Diese Präsentation wurde erfolgreich gemeldet.
Wir verwenden Ihre LinkedIn Profilangaben und Informationen zu Ihren Aktivitäten, um Anzeigen zu personalisieren und Ihnen relevantere Inhalte anzuzeigen. Sie können Ihre Anzeigeneinstellungen jederzeit ändern.

Software Project Management Presentation Final

679 Aufrufe

Veröffentlicht am

Software Project Management- ResearchColab

Presented in 4th year of Bachelor of Science in Software Engineering (BSSE) course at Institute of Information Technology, University of Dhaka (IIT, DU).

Veröffentlicht in: Software
  • Als Erste(r) kommentieren

Software Project Management Presentation Final

  1. 1. Date: 17-Dec-2016 Software Project Management Team: 7
  2. 2. Team Members
  3. 3. • Initiation Project Initiation Domain Analysis Business Case • Planning Project Planning • Execution SRS Software Architecture • Software Demonstration • Monitoring & Control Risk Management Configuration Management Release Notes Change Control Testing Document • Closing Project Summary 1/51Contents
  4. 4. Initiation
  5. 5. • Review management • Data Sharing • Idea/Problem discussion • Profile management 2Description
  6. 6. • Researcher can easily get their draft papers reviewed by the related subject experts • Researcher can share/sell research related data • Researchers/potential researchers may create both public and private discussion rooms on different topics 3Goals & Outcomes
  7. 7. • SPM Reports • Web Based Tool 4Deliverables
  8. 8. • Researchers • Paper Reviewers • Developers 5Stakeholders
  9. 9. 6Budget Summary Type Sector Breakdown Frequency Amount (BDT) Opex Project staffing Total work hours 420 Daily 63,000/= BDTCost per person per hour 150/= BDT Logistic Transport 1,000/= BDT Ongoing 11,500/= BDTReport Printing 1,500/= BDT Web hosting 9,000/= BDT Utility Internet bills (7 person, 2 months) 7,000/= BDT Ongoing 7,000/= Miscellaneous Ongoing 2,000/= Capex Laptop Laptop computers 7 Pcs One time 2,80,000/= Desktop Desktop computers 3 Pcs One time 1,20,000/= Premises Ongoing 2,40,000/= Total anticipated costs 7,23,500 /=
  10. 10. • Public and Private Universities • Research Institutes • Medical College • Public Health Research Institutes • Other Non-University Research Institutes 7Target Market
  11. 11. 8Market Strategy
  12. 12. 9SWOT Analysis Positive Negative Internal Strengths  Offer research paper review, share research idea/problem and data sharing in one single platform  Reading authentic, unbiased reviews with competitive price  Offer research data to share/sell/buy  first-mover advantage in the local market  Professional reviewers get feedback on them to enrich their profile.  More affordable marketing strategies Weaknesses  Lack of market research data for market analysis  Lack of marketing knowledge  Limited time to complete the whole project  Limited number of resource External Opportunities  Number of researchers are increasing  build entry barriers for any possible new competitor.  Similar services on the market are not as reliable or are more expensive to get online with international transaction  Service could be on the market for ideal time Threats  Competitors have a similar Web based service for research manuscript review  Competitors have launched a new advertising campaign  Lack of research fund may mean researchers will spend less for review service
  13. 13. Execution
  14. 14. • User will be able to post review request and any other user will be able to bid on that. • Dataset can be shared by all users. • Users can open discussion room and post comment there. • Users will be able to chat with other users. • There needs to be effective search function and other functionality. • The system will be highly secured. Any issues related the payment and privacy will be handled effectively. 10Requirements
  15. 15. 11Use Case Diagram (Level 1) Authentication Authenticated user Guest user Review Management Data Sharing Discussion Search Profile Management View
  16. 16. 12Data Objects Users- CV, Email, Profile Photo, Short Biography, Social Website, Personal Information, Professional Information, Performance Information Review Request- Research Domain, Work Overview, Comment, Expertise Tag, Payment, Time Limit Data Sharing- Description, Dataset, Preview, Payment, Comment, Rating, Tag, Purchase Count Discussion- Comment, Members, Discussion Type, Creator, Topic, Tag, Votes
  17. 17. 13ER Diagram Review Post Request Time Limit Expertise Tag Comments Research Domain Work Overview Payment User Profile Profile Photo Social Website Personal Info Email CV Professional Info Performance Info Short Biography Data Sharing Comments Tag Preview Payment Dataset Purchase Count Description Rating Discussion Creator Members Tag Votes Discussion Type Comments Topic Create Join Review Purchas
  18. 18. • AuthenticatedUser • DiscussionRoom • Payment • Dataset • PersonalInformation • ProfessionalInformaton • PerformanceInformation 14Class List
  19. 19. 15Class Diagram
  20. 20. 16Identifying Events Event Initiator Collaborator search posts, datasets, discussions rooms, and researchers Authenticated User, Guest User post review request Authenticated User (Researcher) response to interested review requests Authenticated User (Reviewer) Authenticated User (Researcher) converse one-to-one Authenticated User send a get request to the dataset owner Authenticated User ( Researcher) Authenticated User (Dataset Owner) create public or private discussion rooms Authenticated User (Discussion Room Creator) add users to the discussion Authenticated User ( Discussion Room Creator) Authenticated User (Non- Member) maintain profile information Authenticated User
  21. 21. 17 Sequence Diagram: Posting Review Request Authenticated user (Review request poster) System Posting Respond to Review Requests System Ready Authenticated user (Reviewer) Responding to request Converse one to one Confirm DealReceive confirmation Review request Posted Post Review Work
  22. 22. 18Context Diagram ResearchColab Authenticated User Guest User
  23. 23. 19Archetypes (ResearchColab) Researchcolab Review Management Data Sharing Discussion Profile Management Authentication Search
  24. 24. 20Archetypes (Authentication) Authentication Registration Access Management
  25. 25. 21Archetypes (Profile Mgmt.) Profile Management Update Information Manage Performance Information
  26. 26. 22Archetypes (Review Mgmt.) Review Management Manage Review Request Payment Contract Management
  27. 27. 23Archetypes (Data Sharing) Data Sharing Manage Dataset Sharing Payment
  28. 28. 24DFD (Level 1)
  29. 29. 25DFD (Data Sharing)
  30. 30. 26 Architectural Diagram (Data Sharing)
  31. 31. 27Deployment Model
  32. 32. Software Demonstration
  33. 33. Monitoring & Control
  34. 34. • Scheduling Risk • Requirement Risk • Project Management Risk • Product/Technology Risk • Customer Risk • Human Resources & Contractors Risk 28Risk Identification
  35. 35. • Evaluating The Risk • Making Decision What Should Be Done to the Risks • Taking Prudent Margins Over Best-Estimate Assumptions 29Risk Quantification
  36. 36. • Developing Strategic Options • Determining Actions • Enhancing Opportunities • Reducing Threats 30Risk Response
  37. 37. 31Heat Map
  38. 38. • Tracking Identified Risks • Monitoring Residual Risks • Identifying New Risks • Executing Risk Response Plans • Evaluating Their Effectiveness 32Risk Monitoring and Control
  39. 39. 33Human Resource Management Key: R – Responsible for completing the work A – Accountable for ensuring task completion/sign off C – Consulted before any decisions are made I – Informed of when an action/decision has been made
  40. 40. 34Configuration Management Generate Change Request Log CR status Evaluate CR Authorize CR Implement CR
  41. 41. 35Sample Format for CR Change Request Project: Researchcolab.com Date: 20/11/2016 Change Requestor: Minhas Kamal Change No: CR002 Change Category (Check all that apply): □ Schedule □ Cost □ Scope □ Requirements/Deliverables □ Testing/Quality □ Resources Does this Change Affect (Check all that apply): □ Corrective Action □ Preventative Action □ Defect Repair □ Updates □ Other Describe the Change Being Requested: Discussion rooms can have multiple administrators. Describe the Reason for the Change: To give more user authority to the discussion room Describe all Alternatives Considered: N/A Describe any Technical Changes Required to Implement this Change: N/A Describe Risks to be Considered for this Change: Estimate Resources and Costs Needed to Implement this Change: N/A Describe the Implications to Quality: Disposition: □ Approve □ Reject □ Defer Justification of Approval, Rejection, or Deferral: This requirement change is not too much important & does not add much value to the system.
  42. 42. 36Change Log Configuration Change Log Project: Researchcolab.com Date: 25/11/16 Change No. Change Type Description of Change Requestor Date Submitted Date Approved Status Comments CR001 Design Payment should be an independent module, rather than under Data Sharing and Review Request module. Data Sharing and Review Request module should simply use it. Minhas Kamal 17/11/2016 18/11/2016 Accepted This request was approved to ensure the Ease of use the payment system. CR002 Requirement Discussion rooms can have multiple administrators. Minhas Kamal 20/11/2016 21/11/2016 Denied This requirement change is not too much important & does not add much value to the system.
  43. 43. 37Release • About this release • Deliverables • Compatible Products • Change Notes • Bugs and limitations
  44. 44. 38Change Control Generate Change Request Log CR status Evaluate CR Authorize CR Implement CR
  45. 45. 39Change Types • Scope • Time • Duration • Cost • Resources • Deliverables • Product • Processes • Quality
  46. 46. 40CR Status • Open • Work in progress • In review • Testing • Closed
  47. 47. 41Sample Format for CC Request Change Request Project: Researchcolab.com Date: 20/11/2016 Change Requestor: Minhas Kamal Change No: CR002 Change Category (Check all that apply): □ Schedule □ Cost □ Scope □ Requirements/Deliverables □ Testing/Quality □ Resources Does this Change Affect (Check all that apply): □ Corrective Action □ Preventative Action □ Defect Repair □ Updates □ Other Describe the Change Being Requested: Discussion rooms can have multiple administrators. Describe the Reason for the Change: To give more user authority to the discussion room Describe all Alternatives Considered: N/A Describe any Technical Changes Required to Implement this Change: N/A Describe Risks to be Considered for this Change: Estimate Resources and Costs Needed to Implement this Change: N/A Describe the Implications to Quality: Disposition: □ Approve □ Reject □ Defer Justification of Approval, Rejection, or Deferral: This requirement change is not too much important & does not add much value to the system.
  48. 48. 42Change Log Change Log Project: Network Upgrade Project Date: 04/01/20xx Change No. Change Type Description of Change Requestor Date Submitted Date Approved Status Comments CR001 Equipment This change request calls for the purchase of wlan routers. Minhas Kamal 07/08/16 08/08/16 Denied This request was denied by the change control board because there is not adequate funding available for the purchase of new routers and because the request is outside of the project's scope.
  49. 49. 43Testing Types • Function Testing • User Interface Testing • Data and Dataset Integrity Testing • Security and Access Control Testing • Configuration Testing • Load Testing
  50. 50. 44Test Item Pass/Fail Criteria • Data and Database Integrity Testing Criteria • Function Testing Criteria • User Interface Testing Criteria • Load Testing Criteria • Security and Access Control Testing Criteria • Configuration Testing Criteria
  51. 51. 45Functional Testing
  52. 52. 46Features to be Tested • User Registration. • Log in. • Log out. • Review Request Posting. • Biding review request. • Sharing data • Requesting for sharing data • Search
  53. 53. 47Sample Test Case Test Suite ID TS-6 Test Case ID TC-6 Test Case Name Sharing Data Test Case Summary Authenticated User can share data Related Requirements Precondition Must be logged in Prerequisites Test Description 1. Select ‘Share Data option’. 2. Enter title. 3. Give description. 4. Add expertise tag. 5. Add Data File 6. Click on ‘Share’ button. Created by Md Rakib Hossain Date of Creation 12 November 2016 Executed by Md Rakib Hossain Date of Execution 15 November 2016 Test Environment OS: Windows 10 Browser: Google Chrome
  54. 54. 47Sample Test Case (Cont.) Step Action Expected System response Pass/Fail Comment 1 Click Post review Request Link Review request form passed 2 Give required Data( Tittle, description, file tag) and click Post button Successfully shared data passed 3 Give required Data( Blank Tittle, description, file, tag) and click Post button Tittle is required passed 4 Give required Data( Tittle, blank description, tag) and click Post button Description is required passed 5 Give required Data( Tittle, description, blank tag) and click Post button Tag is required passed 6 Give required Data( Tittle, description, invalid file format tag) and click Post button File format is invalid passed 7 Give required Data( Tittle, description, long size file tag) and click Post button File size is too large passed
  55. 55. Closing
  56. 56. 48Project Deliverables Planned Deliverable Actual Deliverable Summary Project Management Reports. The team provided the entire project plan. It contains which development process to follow, how to coordinate between team members, which development tools to follow. This deliverable was completed as planned SRS & Design document The analyst team provided the architecture of the software and UX design is described in this report. This deliverable was completed as planned Configuration Manual The documentation team provided with a configuration manual that describes about how to configure the tools and what environment is required for running the software. This deliverable was completed as planned Executable code module The development team has deployed the actual web application to be used. This deliverable was completed as planned
  57. 57. 49Project Schedule Project Phase Scheduled Completion Actual Completion Comments Initiation September 29, 2016 September 29, 2016 Completed on time Planning October 30, 2016 October 30, 2016 Completed on time Design November 8, 2016 November 8, 2016 Completed on time Build November 12, 2016 November 20, 2016 Not Completed on time Testing November 15, 2016 November 22, 2016 Completed on time Trial Build/Install November 22, 20xx November 25, 2016 Not Completed on time Transition to Ops November 22, 2016 November 26, 2016 Not Completed on time Project Closure November 26, 2016 TBD Progressing on time
  58. 58. 50Project Cost Project Phase Budgeted Cost Actual Cost Comments • Project staffing 63,000/= BDT 65,000/= BDT Staffing cost were over budget due to Schedule pressure • Logistic 11,500/= BDT 10000/= BDT Logistics were over budget due to under estimation • Utility 7,000/=BDT 6000/= BDT Utility costs came in under budget • Miscellaneous 2,000/=BDT 5000/= BDT Miscellaneous cost was over budget • Laptop 2,80,000/=BDT 2,80,000/=BDT costs were on budget • Desktop 1,20,000/=BDT 1,20,000/=BDT costs were on budget • Premises 2,40,000/=BDT 2,20,000/=BDT costs were on budget
  59. 59. 51EVM Chart
  60. 60. THANKS

×