Service 1.077 0.385 0.385
Statistically proven that
Power on/off 0.950 0.500 0.900
Thread Service 0.889 0.556 0.370
Req phase need an
License Management 0.815 0.593 0.667

attention…!!!
Periodic IPC Service 0.800 0.867 0.800
PDD 1.308 0.769 0.154
CALF 0.913 0.696 0.609
Alert System 1.038 0.500 0.423

25 File Number
 Process Improvement

(Setting Quantitative Improvement Goal)

26 File Number
Improvement Alternatives

1. By reducing the Defect Injection Rate by strengthening the

development process
2. By increasing the Defect Detection Rate by strengthening the
defect removal process

Second alternative is considered for the discussion

27 File Number
Req Defect Density Mean Shift

Histogram of Req Detection DD, Req Injection DD

Normal
1.6 Variable
Req Detection DD
1.4 Req Injection DD

Mean StDev N
1.2 0.5586 0.2732 30
1.806 0.4581 30
1.0
Density

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0.0
0.0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2.0 2.4 2.8
Data

Req Defect Detection Mean need a Shift from 0.5586 to 1.806

28 File Number
Project Goal
Assume project sets a goal of 40% improvement in
Requirement Defect Detection Density mean

Histogram of Req Detection DD, Req Injection DD, 40% Imp Detectio
Normal
1.6 Variable
Req Detection DD
1.4 Req Injection DD
40% Imp Detection Req DD
1.2 Mean StDev N
0.5586 0.2732 30
1.0 1.806 0.4581 30
0.7820 0.3825 30
Density

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0.0
0.0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2.0 2.4 2.8
Data

Note: Project team has to document the rationale for selecting 40% improvement

40% improvement is a mean shift from 0.56 to 0.78 Defcets / Req

29 File Number
 Sub-Process Modeling & Control

(Finding Sub-Process Control Factors)

30 File Number
Sub-Process Analysis
SW Development Process
Requirement Phase Design Phase Code Phase

Develop Review Rework Develop Review Rework Develop Review Rework Next Process Steps

Requirement Phase Elaboration

Change
Req Planning Req Capture Req Analyze Docum ent Review Rew ork Baseline
Managem ent

Planning Developm ent Review Change Managem ent

Process Process Process Process

Probable Process, Product & People Attributes

x2 - Req Complexity x10 - Req Volatility
x1 - Author's x8 - Reviewer's Domain Expertise
x3 - Development Effort / Req
Domain Expertise x9 - Review Effort / Req
x4 - Risk of Completeness of Req
x5 - Risk of Ambiguity of Req
x6 - Risk of Non Testable Req
x7 - Risk of Late arrival of Req

Which are the Critical Sub-Process Parameters?

Consider factors related to Process, Product & People

31 File Number
Sub-Process Analysis
SW Development Process
Requirement Phase Design Phase Code Phase

Develop Review Rework Develop Review Rework Develop Review Rework Next Process Steps

Sub-Process Identification

Change
Req Planning Req Capture Req Analyze Docum ent Review Rew ork Baseline
Managem ent

Planning Developm ent Review Change Managem ent

Process Process Process Process

Available Process, Product & People Attributes

x2 - Req Complexity x10 - Req Volatility
x1 - Author's x8 - Reviewer's Domain Expertise
x3 - Development Effort / Req
Domain Expertise x9 - Review Effort / Req
x4 - Risk of Completeness of Req
x5 - Risk of Ambiguity of Req
x6 - Risk of Non Testable Req
x7 - Risk of Late arrival of Req

Sub-Process Output Measure

Y1 = f (x1, x3, x8, x9, x10)

Req Defect Density = f (Author’s domain Expt, Dev Effort/Req, Reviewers Domain
Expt, Rev Effort/Req, Req Volatility)
32 File Number
Metrics Definition of selected input factors

Metrics Data
x Parameter Name Unit Definition / Guidelines
Type Type
Years of experience in the same or similar domain of
x1 = Author's Domain Expertise Objective Continuous Years
the author
Time spent by author on developing the requirements of
x3 = Development Effort / Req Objective Continuous Hrs / Req
the feature or module
Average Years of experience in the same or similar
x8 = Reviewer's Domain Expertise Objective Continuous Years
domain of the reviewers
Time spent by entire team in reviewing the requirement
x9 = Review Effort / Req Objective Continuous Hrs / Req
document
(# of Req [# of times] changed ) / (Total # of Req in the
x10 = Req Volatility Objective Continuous Ratio
feature or module)

33 File Number
Input Parameter Data

x1 x3 x8 x9 x10
Authors Domain Reviewer Domain
Module / Feature Dev Effort / Req Rev Effort / Req Req Volatility
Experience Experience
Exception Service 2.00 1.14 1.50 0.90 0.27
External Interface 3.00 1.20 1.75 0.69 0.10
DL Scheduler 2.25 0.43 3.50 1.25 0.29
Alert registry module 5.00 1.46 1.00 0.37 0.25
Rendering 6.00 0.63 2.25 0.95 0.21
GGF 2.00 2.10 0.50 0.21 0.14
Launchpad 3.50 2.12 1.00 0.49 0.18
CCD 5.00 1.40 0.75 0.47 0.22
Semaphore Service 6.00 1.20 1.50 0.48 0.09
FSS 4.50 1.20 1.50 0.44 0.05
File System Service 1.75 0.92 2.50 1.10 0.23
ECLF 3.50 0.60 3.00 0.93 0.33
Socket Library 2.00 2.33 0.75 0.23 0.04
Installation 7.50 1.40 1.00 0.62 0.28
GPC 5.75 1.60 1.75 0.43 0.10
MTL 6.00 1.00 2.00 0.50 0.08
Alert response module 5.00 1.56 1.00 0.70 0.13
Notification Service 2.25 0.95 2.50 0.70 0.27
Blackberry Thick Client 3.50 1.69 0.50 0.69 0.15
Power Backup service 8.00 1.24 0.75 0.50 0.17
Share Point Client 5.00 0.17 3.75 1.75 0.33
Process Service 6.00 0.26 3.50 1.36 0.39
Platform Resource Service 2.50 0.85 2.50 1.10 0.31
Power on/off 8.25 1.40 1.50 0.60 0.05
Thread Service 1.00 1.60 1.00 0.39 0.22
License Management 4.00 1.00 1.50 0.67 0.19
Periodic IPC Service 3.50 1.53 2.00 0.47 0.20
PDD 5.00 1.15 2.00 0.97 0.23
CALF 6.00 1.20 2.25 0.73 0.22
Alert System 2.00 2.31 0.50 0.22 0.08

34 File Number
Sub-Process Analysis
Req Defect Density: Output Measure – Req Defect Density (Y1)

I Chart of Req DD
1
1.25 UCL=1.235

1.00
Individual Value

0.75
_
X=0.559
0.50

0.25

0.00
LCL=-0.118

1 4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28
Observation

35 File Number
Sub-Process Analysis
Output Measure (Y1) Comparison with Input Measures (x’s)

Effect is seen in Output measure, for change in Input measures

36 File Number
Sub-Process Analysis
Analyze the Correlation

Scatterplot of Req DD vs Authors Doma, Dev Effort /, Reviewers Do, ...

Authors Domain Experience Dev Effort / Req Reviewers Domain Experience
1.5

1.0

0.5
Req DD

0.0
0 4 8 0 1 2 1 2 3
Rev Effort / Req Req Volatility
1.5

1.0

0.5

0.0
0.5 1.0 1.5 0.0 0.2 0.4

Inference:
• Reviewer’s Domain Experience, Review Effort / Req and Req Volatility has positive correlation
• Dev Effort / Req has a negative correlation
• Author's Domain Experience has no correlation
37 File Number
Model Building
Regression Analysis

P ≤ 0.05

R-Sq (adj) > 70%

(Thumb rule)

38 File Number
Model Building
Regression Analysis – Reduced Model

Note:
Though Dev Effort / Req & Req Volatility
are not statistically significant, they are
considered in the reduced model

Req Defect Density = 0.153 - 0.0618 Dev Effort / Req + 0.0608 Reviewers Domain
Experience + 0.48 Review Effort / Req + 0.23 Req Volatility

39 File Number
Statistical V/s Practical
Project objective is to “Uncover” more defects in the Requirement phase
Req Defect Density = 0.153
- 0.0618 Dev Effort / Req
+ 0.0608 Reviewers Domain Experience
+ 0.48 Review Effort / Req
+ 0.23 Req Volatility

To have more defect density in the Requirement phase, the Dev Effort / Req should
be low, Reviewers Domain Experience should be high, Review Effort should be high,
Req Volatility should be high (either few or all).
It practically does not make sense that, to have more Req DD the Req Volatility
should be high or spend less time in development activities. If we do so, then it
means we are intentionally introducing more defects, rather taking any proactive /
systemic measures to uncover more defects in Req phase.
Reviewers Domain Experience & Review Effort / Requirement are the factors which
could help in uncover more defects.
It means that, though “Dev Effort / Req, Reviewers Domain Experience, Review
Effort / Req & Req Volatility” are Critical Parameters, “Reviewers Domain
Experience, Review Effort / Req” are Control Parameter
40 File Number
How to use the model…?

At the beginning of the project:

Use the planned or anticipated values of the x’s to predict the defect
density, take the appropriate action if the predicted defect density is not
within the acceptable range, by changing the values of control factors

During execution of the project:

Use the actual values of the x’s to predict the defect density and validate
the model by actual values of the defect density
Calibrate the model with new data set and enhance the model

41 File Number
 Probabilistic Model from Deterministic Model

(Study the process behavior by knowing the input distribution)

(“What-If” Analysis)

42 File Number
Probabilistic Model by Simulation
Use Crystal Ball tool to arrive at Simulation model

Define the simulation model in Crystal Ball tool for the “Regression
equation” by fitting the distribution for the input parameters and the forecast
for the predictor.

43 File Number
Probabilistic Model Analysis

The probability of detecting 0.5586 defect density is 44.05%

44 File Number
Process Improvement Steps

1. Do Root Cause Analysis (RCA) and identify the causes for defect leakage in Req
phase
2. Prioritize the causes (using Pareto)
3. Identify improvement alternatives in Req phase
4. Study the process behavior by simulating the process for the proposed
improvements (What-If analysis)
5. Study the process improvement having an impact on process output measure
(Goal)
6. Pilot the process in few projects
7. Analyze results
8. Institutionalize and deploy the process improvement in other projects

45 File Number
“What If” Analysis…???!!!
Assume that, if the new proposed process improvement suggest to have a balanced
composition of reviewers with experienced people (Min of 1.5 years, average of 2.4 to
the earlier of 0.5 years, average of 1.72, and an improvement in the review process
which results an additional review effort of mean 10Hrs and Std Deviation of 1.5 per
inspection, then, the New input parameter distributions looks like…
Reviewers Domain Experience Review Effort / Req
Old
New

46 File Number
“What If” Analysis…???!!!

Does the New proposed process meet

the project objective of 40%
improvement in Requirement Defect
Detection Density Mean?
Old

Req DD of old process = 0.556

Req DD of New proposed process = 0.847
% improvement to that of earlier process
= (0.847 – 0.556) / 0.556 = 52.34%

The “New” proposed process will

improve Req DD Mean by 52.34%
New

47 File Number
 Probable Improvements in End Result

(Probable change in Post Release Defects and Effort Estimation)

48 File Number
 What is possible changes in “End Measures”?

Req Defect Removel

Req Review Process
Efficiency (DRE)
Mean Std Dev Mean Std Dev
Current Performance
0.697 0.359 0.302 0.099
Measure
Note: Change the input distribution for Req Review New Proposed
Effort / Req & Req phase DRE 1.210 0.464 0.474 0.108
Performance Measure

49 File Number
 Possible changes in “Effort”
Current Process New Proposed Process

50 File Number
 Possible changes in “Quality”
Current Process New Proposed Process

Observation:
• Though there is increase in Req review effort, there is NOT much change in Total
Effort. Because, it is compensated by reduction in effort to fix the defects in later
phases
• However, there is improvement in the post release defect leakage measure
• The certainty of meeting quality goal of 0.1 defects / Req has increased from 78.5% to
83.0%

The “New” proposed process can be piloted

51 File Number
 Pilot Improvements in new Project

(Validating the predicted improvements)

52 File Number
At the beginning of Project

Predict Req Detection DD from Planned or anticipated values of x’s

Regression Equation:

Req Defect Density = 0.153 - 0.0618 Dev Effort / Req + 0.0608 Reviewers Domain
Experience + 0.48 Review Effort / Req + 0.23 Req Volatility

1.4

1.22
1.10

1.2

1.01

1.00
0.98

0.98

0.95
0.90
1
0.83
Defect Density

0.70

0.68
0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Components
Predicted Req DD from Planned x's

53 File Number
 During the Execution of Project

Monitor & Control the Input Parameters & Monitor Output Predictor
Output Measure (Y1) Input Measures (x’s)
I Chart of Predicted Req DD from Actual x
1.50
UCL=1.466

1.25
Individual Value

1.00 _
X=0.931

0.75

0.50
LCL=0.396

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Observation

54 File Number
During the Execution of Project

Predict Req Detection DD from actual values of x’s

Regression Equation:

Req Defect Density = 0.153 - 0.0618 Dev Effort / Req + 0.0608 Reviewers Domain
Experience + 0.48 Review Effort / Req + 0.23 Req Volatility

1.4

1.22
1.10

1.09

1.09
1.08

1.06
1.2

1.02
1.01
1.00

1.00
0.98
0.98

0.95
0.90
0.87
1
0.83
Defect Density

0.79
0.77

0.74
0.72
0.70

0.68
0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Components
Predicted Req DD from Planned x's Predicted Req DD from Actual x's

55 File Number
During the Execution of Project

Compare the actual Defect Density with Predict from planned values of x’s
and actual values of x’s

1.33
1.27

1.25
1.4

1.22

1.20
1.15
1.10

1.09

1.09
1.08

1.06
1.2 1.03

1.02
1.01
1.00

1.00
0.98
0.98

0.95

0.91
0.90

0.89
0.87

0.86
1

0.84
0.83
Defect Density

0.79
0.77

0.74
0.72
0.70
0.69

0.68
0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Components
Predicted Req DD from Planned x's Predicted Req DD from Actual x's Actual Req DD

Note: Existing Regression equation may not be valid, because of change in process (Process Improvement)

Calibrate the Prediction Equation with New data set

56 File Number
Is Improvement Statistically Significant?

Staged Comparison:

I Chart of Req DD - Actual by Process Stage

Before After
1.75
UCL=1.674
1.50
1
1.25
_ Mean shift is
Individual Value

1.00 X=1.038

0.75
observed…!!!
0.50
LCL=0.402
0.25

0.00

1 5 9 13 17 21 25 29 33 37 41
Observation

57 File Number
Is Improvement Statistically Significant?
Statistical Justification: Test of Hypothesis
H0: μ1 = μ2
Mean are same, there is NO significant difference
in DD between the data samples
H1: μ1 ≠ μ2
Mean are different, there is significant difference
in DD between the data samples

If P ≤ 0.05, Reject H0
If P > 0.05, Accept H0

The mean of two data set is

different
The improvement is
Statistically Significant

Measure and compare the end results after the

completion of the project…
58 File Number
 Looking back…

We have seen one of the ways of…

• Assessing the confidence of project in meeting the project’s multiple goals
• Identifying the Critical Sub-Process with Quantitative justification
• Setting Quantitative project improvement goal
• Defining Sub-Process level Model and arriving at Critical & Controllable factors
• Arriving “Probabilistic” Model from a “Deterministic” Model
• Doing “What-if” analysis for a proposed process improvement
• Demonstrating whether the proposed solution will meet the project’s objective
(end process result), before deploying the solution
• Demonstrating the usage of models at different stages of the project lifecycle
• Demonstrating that the improved process is statistically significant

59 File Number
60 File Number
 Acknowledgement

Authors wish to thank the Management of Honeywell Technology

Solutions Pvt, Ltd, Bangalore for giving an opportunity to present this
paper

Thanks to Venkatachalam V. & Dakshina Murthy for their guidance &

support

61 File Number
 Contact Details

Office Address: Sreenivasa M Gangadhara

Honeywell Technology Solutions Ltd., Six Sigma Black Belt
151/1, Doraisanipalya, Bannerghatta Road Functional Specialist-Process
Bangalore – 560 226 Sreenivasa.gangadhara@honeywell.com
Karnataka State, India. Mobile: +91-98804 24780
+91-80-2658 8360
+91-80-4119 7222 Ajay Simha
+91-80-2658 4750 Fax Six Sigma Green Belt
Principal Engineer
Ajay.simha@honeywell.com
Mobile: +91-98864 99404

Amit Bhattacharjee
Six Sigma Black Belt
Principal Engineer
Amit.bhattacharjee@honeywell.com
Mobile: +91-99860 22908

Archana Kumar
Principal Engineer
Archana.kumar@honeywell.com
Mobile: +91-97407 77667

62 File Number
63 File Number
 Click here for:

High Maturity best practices

HMBP 2010 Presentations
organized by QAI

Click here

64 File Number