SlideShare ist ein Scribd-Unternehmen logo
1 von 15
Intel
Confidential Page 1
SW development process and the “leading
indicator”
F2F with Stefan & Pat – ww32’07
Eyal Rozenblat
Intel
Confidential Page 2
Abstract
• In the past ~18 month, there is a “process improvement” activity being held in IDC
and especially in CCT-E
• It is driven by a w.g., led by Eyal, which reports to ext. staff and get’s it’s approval for
the next step implementation, including new processes that are applied in the
department. Moshe Kleyner is the “godfather” for this.
• This work went through the stages of status & needs collection (Q1’06), basis
concept approval (Q4’06), pilot implementation approval (Q1’07), presentation to
CCT staff (ww18’07 F2F) and eventually Q2’07 pilot, which led to the Q3’07 pilot
before wide implementation in the department
• This improvement, of defining a “SW development process” for DTS departments,
and the facilitation that supports it, is in full correlation with the task of defining a
“leading indicator” for the process quality, asked by Siva
• This presentation is to share the concepts of the process, it’s current
implementation, and proposed improved implementation (merging into the MPOR
system) to CCT-W process owner (Stefan?) and MPOR system owner (Pat), to get
agreement on implementation of it also in CCT-W, and also of building the “leading
indicator” for DTS staff
• Note: ASVS DM decided to adopt this as well, but reorg and technical difficulties
delayed it’s deployment in ASVS-IDC in Q3’07; will be implemented in Q4’07
• Other departments will follow later, and there is need to make progress gradually,
focusing first on CCT-E/W, ASVS and possibly PTM (in that order)
Intel
Confidential Page 3
Agenda
• The process concepts – Q4’06 approval
• Presentation to ext. staff – Q1’07 CCT F2F
• Pilot postmortem and feedback – EOQ2’07
• Extension of the pilot scope to a full blown process and indicator
• Merging with the MPOR system proposal
Intel
Confidential Page 4
Former work presentations
• PVPD Development Process W/G Report –
• CCT-E process w.g. presentation to ext. staff –
ww01’07
• CCT-E SW development process
- ww18'07 F2F.ppt
• CCT-E SW development process pilot postmortem -
ww26'07.ppt
• CCT-E SW development process pilot postmortem -
after feedback .ppt
Microsoft
PowerPoint Presentation
CCT-E process w.g.
at ext. staff - ww01'
CCT-E SW
development process pilot postm
CCT-E SW
development process pilot postm
CCT ww18'07 F2F
Intel
Confidential Page 5
Pilot extension to a full blown process
• Dev. process includes several activities (such as requirement specification,
code review, etc) that lead to a delivery of a “desired quality”
• Those activities may differ from one dev. item to another, from one team to
the other depending of the item complexity, risk, implementer capability, etc
• Hence it needs to be considered and planned on a single dev. item basis -
plan which become a commitment of applying these activities
• The consideration of what set of activities suite best an item is totally in the
hands of the implementation owner, the PL, subjected to GL review
– DTS dev. item is the MPOR. We’re using the MPOR process / system.
• Those activities yield artifacts which are “work material”, such as an EPS
document, test plan document. Reviews are held to assure their quality.
• Therefore the commitment for applying activities, is a commitment for
developing those artifacts (and making them available for tracking as part of
the process)
• Fulfilling the plan (rather than developing many artifacts) is considered a
high quality process; gaps are considered issues in the process execution
• The level of applying the plan, is the essence of the “leading indicator”
Intel
Confidential Page 6
Extending “activities” from the first 2
• The original pilot concentrated on two activities and artifacts
1. Requirement specification - yielding “EPS”
2. Test planning - yielding a “test plan”
• Additional activities, as can be seen in the V model for
example, are
3. SW design – yielding an IPS
4. Coding – yielding “code review”
5. Unit testing – yielding “test results” / “unit test scripts”
• Additional activities may be defined by implementation owners
as they see fit for them
• Each such activity yields an artifact which can be represented
by a file, which is to be available (uploaded) to the system for
tracking purposes
Intel
Confidential Page 7
Localization / configuration of ones “default
process”
• The process / system will be released with those 5 “default”
activities / artifacts, making this to be DTS “default process”
• At each level, additional activities / artifacts may be defined as
part of the unit process activity, or removed from their “default
process”
– Example 1: in one department “code review” was defined, but a certain
group “removed” it from their “default process”
– Example 2: in one department, new activity was defined, called “test
plan review”. It becomes part of all the subordinates default process,
unless removed there
• Once such a definition is done, by whoever in DTS, this definition as an
activity, is available for all DTS units, to define as part of their default
process
• Thus the result of definition at each level, results in a default
process for DTS, ~7 default processes (possibly the same) for
DTS departments, few dozens for DTS groups, etc.
• Default process is of course inherited by the organization
structure, allowing adaptation to the departments and groups
different needs and development style
Intel
Confidential Page 8
Default process hierarchical configuration
Intel
Confidential Page 9
The planning stage – from “default” to “actual”
process
• Given a “default process” at some level, at the
planning stage, the PL needs to select, per item,
weather it will be developed for this specific item or
not
– By this he/she creates the “actual process” for any given MPOR
item that they committed to deliver
– The system will provide the option to select per each item and
each activity “document” or “waiver”
– This would typically be another “folder” in the dialog opens for
editing the item – the “dev. process” folder
• The existing one may be called “execution” or any other reasonable
name
Intel
Confidential Page 10
Tracking
• The system shall track items Vs. their artifacts and
give indications
– When an item is marked “done” (either MPOR system or
MSProject) this is the time that a missing artifact is considered a
violation to the process, and will appear in such a report
– The other report will be of the amount of the already developed
artifacts, normalized to %, per each type (% of EPSs, % of IPSs,
etc)
– The system shall build a progress line based on the delivery
dates, calculating how many items should be developed at each
such point
Intel
Confidential Page 11
Tracking graph
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
ww01 ww02 ww03 ww04 ww05 ww06 ww07 ww08 ww09 ww10 ww11 ww12 ww13
EPS
IPS
Code review
unit test
test plan
planed total
Actual total
% completion
Intel
Confidential Page 12
The indicator calculation
• The indicator is of hierarchical nature
• It is a simple division of the amount of developed items
(uploaded via he system) by the number of those that need to
be done at a given time, by the MPOR commitment.
– Say one team needed to do by ww07, 3 EPSs, 2 IPSs, 2 code reviews
and 5 test plans
– All adds up to 12 artifacts
– Say they did 2 EPSs, 1 IPSs, 2 code reviews and 4 test plans – total of
9 artifacts (and uploaded to the system) then they get 9/12 = 75%
“grade” of process completion
– The group’s grade, containing this team, is calculated exactly the same,
taking into account all the items from all of their teams
• Up to the department level, and up to DTS level!
• We’ll probably have some target of 80%-85% desired
completion rate
Intel
Confidential Page 13
Next step
• Q3’07 pilot in CCT-E
• Q4’07 pilot / implementation in ASVS-IDC
• CCT-W joining ???
• ASVS joining after ASVS-IDC stabilizing
• Go for merge with MPOR system after Q3’07 pilot
completion (or if Moshe will surprise us)
• Eyal writing full specification document – WIP. Will
be sent to participants for review.
• Implementation team availability for readiness for
Q4’07?
Intel
Confidential Page 14
Q&A
Intel
Confidential Page 15

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Was ist angesagt?

Was ist angesagt? (20)

Software Process and Project Management - CS832E02 unit 3
Software Process and Project Management - CS832E02 unit 3Software Process and Project Management - CS832E02 unit 3
Software Process and Project Management - CS832E02 unit 3
 
Beit 381 se lec 3 - 46 - 12 feb14 - sd needs teams to develop intro
Beit 381 se lec 3 - 46  - 12 feb14 - sd needs teams to develop introBeit 381 se lec 3 - 46  - 12 feb14 - sd needs teams to develop intro
Beit 381 se lec 3 - 46 - 12 feb14 - sd needs teams to develop intro
 
Software Engineering (Software Configuration Management)
Software Engineering (Software Configuration Management)Software Engineering (Software Configuration Management)
Software Engineering (Software Configuration Management)
 
Software engineering lecture notes
Software engineering lecture notesSoftware engineering lecture notes
Software engineering lecture notes
 
Other software processes (Software project Management)
Other software processes (Software project Management)Other software processes (Software project Management)
Other software processes (Software project Management)
 
Advanced Web Development in PHP - Understanding Project Development Methodolo...
Advanced Web Development in PHP - Understanding Project Development Methodolo...Advanced Web Development in PHP - Understanding Project Development Methodolo...
Advanced Web Development in PHP - Understanding Project Development Methodolo...
 
Presentation of se
Presentation of sePresentation of se
Presentation of se
 
Neotys PAC 2018 - Gayatree Nalwadad
Neotys PAC 2018 - Gayatree NalwadadNeotys PAC 2018 - Gayatree Nalwadad
Neotys PAC 2018 - Gayatree Nalwadad
 
Software testing and analysis
Software testing and analysisSoftware testing and analysis
Software testing and analysis
 
Software Processes
Software Processes Software Processes
Software Processes
 
Chapter6
Chapter6Chapter6
Chapter6
 
Metrics
MetricsMetrics
Metrics
 
Software effort estimation
Software effort estimationSoftware effort estimation
Software effort estimation
 
Software Engineering (Requirements Engineering & Software Maintenance)
Software Engineering (Requirements Engineering  & Software Maintenance)Software Engineering (Requirements Engineering  & Software Maintenance)
Software Engineering (Requirements Engineering & Software Maintenance)
 
Software Engineering by Pankaj Jalote
Software Engineering by Pankaj JaloteSoftware Engineering by Pankaj Jalote
Software Engineering by Pankaj Jalote
 
Software Engineering (Software Process: A Generic View)
Software Engineering (Software Process: A Generic View)Software Engineering (Software Process: A Generic View)
Software Engineering (Software Process: A Generic View)
 
Software Quality Metrics
Software Quality MetricsSoftware Quality Metrics
Software Quality Metrics
 
Software Development
Software DevelopmentSoftware Development
Software Development
 
Chapter 2 Time boxing & agile models
Chapter 2   Time boxing & agile modelsChapter 2   Time boxing & agile models
Chapter 2 Time boxing & agile models
 
Neotys PAC 2018 - Helen Bally
Neotys PAC 2018 - Helen BallyNeotys PAC 2018 - Helen Bally
Neotys PAC 2018 - Helen Bally
 

Andere mochten auch

Innovation management speaker notes
Innovation management speaker notesInnovation management speaker notes
Innovation management speaker notes
Jean Pаoli
 
CMMi 4 techstaff
CMMi 4 techstaffCMMi 4 techstaff
CMMi 4 techstaff
Jean Pаoli
 
Design patterns intro
Design patterns introDesign patterns intro
Design patterns intro
Jean Pаoli
 
eXtreme programming
eXtreme programmingeXtreme programming
eXtreme programming
Jean Pаoli
 
Mgmt forum MTC 5
Mgmt forum MTC 5Mgmt forum MTC 5
Mgmt forum MTC 5
Jean Pаoli
 
Stress management
Stress managementStress management
Stress management
Jean Pаoli
 
Cohr managing stress training
Cohr managing stress trainingCohr managing stress training
Cohr managing stress training
Jean Pаoli
 
Effective prioritization & zbb
Effective prioritization & zbbEffective prioritization & zbb
Effective prioritization & zbb
Jean Pаoli
 
PMC post implementation review
PMC post implementation reviewPMC post implementation review
PMC post implementation review
Jean Pаoli
 
Leadership ethics and innovation
Leadership ethics and innovationLeadership ethics and innovation
Leadership ethics and innovation
Cyril Foday-Kailie
 
Diversity in thinking styles (part 1)
Diversity in thinking styles (part 1)Diversity in thinking styles (part 1)
Diversity in thinking styles (part 1)
Jean Pаoli
 

Andere mochten auch (20)

Fagan Inspection
Fagan InspectionFagan Inspection
Fagan Inspection
 
08060 c foils
08060 c foils08060 c foils
08060 c foils
 
Innovation management speaker notes
Innovation management speaker notesInnovation management speaker notes
Innovation management speaker notes
 
CMMi 4 techstaff
CMMi 4 techstaffCMMi 4 techstaff
CMMi 4 techstaff
 
Design patterns
Design patternsDesign patterns
Design patterns
 
Design patterns intro
Design patterns introDesign patterns intro
Design patterns intro
 
eXtreme programming
eXtreme programmingeXtreme programming
eXtreme programming
 
Mgmt forum MTC 5
Mgmt forum MTC 5Mgmt forum MTC 5
Mgmt forum MTC 5
 
Stress
StressStress
Stress
 
Stress management
Stress managementStress management
Stress management
 
Cohr managing stress training
Cohr managing stress trainingCohr managing stress training
Cohr managing stress training
 
Effective prioritization & zbb
Effective prioritization & zbbEffective prioritization & zbb
Effective prioritization & zbb
 
PMC post implementation review
PMC post implementation reviewPMC post implementation review
PMC post implementation review
 
Leadership ethics and innovation
Leadership ethics and innovationLeadership ethics and innovation
Leadership ethics and innovation
 
PMP study TTT
PMP study TTTPMP study TTT
PMP study TTT
 
HILD: Leadership Ethics
HILD: Leadership EthicsHILD: Leadership Ethics
HILD: Leadership Ethics
 
Diversity in thinking styles (part 1)
Diversity in thinking styles (part 1)Diversity in thinking styles (part 1)
Diversity in thinking styles (part 1)
 
Pmp study: time
Pmp study: timePmp study: time
Pmp study: time
 
Unified process
Unified processUnified process
Unified process
 
Summary- The Leader Who Had No Title
Summary- The Leader Who Had No TitleSummary- The Leader Who Had No Title
Summary- The Leader Who Had No Title
 

Ähnlich wie SW development process and the leading indicator

Project charter and plan document for millennium upgrade
Project charter and plan document for millennium upgradeProject charter and plan document for millennium upgrade
Project charter and plan document for millennium upgrade
Theodore Van Patten, Jr.
 
Systems Lifecycle workbook
Systems Lifecycle workbookSystems Lifecycle workbook
Systems Lifecycle workbook
MISY
 

Ähnlich wie SW development process and the leading indicator (20)

Project charter and plan document for millennium upgrade
Project charter and plan document for millennium upgradeProject charter and plan document for millennium upgrade
Project charter and plan document for millennium upgrade
 
Rajesh Paleru
Rajesh PaleruRajesh Paleru
Rajesh Paleru
 
Management (IP)
Management (IP)Management (IP)
Management (IP)
 
Systems Lifecycle workbook
Systems Lifecycle workbookSystems Lifecycle workbook
Systems Lifecycle workbook
 
Spm project planning
Spm project planning Spm project planning
Spm project planning
 
Seminar on Project Management by Rj
Seminar on Project Management by RjSeminar on Project Management by Rj
Seminar on Project Management by Rj
 
SDET UNIT 1.pptx
SDET UNIT 1.pptxSDET UNIT 1.pptx
SDET UNIT 1.pptx
 
System Development Proecess
System Development ProecessSystem Development Proecess
System Development Proecess
 
software Engineering process
software Engineering processsoftware Engineering process
software Engineering process
 
IS L02 - Development of Information Systems
IS L02 - Development of Information SystemsIS L02 - Development of Information Systems
IS L02 - Development of Information Systems
 
Se 381 - lec 25 - 32 - 12 may29 - program size and cost estimation models
Se 381 - lec 25 - 32 - 12 may29 - program size and cost estimation modelsSe 381 - lec 25 - 32 - 12 may29 - program size and cost estimation models
Se 381 - lec 25 - 32 - 12 may29 - program size and cost estimation models
 
rough-work.pptx
rough-work.pptxrough-work.pptx
rough-work.pptx
 
Webinar Slides: Using Innoslate for Program Management
Webinar Slides: Using Innoslate for Program Management Webinar Slides: Using Innoslate for Program Management
Webinar Slides: Using Innoslate for Program Management
 
Software Process Models
Software Process ModelsSoftware Process Models
Software Process Models
 
Software testing life cycle
Software testing life cycleSoftware testing life cycle
Software testing life cycle
 
5_6134023428304274682.pptx
5_6134023428304274682.pptx5_6134023428304274682.pptx
5_6134023428304274682.pptx
 
Experts Live Europe 2017 - Windows 10 Servicing - the do’s and don'ts
Experts Live Europe 2017 -  Windows 10 Servicing - the do’s and don'tsExperts Live Europe 2017 -  Windows 10 Servicing - the do’s and don'ts
Experts Live Europe 2017 - Windows 10 Servicing - the do’s and don'ts
 
Context Driven Automation Gtac 2008
Context Driven Automation Gtac 2008Context Driven Automation Gtac 2008
Context Driven Automation Gtac 2008
 
Chapter 1,2,3,4 notes
Chapter 1,2,3,4 notesChapter 1,2,3,4 notes
Chapter 1,2,3,4 notes
 
Beit 381 se lec 13 - 11 - 12 mar20 - project management
Beit 381 se lec 13  -  11 -  12 mar20 - project managementBeit 381 se lec 13  -  11 -  12 mar20 - project management
Beit 381 se lec 13 - 11 - 12 mar20 - project management
 

Kürzlich hochgeladen

Artificial Intelligence: Facts and Myths
Artificial Intelligence: Facts and MythsArtificial Intelligence: Facts and Myths
Artificial Intelligence: Facts and Myths
Joaquim Jorge
 

Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)

What Are The Drone Anti-jamming Systems Technology?
What Are The Drone Anti-jamming Systems Technology?What Are The Drone Anti-jamming Systems Technology?
What Are The Drone Anti-jamming Systems Technology?
 
04-2024-HHUG-Sales-and-Marketing-Alignment.pptx
04-2024-HHUG-Sales-and-Marketing-Alignment.pptx04-2024-HHUG-Sales-and-Marketing-Alignment.pptx
04-2024-HHUG-Sales-and-Marketing-Alignment.pptx
 
A Year of the Servo Reboot: Where Are We Now?
A Year of the Servo Reboot: Where Are We Now?A Year of the Servo Reboot: Where Are We Now?
A Year of the Servo Reboot: Where Are We Now?
 
The Codex of Business Writing Software for Real-World Solutions 2.pptx
The Codex of Business Writing Software for Real-World Solutions 2.pptxThe Codex of Business Writing Software for Real-World Solutions 2.pptx
The Codex of Business Writing Software for Real-World Solutions 2.pptx
 
Artificial Intelligence: Facts and Myths
Artificial Intelligence: Facts and MythsArtificial Intelligence: Facts and Myths
Artificial Intelligence: Facts and Myths
 
Handwritten Text Recognition for manuscripts and early printed texts
Handwritten Text Recognition for manuscripts and early printed textsHandwritten Text Recognition for manuscripts and early printed texts
Handwritten Text Recognition for manuscripts and early printed texts
 
Slack Application Development 101 Slides
Slack Application Development 101 SlidesSlack Application Development 101 Slides
Slack Application Development 101 Slides
 
Understanding Discord NSFW Servers A Guide for Responsible Users.pdf
Understanding Discord NSFW Servers A Guide for Responsible Users.pdfUnderstanding Discord NSFW Servers A Guide for Responsible Users.pdf
Understanding Discord NSFW Servers A Guide for Responsible Users.pdf
 
08448380779 Call Girls In Diplomatic Enclave Women Seeking Men
08448380779 Call Girls In Diplomatic Enclave Women Seeking Men08448380779 Call Girls In Diplomatic Enclave Women Seeking Men
08448380779 Call Girls In Diplomatic Enclave Women Seeking Men
 
Finology Group – Insurtech Innovation Award 2024
Finology Group – Insurtech Innovation Award 2024Finology Group – Insurtech Innovation Award 2024
Finology Group – Insurtech Innovation Award 2024
 
TrustArc Webinar - Stay Ahead of US State Data Privacy Law Developments
TrustArc Webinar - Stay Ahead of US State Data Privacy Law DevelopmentsTrustArc Webinar - Stay Ahead of US State Data Privacy Law Developments
TrustArc Webinar - Stay Ahead of US State Data Privacy Law Developments
 
Real Time Object Detection Using Open CV
Real Time Object Detection Using Open CVReal Time Object Detection Using Open CV
Real Time Object Detection Using Open CV
 
🐬 The future of MySQL is Postgres 🐘
🐬  The future of MySQL is Postgres   🐘🐬  The future of MySQL is Postgres   🐘
🐬 The future of MySQL is Postgres 🐘
 
A Call to Action for Generative AI in 2024
A Call to Action for Generative AI in 2024A Call to Action for Generative AI in 2024
A Call to Action for Generative AI in 2024
 
The Role of Taxonomy and Ontology in Semantic Layers - Heather Hedden.pdf
The Role of Taxonomy and Ontology in Semantic Layers - Heather Hedden.pdfThe Role of Taxonomy and Ontology in Semantic Layers - Heather Hedden.pdf
The Role of Taxonomy and Ontology in Semantic Layers - Heather Hedden.pdf
 
Factors to Consider When Choosing Accounts Payable Services Providers.pptx
Factors to Consider When Choosing Accounts Payable Services Providers.pptxFactors to Consider When Choosing Accounts Payable Services Providers.pptx
Factors to Consider When Choosing Accounts Payable Services Providers.pptx
 
2024: Domino Containers - The Next Step. News from the Domino Container commu...
2024: Domino Containers - The Next Step. News from the Domino Container commu...2024: Domino Containers - The Next Step. News from the Domino Container commu...
2024: Domino Containers - The Next Step. News from the Domino Container commu...
 
Data Cloud, More than a CDP by Matt Robison
Data Cloud, More than a CDP by Matt RobisonData Cloud, More than a CDP by Matt Robison
Data Cloud, More than a CDP by Matt Robison
 
Driving Behavioral Change for Information Management through Data-Driven Gree...
Driving Behavioral Change for Information Management through Data-Driven Gree...Driving Behavioral Change for Information Management through Data-Driven Gree...
Driving Behavioral Change for Information Management through Data-Driven Gree...
 
The 7 Things I Know About Cyber Security After 25 Years | April 2024
The 7 Things I Know About Cyber Security After 25 Years | April 2024The 7 Things I Know About Cyber Security After 25 Years | April 2024
The 7 Things I Know About Cyber Security After 25 Years | April 2024
 

SW development process and the leading indicator

  • 1. Intel Confidential Page 1 SW development process and the “leading indicator” F2F with Stefan & Pat – ww32’07 Eyal Rozenblat
  • 2. Intel Confidential Page 2 Abstract • In the past ~18 month, there is a “process improvement” activity being held in IDC and especially in CCT-E • It is driven by a w.g., led by Eyal, which reports to ext. staff and get’s it’s approval for the next step implementation, including new processes that are applied in the department. Moshe Kleyner is the “godfather” for this. • This work went through the stages of status & needs collection (Q1’06), basis concept approval (Q4’06), pilot implementation approval (Q1’07), presentation to CCT staff (ww18’07 F2F) and eventually Q2’07 pilot, which led to the Q3’07 pilot before wide implementation in the department • This improvement, of defining a “SW development process” for DTS departments, and the facilitation that supports it, is in full correlation with the task of defining a “leading indicator” for the process quality, asked by Siva • This presentation is to share the concepts of the process, it’s current implementation, and proposed improved implementation (merging into the MPOR system) to CCT-W process owner (Stefan?) and MPOR system owner (Pat), to get agreement on implementation of it also in CCT-W, and also of building the “leading indicator” for DTS staff • Note: ASVS DM decided to adopt this as well, but reorg and technical difficulties delayed it’s deployment in ASVS-IDC in Q3’07; will be implemented in Q4’07 • Other departments will follow later, and there is need to make progress gradually, focusing first on CCT-E/W, ASVS and possibly PTM (in that order)
  • 3. Intel Confidential Page 3 Agenda • The process concepts – Q4’06 approval • Presentation to ext. staff – Q1’07 CCT F2F • Pilot postmortem and feedback – EOQ2’07 • Extension of the pilot scope to a full blown process and indicator • Merging with the MPOR system proposal
  • 4. Intel Confidential Page 4 Former work presentations • PVPD Development Process W/G Report – • CCT-E process w.g. presentation to ext. staff – ww01’07 • CCT-E SW development process - ww18'07 F2F.ppt • CCT-E SW development process pilot postmortem - ww26'07.ppt • CCT-E SW development process pilot postmortem - after feedback .ppt Microsoft PowerPoint Presentation CCT-E process w.g. at ext. staff - ww01' CCT-E SW development process pilot postm CCT-E SW development process pilot postm CCT ww18'07 F2F
  • 5. Intel Confidential Page 5 Pilot extension to a full blown process • Dev. process includes several activities (such as requirement specification, code review, etc) that lead to a delivery of a “desired quality” • Those activities may differ from one dev. item to another, from one team to the other depending of the item complexity, risk, implementer capability, etc • Hence it needs to be considered and planned on a single dev. item basis - plan which become a commitment of applying these activities • The consideration of what set of activities suite best an item is totally in the hands of the implementation owner, the PL, subjected to GL review – DTS dev. item is the MPOR. We’re using the MPOR process / system. • Those activities yield artifacts which are “work material”, such as an EPS document, test plan document. Reviews are held to assure their quality. • Therefore the commitment for applying activities, is a commitment for developing those artifacts (and making them available for tracking as part of the process) • Fulfilling the plan (rather than developing many artifacts) is considered a high quality process; gaps are considered issues in the process execution • The level of applying the plan, is the essence of the “leading indicator”
  • 6. Intel Confidential Page 6 Extending “activities” from the first 2 • The original pilot concentrated on two activities and artifacts 1. Requirement specification - yielding “EPS” 2. Test planning - yielding a “test plan” • Additional activities, as can be seen in the V model for example, are 3. SW design – yielding an IPS 4. Coding – yielding “code review” 5. Unit testing – yielding “test results” / “unit test scripts” • Additional activities may be defined by implementation owners as they see fit for them • Each such activity yields an artifact which can be represented by a file, which is to be available (uploaded) to the system for tracking purposes
  • 7. Intel Confidential Page 7 Localization / configuration of ones “default process” • The process / system will be released with those 5 “default” activities / artifacts, making this to be DTS “default process” • At each level, additional activities / artifacts may be defined as part of the unit process activity, or removed from their “default process” – Example 1: in one department “code review” was defined, but a certain group “removed” it from their “default process” – Example 2: in one department, new activity was defined, called “test plan review”. It becomes part of all the subordinates default process, unless removed there • Once such a definition is done, by whoever in DTS, this definition as an activity, is available for all DTS units, to define as part of their default process • Thus the result of definition at each level, results in a default process for DTS, ~7 default processes (possibly the same) for DTS departments, few dozens for DTS groups, etc. • Default process is of course inherited by the organization structure, allowing adaptation to the departments and groups different needs and development style
  • 8. Intel Confidential Page 8 Default process hierarchical configuration
  • 9. Intel Confidential Page 9 The planning stage – from “default” to “actual” process • Given a “default process” at some level, at the planning stage, the PL needs to select, per item, weather it will be developed for this specific item or not – By this he/she creates the “actual process” for any given MPOR item that they committed to deliver – The system will provide the option to select per each item and each activity “document” or “waiver” – This would typically be another “folder” in the dialog opens for editing the item – the “dev. process” folder • The existing one may be called “execution” or any other reasonable name
  • 10. Intel Confidential Page 10 Tracking • The system shall track items Vs. their artifacts and give indications – When an item is marked “done” (either MPOR system or MSProject) this is the time that a missing artifact is considered a violation to the process, and will appear in such a report – The other report will be of the amount of the already developed artifacts, normalized to %, per each type (% of EPSs, % of IPSs, etc) – The system shall build a progress line based on the delivery dates, calculating how many items should be developed at each such point
  • 11. Intel Confidential Page 11 Tracking graph 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 ww01 ww02 ww03 ww04 ww05 ww06 ww07 ww08 ww09 ww10 ww11 ww12 ww13 EPS IPS Code review unit test test plan planed total Actual total % completion
  • 12. Intel Confidential Page 12 The indicator calculation • The indicator is of hierarchical nature • It is a simple division of the amount of developed items (uploaded via he system) by the number of those that need to be done at a given time, by the MPOR commitment. – Say one team needed to do by ww07, 3 EPSs, 2 IPSs, 2 code reviews and 5 test plans – All adds up to 12 artifacts – Say they did 2 EPSs, 1 IPSs, 2 code reviews and 4 test plans – total of 9 artifacts (and uploaded to the system) then they get 9/12 = 75% “grade” of process completion – The group’s grade, containing this team, is calculated exactly the same, taking into account all the items from all of their teams • Up to the department level, and up to DTS level! • We’ll probably have some target of 80%-85% desired completion rate
  • 13. Intel Confidential Page 13 Next step • Q3’07 pilot in CCT-E • Q4’07 pilot / implementation in ASVS-IDC • CCT-W joining ??? • ASVS joining after ASVS-IDC stabilizing • Go for merge with MPOR system after Q3’07 pilot completion (or if Moshe will surprise us) • Eyal writing full specification document – WIP. Will be sent to participants for review. • Implementation team availability for readiness for Q4’07?