Traceability: A Proposal for a Scalable Approach, Agile To Formal
Thomas M. Cagley Jr.
Senior Managing Consultant
David Consulting Group
Introduction:
‘Model based software process improvement' and ‘process discipline' are phrases that can chill the blood of most software engineers at forty feet. Applied incorrectly the trappings of process discipline are viewed as overhead which gets in the way of ‘real work'. The processes that are perceived to be the most offensive to developers are those concentrated on controlling behavior or providing oversight of their work. In many cases the model being used to define the organizational changes acts as lightening rod for criticism. Documents are created for tracking, planning and status reporting, meeting the requirements of the model but at the cost of calendar time and effort and effort. It is the opinion of some that that time and effort is better applied to other tasks. The goal (in the long run) of most process improvements is to facilitate work rather than slowing it down but this often not the perception of those that have to shoulder the effort required to support the processes. When the CMMI® is interjected into the process landscape, traceability becomes one of the lightening rods typically identified in the overhead discussion.
So avoid the lightening rod, right? Easier said than done if an appraisal to the CMMI® model is in your future. Traceability is a core tenant of the requirements management process area within the CMMI®. Why is the effort to create and implement the processes needed to support traceability worth the investment? Simply put traceability allows project personnel to know that what was planned was installed and what was installed was planned at the end of the project AND as the project progresses. In one shape or another, having that knowledge is hard to argue with and in some cases knowing whether a requirement was planned or delivered is an imperative; the problem is that “doing traceability” is not very easy and construed to be expensive when taking someone's word is so much easier.
Even when the traceability is deemed important, the perceived value of traceability depends on the groups involved in gathering and using the data (you get what you put into the process). Some of the burning questions all process engineers must answer as they deploy traceability are:
- Do (assuming they exist) the benefits of tracing accrue to all groups equally?
- Is the effort required to “do traceability” less than the value that will accrue for tracing requirements?
- Can the process be scaled so that all projects and all groups can derive more value than effort?
Traceability is a difficult concept to define a value proposition for all types of projects and an equally difficult concept to sell to all of the stakeholders in the world of projects.
“Traceability: A Proposal for a Scalable Approach, Agile To Formal” suggests an approach to scaling traceability based on balancing user involvement, risk and control needs. This approach provides a means to balance the effort required to trace requirements with the value of doing it. As a side benefit, this approach makes traceability a saleable concept.
Learning Objectives:
Participants will learn an approach to scale traceability requirements that is immediately applicable and eminently tailorable do address specific organization needs. The bottom-line is that participants will learn how to save time, money and address process resistance through disciplined process tailoring. Outline:
- Overview
- Agile versus Plan Driven
- Model Overview
- Model Attributes: Customer Involvement
- Model Attributes: Complexity
- Model Attributes: Criticality
- Using The Model
- Examples
- Summary
Biography:
Mr. Cagley is a Managing Senior Consultant for The David Consulting Group. He is an authority in guiding organizations through the process of integrating software measurement with model-based assessments to yield effective and efficient process improvement programs. Mr. Cagley is a recognized industry expert in the measurement and estimation of software projects. His areas of expertise encompass management experience in methods and metrics, quality integration, quality assurance and the application of the Software Engineering Institute's Capability Maturity Model Integrated ® to achieve process improvements.
His consulting engagements have included clients in software and hardware manufacturing, retail, health services, public utilities, telecommunications, manufacturing, insurance, financial services and government agencies.
Mr. Cagley is a frequent speaker at metrics, quality and project management conferences.
 
|
