Professional Documents
Culture Documents
COPYRIGHT NOTICE Copyright 2008 Polaris Software Lab Limited All rights reserved. These materials are confidential and proprietary to Polaris and no part of these materials should be reproduced, published in any form by any means, electronic or mechanical including photocopy or any information storage or retrieval system nor should the materials be disclosed to third parties without the express written authorization of Polaris Software Lab Limited.
1986
1993
Polaris Software Lab
1999
Listing on major stock exchanges
2003
Merger with Orbitech, A Citi company
2004-09
Transformation from a pureplay services organization to an IP-focused solutions company
Genesis of Polaris
Incorporated
TQM TQM
1991
1995
1998 1999
2001
2004
2007
2009
Predicting
3
Exploring Phase
it y ? Activ
ase ? Ph
Striking a balance
6
Emerging Phase
Objectives Objectives
Projects Goals
Business Objectives
Renegotiate Project Goals Establish Project Goals Quality Plan Metrics Forms
No
No
Process
Review Review
Sub Process
Attribute
Measure
Stratification
type of unit (simple, medium, complex) size in pages
Analysis Technique
C Chart (Stratified per Unit) or U Chart (Varying Size) XmR Chart C Chart (Stratified per Unit) or U Chart (Varying Size) XmR Chart C Chart (Stratified per Unit) or U Chart (Varying Size) XmR Chart XmR Chart C Chart (Stratified per Unit) or U Chart (Varying Size)
Error density (EDdr) - errors per Design/Solution Doc unit or per page Review Effectiveness (plotted per Design/Solution Doc unit) Review Execution Design review Review Efficiency
Time for review per Design/Solution Doc unit (plotted per Design/Solution type of unit (simple, medium, Doc unit complex)
Review Review
type of unit (simple, medium, Review Effectiveness Error density (EDur) - errors per UTP unit or per page (plotted per UTP unit) complex) size in pages Review Execution - UTP type of unit (simple, medium, Review Efficiency Time for review per UTP unit (plotted per UTP unit) complex) review type of unit (simple, medium, complex) size in pages type of unit (simple, medium, complex) by unit type type of unit (simple, medium, complex) sloc ranges type of unit (simple, medium, complex) sloc ranges
Review Review
Review Effectiveness Error density (EDcr) - errors per unit or per sloc (plotted per unit) Review Execution - Code review Review Efficiency Time for review per unit (plotted per unit) Coding Performance Productivity - Actual Effort by unit category (plotted by units) Test Effectiveness Error density (EDiut) defects per unit or per sloc (plotted per unit)
Construction Test Execution (IUT) UAT Problem Resolution Readiness for SLA Commitment
Problem turnaround time-duration in hours by problem Problem correction effort- effort in hours per problem severity type, Module wise
Turnaround Time (TAT) - turnaround time per day (for critical & high) and per week (for low and medium)-duration in hours by problem SLA Responsiveness Ratio of Issues not meeting SLA to Total Issues on a daily basis
Impact Analysis
IA Efficiency
severity type, Module wise Problem type Type of CR (Simple, Medium, Complex)
XmR Chart
10
The Connect
Project Quality goals (Overall and Interim) Identify sub processes Renegotiate objectives project
Identify critical sub processes List of other goals to be managed Check if they are suitable for Statistical management
Identify frequency Identify measures Identify analysis techniques Analyze sub process interactions Check relationship with existing models and adjust Pareto Pie Stacked Bar
No Yes Yes
No No
Meet Goals
Yes
Baseline repository
Model Repository
11
Maturing Phase
13
Organization wide off site workshops on sub processes, statistical analysis and usage of prediction models All levels of management involved Project Leads, Project Managers, Project Directors, Business Unit Heads Brainstorming sessions to identify pain areas / critical sub processes tied to business / customer objectives for each project. Sub process repository enriched Redefinition of organization behavior and paradigm shift in the culture of statistical thinking Revelation - Ability to look beyond the obvious project goals of Effort Variance, Schedule Variance, Defect Density
14
(C chart)
15
View CLICK
D fe ts D n ity e c es
0.05 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.01 12M ay 14M ay 16M ay 18M ay 20M ay 22M ay 24M ay 26M ay 28M ay 0 M on W ed S un T ue T hu T ue T hu
S at
Days
F ri
severe CLICK
Days
16
s / n df n-1
0.152084 0.564779
17
18
Champions
Quantum Leap Ambassadors SPCs at each business unit
Training
Regular Quantum Leap sessions Quantum Leap Competency assessment (along with HR)
Training across all levels : 100% Senior Management trained 100% Quality and SEPG trained 900 Project Directors &Project Managers trained across the organization
People
Dedicated team of statisticians attached to every business unit
19
Excelling Phase
20
Customer goal for resource utilization >85 % and Polaris goal > 90% Resource Utilization dropped to 81.10% due to delayed clarifications from customer Action plan Team started monitoring the Clarification TAT as a critical sub process using control charts Outliers were identified and taken up with customer Updates provided to customer on weekly basis on aging of issues Over a period of time, improvement seen in TAT with shift in process mean from 2.23 days to 0.85 Offshore resource utilization improved to 97%
21
Project Scenario
Monitoring Frequency Prediction Model Outage Prediction Model
Interim Goal # of outages = 3 to 4 in every month. Reducing the downtime duration per outages from 2 to 1.5 hours in next 6 months
Monthly
Impact
Outages Reported
Emergency Outages
NA Monthly
Application Downtime/Outages leads to financial transactions not getting effected thereby causing loss in business to end user. Hence the project wants to reduce outages. Historical data of Jan 2007 till Jan 2008(13 months) shows 109 hours of downtime due to 56 outages # of Outages below 4 per month and duration of outage below 1.5 hrs are project specific goals given by the customer
Outage Reduction
Actions
Monitoring slots wise ( to have individual responsible for a slot) to ensure ownership of monitoring the system during a slot. A checklist is filled after each slot is completed. The same is filled with details of monitoring done during the slot and mailed to client to give the health check status. This checklist is enhanced as and when new functionality goes into production and needs to be monitored for stability and performance.
22
Need for a strong Code Review Process Case Study 3 Poke Yoke path Control Chart: U-Chart
# of data points = 17 0.03 # of data points Out of Control = Mean/Lambda remains unchanged 0.03 0
Major Time Scale Specification limit
View CLICK
Coding
D e f e c ts D e n s i t y
Mean / Lambda () =
Days
Unit Testing
IUT
Assurance of code quality through view points. U-Chart implemented to monitor defect density at micro-level. Reduction of code review defects by 27%. Faster delivery to customer through elimination of IUT
23
24
Org Business Objectives Customer Objectives Control limits from historical Spec Limits from Prediction baseline repository model
View CLICK
D e fe c ts D e n s ity
0.05 0.04 0.03 0.02 0.01 0 12May Tu e 14May Th u 16May Sat 18May Mon 20May Wed 22May F ri 24May Sun 26May Tu e 28May Th u
Special Cause
XMR Chart
Comparison Chart of Control Limits
P dc n s e ro u tio Is u s 1 80 60 40 20 0 1 7 13 19 25 +3S L=47.60 +2S L=38.37 +1S L=29.14 _ X=19.91 -1S L= 10.69 -2S L= 1.46 LB =0 31 Day 37 43 49 55 61 41
Days
Historical
30.00
Recompute 1-25
25.00
25.00
41
15.00
15.00
M v gR n e o in a g
60 45 30 15 0 1 7 13 19 25 31 37 O bs er v ation 43 49 55 61 +3S L=34.01 +2S L=26.14 +1S L=18.28 __ M R= 10.41 -1S L= 2.54 -2S -3S L= 0
10.00
8.84 5.00
5.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
References
Understanding CMMI High Maturity Practices (SEI training material) Measuring the Software Process : statistical process control for software process improvement by William Florac & Anitha Carleton Understanding Variation : The Key to Managing Chaos by Donald Wheeler CMMI : Guidelines for Process Integration and Product Improvement by Mary Beth Chrissis, Mike Konrad and Sandy Shrum
26
Thank You
rama.sivaraman@polaris.co.in sudha.gopalakrishnan@polaris.co.in Website: www.polaris.co.in
COPYRIGHT NOTICE Copyright 2008 Polaris Software Lab Limited All rights reserved. These materials are confidential and proprietary to Polaris and no part of these materials should be reproduced, published in any form by any means, electronic or mechanical including photocopy or any information storage or retrieval system nor should the materials be disclosed to third parties without the express written authorization of Polaris Software Lab Limited.