ValueBased Software Engineering VBSE Barry Boehm, USC ICSE 2002 Tutorial: Software Engineering Econo

1
Value-Based Software Engineering (VBSE) Barry
Boehm, USC ICSE 2002 TutorialSoftware
Engineering EconomicsMay 20, 2002

• (boehm _at_, http//) sunset.usc.edu

2
Outline

• The emerging software engineering paradigm shift
• Traditional to value-based software engineering
  (VBSE)
• 7 key elements of VBSE
• Implementing VBSE
• Conclusions
• References

3
The Traditional Software Engineering Paradigm

• Systems engineers determine cost-benefit
  tradeoffs, systems requirements, systems design
• Requirements, design constraints allocated to
  hardware, software, people
• Software engineers design, develop, and verify
  code
• Assumptions needed by traditional paradigm
• The requirements are knowable in advance
• The requirements are stable
• The requirements are under the projects control
• Software decisions minimally affect the other
  elements

4
The Separation of Concerns Legacy

• The notion of user cannot be precisely
  defined, and therefore has no place in CS or SE.
• Edsger Dijkstra, ICSE 4, 1979
• Analysis and allocation of the system
  requirements is not the responsibility of the SE
  group
• but is a prerequisite for their work.
• Mark Paulk at al., SEI Software CMM v.1.1, 1993

Capability Maturity Model
5
Resulting Project Social Structure
6
Fate of Traditional-Paradigm Assumptions

• The requirements are knowable in advance
• The requirements increasingly emerge from
  experience
• IKIWISI Ill know it when I see it
• The requirements are stable
• The requirements are increasingly dynamic
• Via technology, marketplace, organization, value
  changes
• The requirements are under the projects control
• Not with COTS and requirements dynamism
• Software decisions minimally affect the other
  elements
• Software increasingly determines system content
• Software architecture determines system
  adaptability

7
Outline

• The emerging software engineering paradigm shift
• Traditional to value-based software engineering
  (VBSE)
• 7 key elements of VBSE
• Implementing VBSE
• Conclusions
• References

8
7 Key Elements of VBSE

• Benefits Realization Analysis
• Stakeholders Value Proposition Elicitation and
  Reconciliation
• Business Case Analysis
• Continuous Risk and Opportunity Management
• Concurrent System and Software Engineering
• Value-Based Monitoring and Control
• Change as Opportunity

9
The Information Paradox (Thorp)

• No correlation between companies IT investments
  and their market performance
• Field of Dreams
• Build the (field software)
• and the great (players profits) will come
• Need to integrate software and systems
  initiatives

10
DMR/BRA Results Chain
Order to delivery time is an important buying
criterion
ASSUMPTION
INITIATIVE
OUTCOME
Contribution
OUTCOME
Contribution
Reduced order processing cycle (intermediate
outcome)
Implement a new order entry system
Increased sales
Reduce time to process order
Reduce time to deliver product
DMR Consulting Groups Benefits Realization
Approach
11
The Model-Clash Spider Web Master Net
12
Example of Business Case Analysis ROI
(Benefits-Costs)/Costs
Option B-Rapid
Option B
3
Return on Investment
2
Option A
1
Time
-1
13
Using Risk Analysis to DetermineHow Much Is
Enough?

• Of testing, prototyping, COTS evaluation,
• planning vs. agility,

• Risk Exposure RE Probability (Loss) Size
  (Loss)
• Loss relative to value propositions financial,
  goodwill, control,

14
Example RE Profile Time to Ship- Loss due to
unacceptable dependability
Many defects high P(L) Critical defects high
S(L)
RE P(L) S(L)
Few defects low P(L) Minor defects low S(L)
Time to Ship (amount of testing)
15
Example RE Profile Time to Ship - Loss due to
unacceptable dependability- Loss due to market
share erosion
Many rivals high P(L) Strong rivals high S(L)
Many defects high P(L) Critical defects high
S(L)
RE P(L) S(L)
Few rivals low P(L) Weak rivals low S(L)
Few defects low P(L) Minor defects low S(L)
Time to Ship (amount of testing)
16
Example RE Profile Time to Ship- Sum of Risk
Exposures
17
Comparative RE Profile Safety-Critical System
18
Comparative RE Profile Internet Startup
Higher S(L) delays
Low-TTM Sweet Spot
Mainstream Sweet Spot
TTM Time to Market
RE P(L) S(L)
Time to Ship (amount of testing)
19
Architecture Choices
Rigid
Hyper-flexible
Flexible
20
Architecture Flexibility Determination
21
Outline

• The emerging software engineering paradigm shift
• Traditional to value-based software engineering
  (VBSE)
• 7 key elements of VBSE
• Implementing VBSE
• Conclusions
• References

22
Experience Factory Framework - I
Org. Shared Vision Improvement Strategy

• Org. Improvement Goals
• Goal-related questions, metrics
• Org. Improvement Strategies
• Goal achievement models

23
Experience Factory Framework - II
Progress/Plan/ Goal Mismatches
Org. Improvement Initiative Planning Control
Org. Shared Vision Improvement Strategy
Planning context

• Initiative Plans
• Initiative-related questions, metrics
• Initiative Monitoring and Control
• Experience-Base Analysis

• Org. Improvement Goals
• Goal-related questions, metrics
• Org. Improvement Strategies
• Goal achievement models

Initiatives
Achievables, Opportunities
Analyzed experience, Updated models
Experience Base
24
Experience Factory Framework - III
Progress/Plan/ Goal Mismatches
Org. Improvement Initiative Planning Control
Org. Shared Vision Improvement Strategy
Planning context

• Initiative Plans
• Initiative-related questions, metrics
• Initiative Monitoring and Control
• Experience-Base Analysis

• Org. Improvement Goals
• Goal-related questions, metrics
• Org. Improvement Strategies
• Goal achievement models

Initiatives
Analyzed experience, Updated models
Achievables, Opportunities
Experience Base
Org. Goals
Project experience
Models and data
Models and data
Planning Context
Project Planning and Control
Project Shared Vision and Strategy
25
VBSE Experience Factory Example

• Shared vision Increased market share, profit via
  rapid development
• Improvement goal Reduce system development time
  50
• Improvement strategy Reduce all task durations
  50
• Pilot project Rqts, design, code reduced 50
  test delayed
• Analysis Test preparation insufficient, not on
  critical-path
• Experience base OK to increase effort on
  non-critical-path activities, if it decreases
  time on critical-path activities

26
CeBASE Method Strategic Framework
-Applies to organizations and projects people,
processes, and products
Progress/Plan/Goal mismatches -shortfalls,
opportunities, risks
Plan/Goal mismatches
Planning context

• Monitor environment
• -Update models
• Implement plans
• Evaluate progress
• -w.r.t. goals, models
• Determine, apply
• corrective actions
• Update experience base

Org. Monitoring Control

• Org. Value Propositions (VPs)
• -Stakeholder values
• Current situation w.r.t. VPs
• Improvement Goals, Priorities
• Global Scope, Results Chain
• Value/business case models

Org-Portfolio Shared Vision

• Strategy elements
• Evaluation criteria/questions
• Improvement plans
• -Progress metrics
• -Experience base

Org. Strategic Plans
Organization/ Portfolio Experience Factory, GMQM
Monitoring Control Context
Initiatives
Shortfalls, opportunities, risks
Planning Context
Project experience, progress w.r.t. plans, goals
Project vision, goals
Shortfalls, opportunities, risks
Monitoring Control context
Scoping context
Project Plans

• LCO/LCA Package
• -Ops concept, prototypes,
• rqts, architecture,
• LCplan, rationale
• IOC/Transition/Support Package
• -Design, increment plans,
• quality plans, T/S plans
• Evaluation criteria/questions
• Progress metrics

• Project Value Propositions
• -Stakeholder values
• Current situation w.r.t. VPs
• Improvement Goals, Priorities
• Project Scope, Results Chain
• Value/business case models

Project Shared Vision

• Monitor environment
• -Update models
• Implement plans
• Evaluate progress
• -w.r.t. goals, models,
• plans
• Determine, apply
• corrective actions
• Update experience base

Proj. Monitoring Control
Monitoring Control context
Project MBASE
Planning Context
LCO Life Cycle Objectives LCA Life Cycle
Architecture IOC Initial Operational
Capability GMQM Goal-Model-Question-Metric
Paradigm MBASE Model-Based (System) Architecting
and Software Engineering
Plan/goal mismatches
Progress/Plan/goal mismatches -Shortfalls,
opportunities, risks
27
The CMMI Software Paradigm

• System and software engineering are integrated
• Software has a seat at the center table
• Requirements, architecture, and process are
  developed concurrently
• Along with prototypes and key capabilities
• Developments done by integrated teams
• Collaborative vs. adversarial process
• Based on shared vision, negotiated stakeholder
  concurrence
• Value aspects still underemphasized

28
Conclusions

• Marketplace trends favor transition to VBSE
  paradigm
• Software a/the major source of product value
• Software the primary enabler of adaptability
• VBSE involves 7 key elements
• Benefits Realization Analysis
• Stakeholders Value Proposition Elicitation and
  Reconciliation
• Business Case Analysis
• Continuous Risk and Opportunity Management
• Concurrent System and Software Engineering
• Value-Based Monitoring and Control
• Change as Opportunity
• Processes for implementing VBSE emerging
• CeBASE Method, CMMI, DMR/BRA, Balanced Scorecard,
  RUP extensions, Strategic Design

29
References
D. Ahern, A.Clouse, R. Turner, CMMI Distilled,
Addison Wesley, 2001. C. Baldwin K. Clark,
Design Rules The Power of Modularity, MIT Press,
1999. B. Boehm, D. Port, A. Jain, V. Basili,
Achieving CMMI Level 5 with MBASE and the CeBASE
Method, Cross Talk, May 2002. B. Boehm K.
Sullivan, Software Economics A Roadmap, The
Future of Software Economics, A. Finkelstein
(ed.), ACM Press, 2000. R. Kaplan D. Norton,
The Balanced Scorecard Translating Strategy into
Action, Harvard Business School Press, 1996. D.
Reifer, Making the Software Business Case,
Addison Wesley, 2002. K. Sullivan, Y. Cai, B.
Hallen, and W. Griswold, The Structure and Value
of Modularity in Software Design, Proceedings,
ESEC/FSE, 2001, ACM Press, pp. 99-108. J. Thorp
and DMR, The Information Paradox, McGraw Hill,
1998. CeBASE web site www.cebase.org CMMI web
site www.sei.cmu.edu/cmmi MBASE web site
sunset.usc.edu/research/MBASE