The Third International Conference on
Software Process Improvement

April 3 - 7, 2006
Orlando, FL

Mark your calendar and do not miss this remarkable event

New Technologies in Support of Multiple Releases 
Barbara Dumas
Director of SCM Solutions
McCabe Software, Inc.

Introduction:

According to industry surveys, well over 50% of software companies are reporting an increase in the frequency of releases resulting in an overlap in supported code lines. The number of Independent Software Vendors (ISVs) supporting multiple releases in parallel is also on the rise. This translates to an even greater need for version control tools that can effectively support parallel code streams. This paper discusses the use of process and technology to address the requirements of organizations struggling to maintain multiple releases in parallel.

Introduction:

PROBLEM STATEMENT

Process is a buzz word to achieve high quality of products in IT world. Most of the organizations having ‘mature' process experience would agree that process design (definition) and its implementation are the key factors to obtain good returns from a process. Process implementation causes defined processes to be performed routinely, resulting in institutionalization throughout the organization. Institutionalization is achieved by blending process training & mentoring, support & communication, tool training, support mechanisms, metrics, and infrastructure forcontinuous improvement. Most of the time, achieving good process definition is easy compared to good implementation of the process. The foremost challenge is to align behaviors of employees to accomplish process compliance.

The existing industry practices such as audit or assessment help gauge health of the process at higher levels rather than gauging the depth of implementation of the individual process at a granular level. Most of the time, we don't know the state of implementation granularly. Hence the actions which are required to be taken to address root cause are taken at high level, leaving the process implementation to an ineffective stage.

SOLUTION

OIM (Optimized Implementation Methodology) is a focused methodology which can measure implementation at granular level & draw a roadmap for process improvement to overcome the challenges of ineffective implementation.

This methodology leverages the existing techniques & concepts like PDCA (plan, do, check and act), RCA (root cause analysis), SQC (Statistical quality control) and tools like QFD (quality function deployment), Relative Prioritization Metrics, weighted scoring etc. It starts with measuring and understanding the current state of implementation effectiveness. Further it helps creating a roadmap to ensure process institutionalization. This way of measurement is granular enough to provide deeper understanding of root causes of ineffective implementation.

Outline:

• FUNDAMENTALS OF  PROCESS DOMAIN
• IMPLEMENTATION CHALLENGES
• SOLUTION : OIM (Optimized Implementation Methodology)
  • Logically break the process into sub-processes /procedures/ tasks.
  • Use Relative Prioritization Metrics to calculate & understand the relative importance of the sub processes with respect to the process goal.
  • Create questions (with objective guidelines) which can gauge the state of implementation of each sub process at depth.
  • Use QFD to calculate and understand the weights of the questions depending upon their relationship with the important sub processes.
  • Gather data about process compliance.
  • Calculate the Implementation Effectiveness Score and analyze the data for identifying the areas of improvement.
  • Define action plan for areas of improvement and categorise them into people, process and tools.
  • Gather the compliance data at defined intervals and monitor the impact of action plan.
• THE MODEL
• CASE STUDY
• KEY SUCCESS FACTORS
• CONCLUSION

Learning Objectives:

Kulpreet Singh Nanda works as a Software Process Consultant at Quality and Delivery Innovation Department, Patni Computer Systems Inc. He has worked on various quality and process improvement initiatives like ISO 9000, CMM, CMMI, TQM and Six Sigma.Kulpreet is a Certified Software Quality Analyst by QAI, FL and certified Six Sigma Green Belt by PATNI.

He has more than 6 years of experience in the field of Quality Management and 1 year of experience in Marketing & Advertising. He has been a member of SEPG and worked as in-charge of Internal Quality Audits for Patni.  Kulpreet has successfully conducted process improvements for Patni and its clients and he is currently deployed at client's site on a  process consultancy assignment for Patni.

Kulpreet has following experience with the subject of paper & presentation:

• Methodology Development
• Methodology Pilot
• Methodology Implementation

• how to create an early-warning system that is capable of providing the right information and take corrective measures in a timely manner
• which technologically is available to unlock the information that is already available
• which measures to take to mobilizing the stakeholders

Biography:

Willy Druyts is business process analyst for AGFA ( www.agfa.com ).He is responsible for the process improvement program and software development tools at AGFA’s Belgian R&D centre for development of medical imaging systems.

It is his primary role to define and manage projects such as the introduction of iterative development practices, increase product development predictability in geographically dispersed development centres.

His interest in metrics to make software development characteristics more tangible originate from the latter project. Each project takes a holistic view on software development and covers a broad area in software engineering; from requirements engineering over development and unit testing through verification and project management.

As QA-representative for his R&D site, he leads and participates in various activities pertaining to regulatory compliance; such as the validation of software tools, gap analysis, audit preparations, etc…

His tour of duties as a lead software developer have included numerous CMM assessments up to and including CMM level 4. This legacy followed Tim to the systems engineering environment, where he has been providing active support for achieving the Corporate CMMI goals. During 2003, Tim was an Appraisal Team Member for two SCAMPI “B” level appraisals and the SCAMPI “A” SW/SE level 3 appraisal of the Raytheon SAS Business Unit. Currently, he is assigned as an Appraisal Team Member for the Missile Systems CMMI level 3 initiative as well as an ATM for the Raytheon SAS CMMI level 4 efforts.

Managing Agile Requirements 
Wayne Allen
Product Development Manager
Corillian Corporation

Introduction:

Tracking, organizing and managing requirements for agile projects has unique challenges that can trip you up if you don't have a process for dealing with them. This interactive session will show you how to cope with the agile requirements lifecycle. We will talk about where requirements come from, accounting for the planning horizon, "technical" stories, requirements that are "too big", defects, changing requirements, testing, documentation, rework and more. An overview of tools from low tech to high tech will also be covered.

Outline:

Each portion of the presentation will be started with an open discussion of problem attendees are experiencing and what others have tried to do to solve similar issues. Each area of discussion will be captured and made available

• Requirements
• Planning & estimating
• Re-planning based on information gathered from completed iterations
• Non-development activities
• Tool support

Learning Objectives:

• How to manage functional requirements in an iterative process
• How to translate iterative schedules into completion dates
• How to incorporate feedback into an iterative schedule
• How to integrate quality assurance, documentation and other non-development tasks into an iterative plan.
• What types of tools are available and when they are appropriate

Biography:

Wayne Allen is a Product Development Manager for Corillian Corporation. Over the last 19 years he has worked on building appropriate software solutions for various types of organizations both public and private. Over the last 5 years he has specialized in helping organization transition from big bang software delivery to incremental delivery to help increase project success rates and customer satisfaction. During this time he noticed a lack of attention from the Agile community on the non-development roles such as product management, quality assurance, documentation and user interface design. He has been working specifically with these groups to discover ways to improve the larger issue of whole product delivery in addition to the software portion.

A Metrics Perspective for CMMI® Level-4 Organization: Case Study 
Sameh S. Zeid
Process Improvement Program Manager
ITSoft

Introduction:

The presentation will address implementation of Metrics in and off-shore software development organization. The Metrics program was implemented to meet CMMI® Level-4 requirements. The CMMI® level 4 provides a platform for continuous process improvement based on metrics values. It gives platform for predicting project performance and serve to have objective language among practitioners. The presentation will address infra-structure for CMMI® Level 4 company and how processes have been evolved till they satisfied the requirements of this level. The presentation will explain the use of Process Performance Baseline and Quantitative Project Management based on Metrics foundation laid in lower levels of the CMMI® Level 4. The presentation will emphasize on quantitative improvement in operational performance using selected metrics.

Outline:

• Business and Operational Benefits of having a Metrics Program
• Uses of Metrics
• A look at some of common metrics
• An infra-structure used to establish a Metrics program for a CMMI® level 4 organization
• Locate and understand Metrics requirements in CMMI® Process Area and Maturity Levels
• How Process Cycle are impacted by implementing CMMI® Level 4 Metrics Requirements
• HR dimension of metrics implementation
• Understand Process Performance Baselines and how they are used by projects.
• A metrics based improvement cycle

Learning Objectives:

• Value the use of Metrics in Software Processes
• Impact of metrics on the way people can work
• Examine and Infra-structure of a Metrics program that was implemented in CMMI® Level 4
• Understand the Process Performance Baselines and Quantitative Project Management
• A look at some of common metrics used during project

Biography:

Sameh S. Zeid skills and Interests include:

• Member of Project Management Institute (PMI) and IEEE.
• Project Management Professional (PMP) from PMI since, July 2001. PMP certification valid till Dec/2007.
• Instructor on various topics of Project Management including Risk Management, Procurement Management, Project Integration and PMP preparation courses.
• Completed the official courses offered by Software Engineering Institute (SEI) on:
  • Introduction to CMM, Introduction to CMMI, Intermediate Concepts of CMMI ® , Mastering Process Improvement, Consultation Skills, and CMMI ® Implementation Essentials.

Practical Examples: Using Metrics Trend for Process Improvement 
Deborah Devadason
Associate Consultant
Satyam Computer Services Ltd., USA

Introduction:

This presentation shares the practical examples how an innovative approach of using metrics trends for process improvement. Process improvement within software organizations is gaining momentum. More

Organizations today are initiating software process improvement efforts. One of the effective tools to be used in the journey is metrics trend analysis. This presentation shares examples of metrics analysis such as tracking defect discovery rates to predict product release dates, predicting schedules, costs, using control charts to stabilize and improve software processes or to assess process capability, evaluating defect discovery profiles to identify focal areas for process improvement etc.

Outline/Learning Objectives:

The audience will be able to understand and appreciate the following:

• How does matured organizations use metrics trends for process improvements
• Practical examples of how various metrics can be analyzed and reported with
• How to use metrics for predicting future performance
• How to show the results of Process improvement to management
• Able to understand some of the industry benchmarks

Biography:

Deborah Devadason is Associate Consultant of the Software Process Consulting Team at Satyam Computer Services, USA , (an SEI CMM & CMMI level 5 Company) with over 9 years of experience in Quality Management. In her CMM and Quality consulting assignments for US and Japanese clients, she has played a key role in Process Definition and Process Integration and Metrics Implementation. She had also successfully implemented Statistical Process Control (SPC) and Process Re-engineering. She holds dual Master degree in Technology and Science. She is a Certified Quality Manager (CQM), Certified Project Management Professional (PMP), holds certification in SPC (Statistical Process Control), MiC Australia and is a certified ISO: 9000 auditor. She has expertise in CMM, CMMI, EFQM models and Six Sigma. She has published papers in International and National Conferences. She has made impressive presentations at multiple organization wide symposiums on Quality Models.

Implementing Project Quality Gates: The Pain, The Agony, The Success 
Clyneice Chaney
Quality Manager
Project Performance Corporation

Introduction:

Many projects don't have enough quality controls in place to ensure a quality product. This lack of controls results in products that proceed through the life cycle with major problems and that cause difficulties late in the project when it is costly and time-consuming to fix. This presentation provides a case study of the implementation of a process improvement project design to place the proper controls at the right place to increase product quality.

Outline:

• The Problem
  • Organizational Culture: AS IS
  • Identifying the problem
• The Fix
  • Process improvement initiative
  • Integrated Improvement Team
  • Process Design and Development
  • Implementing
• Lessons Learned
  • Things that went wrong
  • Things that worked

Learning Objectives:

• Role of process action teams in process improvement
• Steps to implementing improvements
• Tools and templates used for
• Prerequisites for Improvement initiatives

Biography:

Clyneice Chaney, Corporate Quality Manager with Project Performance Corporation brings over 20 years of testing, quality assurance and process improvement experience. Clyneice holds certifications from American Society for Quality as a Certified Quality Manager, Quality Assurance Institute's Certified Quality Analyst, and Project Management Institute's Professional Project Manager. She is a 2003 Georgia Oglethorpe State Quality Award Examiner

Focusing on process improvement and procedure development in the software testing and quality assurance areas, Clyneice has successfully lead process improvement, methodology development, and reengineering projects for organizations wishing to improve their software development, testing processes, and tool implementation.

Clyneice is currently an instructor for the International Institute for Software Testing and has presented technical papers at the Software Engineering Institute: SEPG Conference, American Society for Quality: Quality Manager's conference, Quality Assurance Institute International Testing conference and STAR East Testing and the Quality Assurance conference.

New Generation Software Product Quality Metrics 
Raghavan M
General Manager and Head-Quality
Aztec Software and Technology Services Limited

Introduction:

Traditionally, software organizations for a long time now, have been implementing Measurements and Metrics Programs such as variances in size, schedule, effort and cost, productivity, review efficiency etc. and also, product quality metrics such as post delivery defects, defect density These companies have particularly strong processes and development methodologies which are in alignment with high industry standards/models such as SEI-CMM, CMMI etc., This paper analyzes the efficacy of these metrics from the point of view of software product organizations. It also deals with some of the drawbacks of these metrics programs and the need for a change. Ideas for a new generation of product quality metrics program, which is in better-sync with the needs of today’s industry, have been evaluated and presented. The suggested Metrics involves measurement of parameters such performance, scalability, maintainability etc. The criteria for measurement/classification of these product quality attributes have also been discussed. Going further, the paper also deals with implementation details and presents a work-sheet to compute such metrics across the products/projects and across the organization.

Outline/Learning Objectives:

• Introduction
• Current metrics Practices
• Recent Trends and Need for Change
• New Metrics Program
• Basis for Measurements
• Next Steps and Conclusion

Biography:

Raghavan heads the Quality Function and is responsible for all Process related initiatives at Aztec. He has about 17 years of experience in software industry, of which about 5 years have been in Product Testing, 8 years have been in technical project management and 4 years in Process Quality. He has been associated with Aztec since August 2000, and has managed several projects involving Database, Java/J2EE and C/C++ technologies.

Prior to joining Aztec, Raghavan was associated with IBM Global Services India. There, he was instrumental in the development e-business practices. Over a period of 7+ years, Raghavan performed varied roles at IBM including Project Manager, Development Leads, Test Lead and also, had a 3.5 years long stint with various product groups at IBM Boca Raton, Austin and Raleigh. Most recently, as Program Manager, Raghavan was responsible for managing multiple projects in the e-business area and also, as head of e-business competency, including interactions with Global Customers, various IBM Product groups, Services units. Raghavan was also involved in the various Process quality initiatives and was an active member of the Software Engineering Process Group (SEPG). He also served as a member of the SEI CMM Assessment Team, during the Level 5 assessments.

Raghavan also worked with Hewlett Packard India , Indian Space Research Organization and DCM Data Systems for 5 years prior to joining at IBM, where he was involved with product development, product test software development, testing of the onboard Control Software for Indian Satellites.

Raghavan M is well versed in implementing Project Management processes and practices in large projects, Quality processes, models /standards. His strengths include Unix and operating system internals and Testing.

How to Work with Geographically-Diverse Teams 
Bob Reed
Product Lifecycle Management System Manager
Synopsys, Inc.

Introduction:

For the past six years, Bob has worked out of his home managing projects, software releases, implementing process improvements—all while only traveling on average three days a month. He has worked with teams spanning the globe, and especially with team members and groups of teams who are in different locations. His techniques and perspective can be applied to anyone who needs to manage remote teams, travel less, or just spend a day-a-week telecommuting to save time and gasoline. In this lively, interactive and humorous presentation, Bob presents the system that he uses to work with individuals and teams around the globe. He works with the audience to apply it to several real challenges from the audience.

Outline:

• Audience survey
  • Your role in “remote” situations
  • Your challenges
• The benefits of working remotely
  • Business benefits
  • Process benefits
• The challenges of working remotely
  • Bonding
  • Communication
    • Hallway conversations – impossible or imbalanced
    • Loss of body communication
    • Collaboration
    • Discussion
    • Visual presentations
• The Machine
  • The process system attributes
  • Teams
  • Roles
  • Interfaces
  • Operations
  • Communication
  • Planning
  • Visibility
  • Escalation
• Machine Builder & Operator Role
• How to build The Machine when it isn't your formal role
• When to travel
• Solving the audience's challenges

Learning Objectives:

• Thinking differently about “geographically diverse” teams
• How to build a system to help teams operate successfully over long distances
• What to do if you are not formally in charge of a needed system.
• How to run the system from any location and position
• How to minimize travel and maximize its benefits

Biography:

Bob Reed (BSEE 1988 Oregon State University; MSCE 1989 Stanford) is the expert at Synopsys in Product Lifecycle Management. Synopsys develops software tools in the Electronic Design Automation industry to help its customers, such as IBM, Intel and HP, design and verify complex integrated circuits.

Bob started his career at Intel as a microprocessor applications engineer. When he moved to Synopsys 12 years ago, it was just growing out of startup. Bob became much more fascinated with how to design and build great teams and organizations rather than designing and building hardware and software. Bob has spent the last eight years of his career working at all levels of Synopsys in implementing everything from Strategic Planning to how software programmers integrate their code. He has worked on organizing teams, developing processes, training…with team members from all functional groups, such as Marketing, applications engineering, support and R&D.

Although Synopsys has grown considerably, it still retains a very dynamic, fast-paced, and consensus-driven culture. Meanwhile, Bob has worked with very little formal authority, so he has developed many skills and techniques that create amazing results in the teams and business units he's helped. Even more amazing is that he has worked “out of his home” for the past six years so that his children could grow up near their grandparents. With about three days a month of travel, he's produced dramatic changes in organizations from across the US to India , China and Europe.

Challenges in CMM/CMMI Implementation – An Experience Sharing 
Raghavan M
General Manager and Head-Quality
Aztec Software and Technology Services Limited

Introduction:

To start with, most of the work that was being carried out offshore was Application Development (and Maintenance) where the full-gamut of the entire Application Project execution used to be owned by the Service Provider. The Execution Model more or less looked as depicted below.

Of late, we have seen a new trend wherein:

• Offshore Dedicated and Distributed Development centers are a reality
• Offshore Team is considered as an extended arm of the Customer
• Agile Development Practices are gaining prominence
• Agile is wrongly defined as “no processes”
• Agile implies co-located teams and hence, “no offshore”

The new execution Model depicted below:

We, at Aztec Software and Technology Services Ltd., have lived through this changing scenario, over the years. As we align our Software Execution Processes through the Industry Standard SEI-CMMi Model, since, the model looks at the Project execution in a manner more similar to the model depicted in Figure 1. Since, in reality, the project execution model is more similar to the one depicted in Figure 2, the scope for interpretations of CMMi advocated practices are much higher than ever. The assessments also have to be sensitive to this and make adjustments accordingly.

This presentation discusses the challenges we face (due to the change in execution model) in detail and explains how we solved them.

Outline:

• Introduction
• Traditional Model of Offshore Project execution
• Recent Trend and Execution Model in Offshore Project
• Challenges in
• Software Lifecycle, Estimation and Project Planning
• Software Requirements Phase
• Architecture and Design
• Implementation
• Reviews
• Verification and Validation
• Acceptance Testing
• Measurements and Metrics
• Closing Remarks

Learning Objectives:

• The new scenario and execution Model is here to stay; will become much more pronounced as “offshoring” and “outsourcing” becomes the norm in the Software Industry
• Scope for interpretations during assessments is much higher than before
• Future assessments and Audits must be sensitive to the changing scenarios
• This might even trigger bigger changes in interpretations and may be, even in the Model.

Biography:

Raghavan heads the Quality Function and is responsible for all Process related initiatives at Aztec. He has about 17 years of experience in software industry, of which about 5 years have been in Product Testing, 8 years have been in technical project management and 4 years in Process Quality . He has been associated with Aztec since August 2000, and has managed several projects involving Database, Java/J2EE and C/C++ technologies.

Prior to joining Aztec, Raghavan was associated with IBM Global Services India. There, he was instrumental in the development e-business practices. Over a period of 7+ years, Raghavan performed varied roles at IBM including Project Manager, Development Leads, Test Lead and also, had a 3.5 years long stint with various product groups at IBM Boca Raton, Austin and Raleigh. Most recently, as Program Manager, Raghavan was responsible for managing multiple projects in the e-business area and also, as head of e-business competency, including interactions with Global Customers, various IBM Product groups, Services units. Raghavan was also involved in the various Process quality initiatives and was an active member of the Software Engineering Process Group (SEPG). He also served as a member of the SEI CMM Assessment Team, during the Level 5 assessments.

Raghavan also worked with Hewlett Packard India , Indian Space Research Organization and DCM Data Systems for 5 years prior to joining at IBM, where he was involved with product development, product test software development, testing of the onboard Control Software for Indian Satellites.

Raghavan M is well versed in implementing Project Management processes and practices in large projects, Quality processes, models /standards. His strengths include Unix and operating system internals and Testing.

Raghavan holds a Bachelor's degree in Electronics & Communications and a Master's degree in Electrical Engineering from Indian Institute of Technology, New Delhi , India.

Rules of Engagement: Getting Past the Rhetoric to Truly Effective Software Process Improvement 

Kevin Weiss
CEO of The Capability Group & Philip Crosby Associates

Introduction:

Learning Objectives:

In this session, you will learn:·       

• Why a common language is critical for successful process improvement
• The protocols that must be in place before successful improvement begins
• Why supportive management can be worse than no sponsorship at all
• How to continually assess the organizational terrain and align your team for success
• How improvement teams too often sabotage their own success.

As with any change effort, organizational skirmishes will occur and unforeseen issues will arise, but the proper rules of engagement limit their effects and allow your team to ultimately succeed.  By understanding these critical rules, you can focus your energy on winning the few, important battles that lead to successful process improvement.

Biography:

Kevin Weiss is the CEO of The Capability Group and Philip Crosby Associates, firms that help organizations achieve increased profitability and customer loyalty through organizational change and process improvement. He has been at the forefront of improving performance in transaction and service environments, and has consulted for a variety of companies including General Electric, Shimano, Seagate Technologies, American Express , Sony, Oracle and the American Society for Quality.

Prior to founding The Capability Group, Kevin served as a Quality Leader and Master Black Belt at General Electric Power Systems, a US$6 billion manufacturer, installer and servicer of Power Plants and Power Generation Equipment. There he designed and executed a Six Sigma Quality Strategy for a US$140 million global business unit with 300 employees, served on the company's Quality and Information Management Councils, and coached cross-functional teams executing large-scale process improvement projects in the areas of Finance, Human Resources, Engineering, Information Technology, and Risk Management.

Kevin led the first large-scale project to redesign a commercial process using Six Sigma principles at GE Power Systems. He developed the methodology to integrate process and information technology improvements within a single project, and directed a team of 30 full-time people and several hundred part-time members to execute the plan. The project redesigned 77 business processes that spanned 5 geographic sites and 4 functional areas, created direct annual savings of US$25 million, and provided a platform for significant top-line growth.

Kevin completed GE's Financial Management Program and held a number of finance positions at General Electric in both manufacturing and service environments. He also served in the United States Navy's nuclear propulsion program, where he lead an engineering division of a nuclear submarine.

Kevin is a Cum Laude graduate of the University of California , Berkeley with degrees in Economics and Statistics. He is a member of the corporate board of G. Loomis, Inc., a subsidiary of Shimano America Corporation.

Advanced Process Quantification 

Tom Gilb
Independent Consultant

Introduction:

Advanced Process Quantification : 10 Practical Principles for determining your critical-few objectives for process improvement. How to measure, estimate, and evaluate the effects of a process improvement effort for critical stakeholders"

Outline:

• Introduction:
  • You should not seriously tackle your process improvement unless you have stated and agreed your long term improvement objectives quantitatively. Process improvement is the ‘means'. To manage it meaningfully, to sell it to top management, you must develop and present a clear ‘bottom line' verifiable trackable notion of the ‘ends'
  • You not only need to realistically set your ambition levels, but you need to be able to estimate the projected impact on those objectives of your investments in process improvement. You also need to measure quickly and continuously your progress towards those goals
  • Most process improvement programs are not good at any of this. They are therefore doomed from the start to fail and be discredited
  • This talk will show you how to quantify, measure and estimate – and will illustrate with real case studies and examples

Learning Objectives:

• Learn how to quantify any process improvement objective
• Learn how to deal with the critical set of your process improvement objectives: many simultaneous objectives
• See varied examples of process improvement quantification
• Get the basic idea: a process improvement is only as good as the measurable lasting effect it has on your official objectives in practice.

Biography :

Tom Gilb is a freelance consultant, teacher and author serving clients in Europe and the US. His newest textbook, Competitive Engineering: A Handbook For Systems Engineering, Requirements Engineering, and Software Engineering Using Planguage", was published in the US August 2005. He has also written “Principles of Software Engineering Management” (in 20 th printing) and is Principal author of “Software Inspection” (in 13 th Printing). He specializes in software quality design and management. He lives in Norway, when he is not travelling.

He has taught and consulted with Medtronic, Cray Research, United Defense and other companies in Minneapolis. With Ericsson and Nokia in Dallas. Motorola in Austin. His methods are also in use at Hewlett Packard, Intel, GE, IBM, Citigroup, Symbian, Philips Medical Systems, Microsoft, Ericsson, Nokia, DoD and many other companies.

Executive Eye: What does CMMI Level 5 mean for the CIO

 
Venguswamy Ramaswamy
Director of Sales and Delivery for the Global Consulting Practice at Tata Consultancy Services

Introduction:

Capability Maturity Model® Integration (CMMI®) is a process improvement approach that provides organizations with the essential elements of effective processes. It can be used to guide process improvement across a project, a division, or an entire organization. CMMI helps integrate traditionally separate organizational functions, set process improvement goals and priorities, provide guidance for quality processes, and provide a point of reference for appraising current processes. This keynote presentation will present a direct view from the prism of Executive lens.

Learning Objectives/Outline:

The session will focus on the following facets of Enterprise Quality transformation:

As with any change effort, organizational skirmishes will occur and unforeseen issues will arise, but the proper rules of engagement limit their effects and allow your team to ultimately succeed.  By understanding these critical rules, you can focus your energy on winning the few, important battles that lead to successful process improvement.

Biography:

Venguswamy Ramaswamy is the Director of Sales and Delivery for the Global Consulting Practice at TCS. Prior to this role, he was heading the Process Consulting Group at TCS.

As Director of Sales and Delivery Support - Global Consulting, Venguswamy Ramaswamy, has the responsibility to take TCS' consulting offerings including Software Quality Solutions, Six Sigma Solutions and Creativity & Innovation Solutions to the large customer base of TCS. The practice is responsible for defining and developing various process solutions that can be accepted and implemented across different organizations globally.

Swamy spent a significant period of time leading the Six Sigma Program as a Quality Leader for the TCS-GE Relationship, SEEPZ, Mumbai, India. Swamy has been the TCS-GE relationship manager and has been responsible for managing TCS relationship with General Electric.

A certified quality analyst, his focus shifted towards leading the Six Sigma Quality Initiative for the relationship. In this role, he has led a team of Master Black Belts and Six Sigma deployment leaders within the relationship. His other responsibilities were, leading the Center of Excellence initiative and the Digitization efforts of TCS. Swamy holds a Masters in Computer Applications from University of Madras, India .

Process Improvement – An Effective Converged Release Management in Diverged Applications and Environments 
Renuka Devadson
Senior Software Release Engineer
Fidelity Investments

Introduction:

This presentation shares a practical experience of a release engineer. This presentation demonstrates the efficiency and advantages of having a single point release team for an organization. The often neglected code migration from one environment to another can result in unclean, non sync and non-production like environments. This results in loss of testing efficiency and post production defects thereby affecting the project quality. The effect of which when noted is then difficult to restore. The key focus of this presentation is converged release, establishing repeatability, security and metrics for release. Many innovative approaches and shared experience from various leading organization is incorporated to make the single point release management effective. This proven approach is easy to adopt and customize. This effective approach has a range of benefits that impact from a small team to an entire organization.

Outline:

• Insight to Release Management
  • Manage Migration
    • Release of code or Code migration into various environment like multiple test , production, disaster recovery, etc…
    • Support developers, testers and operations by communicating and promoting code in a multi environment scenario.
  • Manage Environments
    • Responsible for environment sync.
    • Works closely with the ‘change management process'
  • Importance
    • Guarantees best environment for testing efficiency
• Process Improvement Motivation
  • Avoid collision or conflicts among and between applications in various environments.
  • Establish repeatability in code migration to multi environments.
  • Automate the communication process.
  • Ensure security.
  • Assess risk in case of back out (uninstall) scenarios.
  • Boost team spirit of Release engineers.
  • Measurement of effectiveness
• Disadvantages of a diverged Release Management
  • Absence of the BIGGER picture
  • Communication gap
  • Application dependencies not governed
  • No consolidated test environment
  • Discovery of problems in production
  • Security Risk
  • Environment sync and stability is at risk
  • Disintegrated code promotion

Learning Objectives:

• Identifying various methodology used for version control Best Practices in Controlling and Releasing Change Change Management Process Best Practices in Naming Parallel Releases
• Identifying Risks in the Application Lifecycle

Biography:

Renuka Devadason is a Senior Release Engineer in EPS (Enterprise Processing Service) of Fidelity Investments. She has over 7 years of diverse software experience that ranges from Development to Project Management including Quality Assurance. Currently her chief work and focus is on Process Improvement and Repeatability of project “Release” into multi environments like production, test, development and disaster recovery. She has implemented solid workflows that ensure repeatability, sanity, integrity and stability of code migration into different environments at various stages of the software life cycle. Her work at Fidelity focuses on building process and methodology for efficient and effective center point quality release management that is applicable across various environments and applications of an organization.

CMM/CMMI Process Improvement and Results - A Global Corporation Perspective 
Ron Weidemann
Division Quality Director
NCR Corporation

Introduction:

The concept is to share our successes and failures of moving from CMM to CMMI. Showing actual results from using CMM and CMMI, both process and product improvements. Will also be sharing how CMM or CMMI can be used with both the Waterfall and Agile development models. I will also share how and what measure we use for all process areas. I have been to conferences to see real measures and actual results only to be disappointed. Attendees to this presentation will go away with real measures and actual results.

Outline:

• Company History with SW/CMM-CMMI
  • Approach and Results
• Why Move to CMMI?
• When to Move to CMMI
• Methodology Used to Migrate
• Problems That Arose
• Choosing the Right Representation of the model
• Current Direction
• Current Accomplishments & Implementation Schedule
• This can work with Agile Development Model
• Process Measure Examples

Learning Objectives:

• I will share actual experiences of being a CMM Level 4 organization moving to CMMI and the successes and problems that arose
• I will discuss whether to use the Staged or Continuous Representation (will give them guidance on how to choose the right one for their organization)
• I will share what we would change if we were to do it over again
• I will show how both the Waterfall and Agile Development models will work with CMM/CMMI
• Will share guidance on whether to include IPPD in your CMMI implementation
• I will show all of the actual metrics we use to monitor our process and products, these have evolved over the past 3 years and will share what we learned

Biography:

Ron has been working with CMM since 1997 and have been an SEI Authorized Lead assessor since 1998. I have conducted over 25 CMM Assessments and 5 CMMI appraisals. I have led several organizations to CMM Level 4 and 5. I am the SEPG/EPG Chairman and have been for company for the past 6 years. I lead all internal process improvements. We have had recent success using CMMI with the Agile Development model.

The Cost of Quality and the Individual Contributor 
Maude Harris
Quality Assurance Analyst
Intuit Inc.

Introduction:

The Cost of Quality is an important measure of success for any company where the human factor is involved in the production of a product. Individual contributors, when aware of the cost of quality, understand the concept as it applies to the broader corporate level or the individual product level. This presentation delivers a foundation that provides understanding for the cost of quality at the individual contributor level. This understanding can improve production, reduce rework and contribute to the work life balance of the individual which can lead to employee engagement. The session provides a qualitative exercise that can assist individual contributors in assessing their personal cost of quality.

Outline:

• The Literal Cost of Quality
  • Costs associated with the Cost of quality
    • Necessary Costs
      • Prevention Costs
      • Inspection Costs
    • Avoidable Costs
      • Inspection Costs
      • Failure Costs
        • Internal Failure Costs
        • External Failure Costs
• The Quality Grid
  • What you do
    • Right Things
      • Right Things Wrong
        • examples
      • Right Things Right
        • examples
    • Wrong Things
      • Wrong Things Wrong
        • examples
      • Wrong Things Right
        • examples
  • How you do it
    • Things Done Right
      • examples
    • Things Done Wrong
      • examples
• Estimating Your Cost of Quality
  • Example of take away exercise for individual contributors
    • Quality Grid
      • How you do it
      • What you do
• Employee Engagement, why understanding the Cost of Quality creates Engagement
  • What values does a company assume to assure Employee Engagement.
  • How does an employee know she is engaged
  • The significant link between employee engagement, customer loyalty, and profitability
  • Responsibility of the individual contributor to assure personal quality
• Why We Must Focus on the Cost of Quality
  • Statistical Information
  • Ideas and focus to take back to individual contributors
• Take Away Questions/Advice for Individual Contributors

Learning Objectives:

• The importance of the frontline employees grasp on the reality of the Cost of Quality and how it applies directly to their job functions.
• Notice traits of engagement in front line employees.
• Help create engaged employees.
• A take away exercise that shows employees at any level their personal Cost of Quality, which leads to personal changes facilitating improvement.
• The ability to see traits of engagement in front line employees.
• Reminders of how important your employees are exercises and methods you can use to remind them and yourself of this fact

Biography:

Maude Harris is a Quality Assurance Analyst for Intuit Inc. Is currently a member of Intuits corporate Test Management Working Group. She has initiated and collaborated on many of the Process Improvement initiatives currently implemented. Involvement in the implementation of the processes below has created an understanding of the importance of process socialization. Processes involved in include but are not limited to, creation, roll out and training of new software production life cycle, Requirement Traceability Schema, Enterprise E2E test process improvement effort, Software Testing Terminology, Document Template definition and roll out. From her observations the Author recognizes the importance of understanding process changes by the front line employees. This understanding can lead to realization of self-worth, personal goal completion, understanding management's goals, and company goals which can create employee engagement. Maude Harris has presented at Intuit Inc Technical Forum, Create the Offering 2005. She has received a Best Business Practices/Organizational Excellence certification from SDSU 2005.

Comparative Study of Internal and External Assessments 
Sreehsa Sanne & Vinayak Guttal
Consultant & Sr. Quality Analyst
Satyam Computer Services Ltd.

Introduction:

Quality Assessments are done to check the health of an organization and to identify improvement opportunities in their quality journey. These assessments can be done either externally or internally based on the objectives and business needs of the organization. Information available on internal assessment as compared to external assessment is limited. In this paper we provide a set of guidelines and prerequisites for selecting an appropriate assessment and also highlight pros and cons associated with them. An attempt is made to compare internal with external assessment with respect to time, cost and schedule. Outcome of an internal assessment can always be questioned due to the fact that they are conducted informally. Results of internal assessments can be biased and manipulated as compared to external assessments. The results of internal assessments may not provide a complete and true picture as compared to external assessment. External assessments can be expensive. Internal assessments can be very good tool if used with clear objectives of process improvement and management support. Organizations need to invest in internal/external assessments wisely so that their objectives are achieved. This paper will provide you an unbiased comparison, so that decision process can be improved. From the study and experience, authors felt that a combination of external and internal assessment can yield better results. These observations are purely based on authors' experience and exposure in this subject area.

Outline:

• Basics of Assessments
• Need of Assessments
• Management commitment
• Criteria for selection
• Unbiased comparative study of Self(Internal) assessment and External assessment
• Advantages and Disadvantages
• Conclusion

Learning Objectives:

The audience will be able to understand and appreciate:

• Internal and external assessment
• Benefits and drawbacks
• Selection of assessments
• Decision making process

Biography:

Sreesha Sanne is a Consultant of the Software Process Consulting Team at Satyam Computer Services, USA, (an SEI CMM & CMMI level 5 Company) with over 15 years of experience in Manufacturing / S/w development and Software Quality Management. In his ISO 9000/ CMM / CMMI and other Quality consulting assignments for US, UK and European clients, Sanne has played a key role completing end to end projects in ISO 9000 and CMM / CMMI. Process Definition and Process Integration / automation and Metrics Implementation are prime areas of interest. Sanne was responsible to successfully and repeatedly get organizations certified under ISO series. Sanne has a Masters in Technology and engineering and worked as Lead auditor. As a Certified Project Management Professional (PMP), completed 5 projects on time and cost. Also developed expertise in Function points, RUP / Rational suite of products, Six Sigma and TQM. Sanne has published papers in International and National Conferences.

Software:

• A statistical approach for comparing Tick IT and CMM – Part –1, Published in British computer society-Jan-2004.
• W-Model, Guidelines for Embedded Process – Presented in international SEPG conference – QAI- 2002 .
• Non-software : Six papers were published in different national and international papers.

Vinayak Guttal is a Sr. Quality Analyst of the Software Process Consulting Team(QPRIME) at Satyam Computer Services, USA, (an SEI CMM & CMMI level 5 Company) with 8 years of experience in Software design, development, testing and Software Quality Management. In his ISO 9000/ CMM / CMMI and other Quality consulting assignments for US and Indian clients, he played a key role in implementing these models in the various organizations. He guided organization for their non model based process improvement journey. He also has extensively worked in area of testing, measurement, software configuration management.

He holds a bachelor degree in Engineering. He is Certified Software Quality Analyst (CSQA), Brianbench certified Software quality Assurance and certified Internal Quality Auditor. He also has expertise in various software development models like SSAD, OOAD and trained in RUP. Vinayak has contributed in

• “A statistical approach for comparing Tick IT and CMM” published in British computer society in Jan-2004

A Communications-Driven Approach to Implementing the CMMI 
Shawn Presson
Director of Organizational Practice
Apogen Services, LLC

Introduction:

We use the phrase “form follows function” to drive design for manufacturing, architecture, and most other projects. This gets lost, however, when many organizations try to interpret the CMMI. The “form” of the improvement efforts tend to be that of documentation projects, and the “function” of increased visibility and communication often are forgotten. This presentation will cover fundamental concepts of communication loops, and will discuss how components of the CMMI directly relate to components of communication. Specific examples will be given of how organizations have successfully avoided the documentation trap to make the CMMI support business goals.

Outline:

• Components of Communication Loops
  • sender/recipient: “ping”-acknowledge
  • encoding-decoding: message
  • processing
  • encoding-decoding: response
  • feedback processing
  • medium and noise
• Evolutions of Communication media through history
  • Impacts of language
  • Impacts of technology
  • Impact of modern communication behaviors by ancient habits
  • Still-useful practices
  • Outdated practices
• Relationships of CMMI components to communication components
  • Generic Practices
  • Specific Practices
  • Helpful/hampering real-world examples for each practice drawn from industry experiences
  • Accurate and misleading uses of the word “communication” in the CMMI
• Interpreting CMMI components when developing organizational process assets
  • Architectural considerations
  • Timeline considerations

Learning Objectives:

• Attendees will be exposed to fundamental elements of communication, and will be challenged to re-think activities that often get labeled as “communication”
• Attendees will become aware of common practices that obscure rather than support communication of practices
• Attendees will become aware of innovative ways of thinking about fulfilling principles within the CMMI
• Attendees will be challenged to rethink architectural and content assumptions about process assets
• Attendees will be challenged to reassess schedule and business drivers for process improvement
• Attendees from the acquisition community will obtain a broader understanding of the behavioral and cultural indicators of process maturity than the typical document-driven view

Biography:

Shawn Presson's background encompasses project management, process improvement consulting, and internal process improvement. Over a decade of software engineering combined with seven years evaluating and consulting systems development companies has provided him a firm understanding of the issues involved with custom software development. He has performed training and hands-on process improvement within organizations from various domains, including DoD/government, aerospace, pharmaceuticals, microprocessors, banking, commercial software consulting, networking, transportation systems, and document imaging. Having served as PPQA Lead and SEPG Chair, Mr. Presson fully understands the real-world challenges in mapping process improvement efforts to organizational needs. His experience evaluating organizations using the Software Engineering Institute's (SEI) Software Capability Evaluation (SCE) methodology has given him clear insight into how companies attempt the implementation of models such as CMMI and SW-CMM, and in-depth insight into common causes of success and failure. As an authorized instructor of the SEI's Introduction to CMM Integrated (CMMI) course, he has a strong appreciation for the challenges in communicating model-based process improvement concepts. Mr. Presson is a candidate Lead Appraiser under the SEI's SCAMPI methodology. His primary goals in training, appraisal, and consulting is to help organizations tie process improvement goals directly to financial, mission, and other business goals. His approach emphasizes flexibility in process definitions that enable organizations to add assets based on CMMI, SW-CMM, ISO, IEEE, PMBOK, ITIL, and other industry guidance with minimal rework and disruption.

Leverage Earned Value Management with Function Point Analysis 
Ian Brown, CFPS
Senior Associate
Booz Allen Hamilton

Introduction:

In the Earned Value Management (EVM) approach, as work is performed, it is ''earned'' on the same basis it was planned - both the original plan and agreed to changes. Today more and more software projects are using this approach. Function Point Analysis has been shown to be a reliable method for measuring the size of computer software based on detailed requirements and specifications. Function points can be leveraged throughout the EVM process to establish cost and schedule baselines, control project scope over the life cycle, and quantitatively assess percent complete. This presentation provides an oversight of EVM concepts of as applied to software development and the key conditions necessary to profitably employ this management technology. The presentation also demonstrates how companies can use function point analysis to improve the information provided by the approach.

Outline:

• Purpose
• Earned Value Management (EVM) Overview
• Function Point Analysis (FPA) Overview
• Applying FPA to EVM complimentary suit

Learning Objectives:

• Gain an understanding of Earned Value Management and how it differs from traditional project management
• Identify three key requirements for successful EVM
• Gain a high level understanding of function point analysis concepts and the benefits of FPA
• Learn how function points can be applied to support the EVM approach and how FPA can help meet the three key requirements

Biography:

Ian Brown, a senior associate with Booz Allen Hamilton, leads the firm's Quantitative Software Analysis capability. He has 8 years of experience in software measurement and analysis, CMM/CMMI, and goal-question-metric (GQM) implementation. Ian was elected to the Board of Directors of the International Function Point Users Group (IFPUG) in 2004 and serves as the Secretary and Director of Communications and Marketing. He has presented at several software conferences, including the Better Software Conference & Expo, the IFPUG Annual Conference, and the Practical Software Quality and Test Conference. Ian is a Certified Function Point Specialist (CFPS) and has earned a bachelors degree from Cornell University and a master degree in public policy from Harvard University. He has worked closely with the firm's Earned Value Management (EVM) capability to integrate software measurement concepts with EVM and is currently implementing the approach on a large maintenance and enhancement task at the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.

Support the CMMI Initiatives with Well Designed Measurement Constructs 
Agnes E. Nanu
Associate
Booz Allen Hamilton

Introduction:

If you ever found yourself being overwhelmed by the idea of measurement, this is the session for you. Very often we face the question: what evidence do we have that measures are collected and analyzed in a consistent, and repeatable way? Too often, when people are measuring, they don't use the same processes and procedures. In other words, every time when we don't specify how the measures are collected, and analyzed, we leave room for assumptions and interpretations, and such, for errors in our analysis. The fundamental basis for process improvement is to have accurate, and reliable measures. The measurement construct is a simple but very powerful concept that addresses this problem.

Outline/Learning Objectives:

The use of well designed measurement constructs allows us to have more accurate, reliable measures, which are essential for dependable, and repeatable processes, and as such, fundamental for process improvement.

• Learn how to implement the PSM key concepts and procedures
• Learn how to determine what we need to measure versus what we can measure
• Establish key components of a measurement construct according to each type of measure identified (base measure, derived measure, and indicator)
• Identify issues and challenges related to the measurement constructs
• Learn how to make the measurement constructs part of the measurement and analysis process

Biography:

Mrs. Nanu is an Associate with the Economic and Business Analysis Team of Booz Allen Hamilton. She has a Master in Business Administration from the University of New Orleans, Louisiana, and a Master in Science in Electronics and Telecommunications, from the Polytechnic Institute, Bucharest , Romania .

Ms. Nanu has over 20 years of professional experience in strategic planning, market analysis, contract negotiation, software cost estimation, measurement, performance management, and process improvement. Her other areas of expertise include CMMI, Practical Software Measurement (PSM), and Function Point Analysis (FPA).

“PROSO - Project Schedule Optimization” Model using Empirical Methods: Breakthrough in Stakeholders' Expectation Management 
Anoop Kumar
Program Manager (SEPG)
Infosys Technologies Limited

Introduction:

Time overrun and inability to fulfill stakeholders' expectations are the two most chronic problems in software development. Recent benchmarking studies by Capers Jones indicate that only 66% MIS projects are completed on time. One of the root causes for this phenomenon is improper schedule estimation. Typically, schedule estimation is done using Empirical Models available in public domain such as COCOMO, COCOMO II etc, which describe the relationships between effort and elapsed time. However, these models do require refinement to address organization specific scenarios and capabilities. Apart from that, the impact of team size on elapsed time often remains unaddressed. Besides, these models do not provide “what-if” capability to the decision makers when confronted with stakeholders demand to shorten the project time lines.

This paper explores various existing models and establishes the empirical relationship among effort, team size and elapsed time to ensure Project Schedule Optimization (PROSO) using actual performance of the recently completed projects. Over 500, high-maturity (CMMI Level 5) development projects performance has been analyzed to create this model. Stakeholders do look out for crunching optimal elapsed time. PROSO further allows decision makers to analyze the impact of schedule crunch on various product and process quality metrics e.g. Overall Defect Removal Effectiveness, Defect Density, Effort Overrun, Field Defect Density etc. This powerful capability allows the project team to set realistic expectations and take a balanced view of project's expected performance.

Comparison has been made with the industry-best schedule estimation models and it has been found that PROSO is much more precise and accurate than so far published models for the organization specific requirements. This has been extensively deployed to facilitate improved estimation and validation of the time schedule, thereby creating immense business value.

This study reinforces the fact that estimation models using organizations' own data provides much better insights into schedule estimation issues. Team size apart from effort is found to be the two most important factors impacting elapsed time, which are factored in PROSO. In addition to that, PROSO simulates the project performance for different extent of schedule crunch. It has proved to be a strong tool in the hand of project managers and other decision makers to effectively negotiate with the stakeholders and set realistic expectations.

Use of PROSO has resulted into improved on-time delivery of projects (up from 88% to 92%). This has enabled decision makers to predict the adverse impact of schedule crunch. For instance, crunching optimal schedule by over 20% leads to approximately 4 times higher Field Defect Density than the normal levels.

Outline:

• Importance of schedule estimation
• Trade-offs in project scheduling
• Organizational environment
• Comparison of available schedule estimation models
• Structured approach for empirical model building by examining the key factors impacting elapsed time
• Model building through multiple regression analysis, validation and comparison of results using a large number (over 500) of high process maturity projects (CMMI Level 5)
• Impact of schedule crunch on key result metrics
• Implementation experience and road ahead
• Business Results

Learning Objectives:

• Comparative analysis of known schedule estimation models
• Key factors impacting project schedule estimation
• Relationship among team size, effort and elapsed time
• Impact of schedule crunch on Overall Defect Removal Effectiveness, Defect Density, Effort Overrun, Field Defect Density in quantitative terms

Biography:

Anoop Kumar is working as Program Manager – Software Engineering Process Group (SEPG) from May 2000 at Infosys Technologies Limited, a CMM/CMMI Level 5 company, headquartered at Bangalore , India . He is primarily responsible for bringing out continuous improvement in Software Project Management and Estimation processes by systematically analyzing quality and process performance results. His other key responsibilities include improving organization-wide metrics & measurement program, implementing large change management initiatives across the organization, benchmarking, and imparting training on application of the statistical techniques for quantitative project management.

He has introduced several new practices in the area of measurement to improve software process capabilities. These practices were presented in the SEPG Asia Pacific Conference, held in 2002 at Bangalore , India and were adjudged as the Best Practices. Besides, he has come up with many decision-making models by analyzing the correlation among different software metrics for estimation, project monitoring and control. These have resulted into significant reduction in effort overrun, defect injection rate and improvement in schedule adherence.

While reviewing projects estimated elapsed time, it was observed by the authors that typically, schedule estimation is done using empirical models available in public domain such as COCOMO, COCOMO II etc. Careful analysis of the performance of the completed projects clearly indicates that organization-specific models could serve this purpose better. Besides, these models do not clearly address the impact of team size on elapsed time. Apart from that, they have not established quantitative relationship between the extent of schedule crunch and projects' expected performance. Whereas, decision makers when confronted with stakeholders demand to shorten the project time lines due to business considerations. These have been the key motivation for coming up with Project Schedule Optimization (PROSO) model.

Anoop has in-depth experience in using various Quality Management models /techniques like ISO 9000, MBNQA, CMM / CMMI and Six Sigma. He has consulted several Fortune 500 companies in the areas of estimation, quantitative project management, setting up of measurement program etc.

Prior to joining Infosys, he has worked in Tata Steel, the most cost-effective producer of steel in the world, from February 1992 till April 2000 in the areas of statistical process control, process benchmarking, implementation & audit of ISO 9000 quality systems, operations research and facilitation of company wide quality improvement programs. He is a graduate in Metallurgical Engineering with Post-Graduate Diploma in Industrial Engineering.

Steering Agility: Detecting, Understanding and Correcting Agile Process "Smells" 
Wayne Allen
Consultant

Introduction:

Agile methodologies are just as prone to mistakes, deviations and subversion as any other methodology. Learn about ways to identify these process "smells" so that corrective action can be taken. Just because you are using one of the agile software development methodologies (XP, Scrum, FDD, DSDM, etc) doesn't mean you won't run into trouble because of lack of knowledge, good intentions, old habits or plain old subversion.

Join us for an interactive discussion about some common ways that agile projects get off track, factors that lead to the situation, evaluating the situation in relation to agile principles and practices and whether corrective action should be taken.

Outline:

• Introduction
• Solution Stories
• Specialists
• Estimation Problems
• Lack of Testing
• Customer can't/won't Steer
• Audience Supplied "Smells"

Learning Objectives:

• Recognize common agile problems
• How to evaluate problems in relation to agile principles
• How to work with teams to change behavior

Biography:

Wayne Allen has been consulting/coaching organizations on adopting agile methods since 2000. Starting in 2002 he began specializing on the areas outside the core of agile development, namely product management, quality assurance, interface/interaction design, documentation and project management.

Mission Assurance in the Operational Environment – A Case Study 
Ronda R. Henning
Senior Scientist
Harris Corporation

Introduction:

The modernization of a critical infrastructure is a daunting task. When the system is a national critical infrastructure, it comes under additional scrutiny. Especially when the system migrates from a dedicated network to a service based architecture. In these circumstances, continuous deliveries of assured services are required for a successful implementation. This presentation examines the legacy network and contrasts the existing network assurance capabilities with the evolving services-based assurance architecture. The requirements as specified during the acquisition are examined, and lessons learned during requirement validation are presented. From this assurance foundation, the operational assurance and system certification approach are presented. The integration of verification, configuration management, operational procedures, and contingency management are discussed, and the rationale for assurance trade-offs presented. Finally, the evidence that the operational assurance techniques are functioning as required is presented in the case study of four hurricanes and their impacts on mission operation.

Outline:

• Introduction -- the existing network
  • how it was created
  • how it was tested
  • “don't fix it, it's not broken”
• Evolving to Services
  • Why move to services
  • How services are characterized
  • The implications for assurance
• Assurance mechanisms applied
  • Security Perimeter
  • Change Management
  • Configuration Management
  • Contingency Management
  • Policies, Procedures, Software Development
  • Verification
• Making it all function together – the final steps
  • The independent audit process
  • Training the team
• Test under Fire
  • Hurricanes Frances, Jeanne, Charlie, Ivan

Learning Objectives:

At the end of this presentation the audience will:

• Understand that, even if the legacy system is being discarded, it must be understood
• Have a good understanding of which development disciplines impact mission assurance
• Understand the tools and techniques used to implement mission assurance in an interdisciplinary environment
• Be capable of validating mission assurance claims
• Be an informed consumer of assurance services.

Biography:

Ronda R. Henning is a Senior Scientist at Harris Corporation, Government Communications Systems Division; a Melbourne, Florida based international communications company. Ms. Henning is the Network Security Manager for the FAA Telecommunication Infrastructure (FTI) Program, a $1.7- Billion dollar network infrastructure modernization of the National Air Space communications networks. In this assignment, she has been responsible for the security architecture, security operations management, and security certification of the replacement system. The network evolves the FAA from a point-to-point ad hoc network to a communications services oriented architecture. Prior to this assignment, she led the Harris Information Assurance center of excellence in the definition of security architectures for the National Crime Information Center modernization (NCIC 2000) and the Eastern Test Range Modernization Program for the U.S. Air Force.. Ms. Henning also served as principal investigator on the Network Vulnerability Visualization Architecture (NVVA) program, and the Integrated Design Environment for Assurance (IDEA) program. Prior to her employment at Harris, Ms. Henning worked in information security research and development at the National Security Agency, specializing in multilevel database management architectures and applications. She is a Certified Information Systems Security Professional (CISSP), Information System Security Engineering Professional (ISSEP), Information System Security Management Professional (ISSMP), and a Certified Information Security Manager (CISM). Ms. Henning holds an M.B.A. from the Florida Institute of Technology, an M.S. in Computer Science from Johns Hopkins University, and a B.A. from the University of Pittsburgh.

Roadmap for Effective Implementation Of CMMI 
Diane M. Burwick
CEO/Principal Consultant
Business Process Solutions

Introduction:

In the year 1513, Machiavelli said, “Let it be noted that there is no more delicate matter to take in hand, nor more dangerous to conduct, nor more doubtful in its success, than to set up as a leader in the introduction of changes.” In most cases, this still holds true today. If your organization is having difficulty implementing Level 2 and/or Level 3 of the Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI), it is probably due, at least in part, to the method or techniques being used to affect the change. To those who have become frustrated along the way or are just beginning the journey, this session will provide a roadmap to help you. Rather than theory, this seminar will provide practical guidance and instruction on the high-level steps for the complete lifecycle of process improvement, from "how to get started" to "a successful appraisal." The session will focus on the two following learning objectives: 1) learn how to overcome resistance to change and other typical obstacles to process improvement, and 2) understand the elements of the major steps for effective implementation.

Outline/Learning Objectives:

• Brief Introduction to CMMI
  • Overview of the model
  • Maturity Levels for Rating based on Staged Representation
  • Process Areas (PAs) within each Level (or using Continuous Representation)
• Roadmap for Implementation
  • How to Get Started
    • Document an Initial Strategic Plan
    • Perform Gap Analysis
    • Update Strategic Plan and Create Charter
    • Develop a Tactical Plan
  • Everybody Plays, Everybody Wins
    • Identify resources
    • Create roster
    • Provide orientation to resources
  • Organizational Implementation
    • 10 Basic Steps
    • Kickoff Meeting and Overview Training
    • Building the Infrastructure
      • Formation and Startup of EPG
      • Baseline PA Handbooks (or Process Manuals) and Standard Operating Procedure
      • Formation and Start-up of a Quality Management Board (QMB) or Management Steering Committee (MSC)
    • Baseline Project Management Plans
    • Implementation on Projects
    • Putting It All Together - Approach Based on IDEAL lifecycle
    • A Successful Appraisal

Biography:

Diane M. Burwick - CEO/Principal Consultant of Business Process Solutions, an education and consulting services organization that provides assistance with process improvement using the CMM or CMMI model. Ms. Burwick is also President of parent-corporation Business & Personal Solutions, Inc. and author of the popular book “How To Implement the CMM,” first and second editions. Prior to 1996, Ms. Burwick provided consulting to some of the largest defense contractors in the D.C. area, and worked for two years at CPI/MicroAge as a Technical Account Manager where she provided consultation and professional services to local government, large school districts, and universities. During 1996-1998, in her position within the defense services sector of a large IT company, she was tasked with training and implementation to ensure CMM compliance. During 1998 and 1999, as CMM Lead of the Mentor-Protégé Program, Ms. Burwick led entire companies through the lifecycle of process improvement using application development processes in accordance with the CMM. She developed and/or customized best practices for individual projects and instructed project managers in their use.

Since then, Ms. Burwick has provided training and performed consulting for many commercial businesses and government agencies on all of the CMM or CMMI Level 2 and 3 Process Areas. She is widely regarded as a CMM Subject Matter Expert and is an entertaining and informative speaker. In 2002, Ms. Burwick developed a small set of streamlined procedures to ensure thorough and effective (yet practical) risk identification, assessment, and management. This program for Risk Management was rated as a best practice in two formal CMM-Based Assessments in 2002! Ms. Burwick has also developed other industry best practices in the areas of Time Tracking and Project Estimation.

A Case Study in Globally-Distributed Lean Software Development 
Jerry Bernsten
Senior Technical Manager
Honeywell Aerospace Software CoE

Introduction:

The Honeywell Aerospace Engineering Software Center of Excellence (SWCOE) is responsible for the definition and deployment of software development processes and software productivity improvements across the Honeywell Aerospace engineering organization. The Honeywell SWCOE has identified the application of lean principles as a means to achieve the desired improvements. To identify and prioritize projects – for improving productivity, reducing cycle time, and eliminating waste – the SWCOE conducts lean assessments of software development projects using the Honeywell Velocity Product Development™ (VPD™) method. This presentation will discuss the VPD™ assessment method and resulting improvement projects, the application of iterative development methods to this globally-distributed development project, and the results.

Outline:

• Introduction
• SWCOE in Honeywell Aerospace
• Honeywell and Six Sigma and Lean: VPD™
• Honeywell VPD™
• Case for Change
• Assessment Methods
• CMMI
• VPD™
• Selected Approach
• Baseline process and tools
• Current State : Value Stream Mapping
• Undesirable Observations
• Lean C&E Matrix
• Reality Tree
• Leverage Points
• Future State
• Results: Improvement Projects
• The Iterative Development Project
• Background
• Planned Approach
• Iteration Value Stream
• Iteration Planning
• Actual Iteration Performance
• Iteration Evaluation
• Summary

Learning Objectives:

• Discuss a methodology for applying lean principles to product development.
• Demonstrate the lean product development methodology in an application to a software project.
• Demonstrate an application of Rational Unified Process and its quantitative results.
• Demonstrate simple metrics for measuring project success.
• Describe an approach for planning and evaluating iterations between globally-distributed sites.

Biography:

Jerry Berntsen holds Honeywell Six Sigma certifications for both Black Belt and Lean Expert. He has worked in the field of software development for 25 years. In the last five years he has been applying Six Sigma to software development. Jerry used the project described in this presentation to obtain his lean certification.

Jack Janelle holds a Honeywell Lean Expert Certification. He has worked for 27 years in the field of avionics software and systems, with 18 years at Honeywell. He has focused on software process improvement for the last 10 years, most recently applying lean principles to software development.

Dan Houston has worked in the field of software development for 18 years. He received his doctorate in industrial engineering at Arizona State University with research on simulation of software development processes. He is a Honeywell Six Sigma Black Belt and currently works as an internal consultant supporting the quantitative management of Honeywell software development teams.

One NASA: Sharing Knowledge through an Agency-wide Process Asset Library (PAL) 
Baraka J. Truss (Author/Presenter)
Grey Settle (Author)
Project Lead
NASA, Marshall Space Flight Center

Introduction:

This presentation will cover the key purpose and components behind implementing the NASA PAL website. This presentation will present the current results, describing the process used to create the website, the current usage measure, and will demonstrate how NASA is truly becoming ONE. The target audience for the presentation includes those currently implementing the CMMI model and looking for PAL adoption techniques.

Outline:

• Agency PAL Background
• Website purpose
• Characteristics of the website
• User accounts status
• Website content size
• Usage percentages
• NASA's benefits from PAL
• General Recommendations

Learning Objectives: