Estimating Packaged Software - The first part of a framework
Download as PPTX, PDF2 likes2,210 views
The document outlines the development of a generic framework for estimating the cost of packaged software implementations and maintenance, initiated by the Netherlands Software Metrics Users Association (NESMA). It highlights the absence of a standard framework, the need for a shared estimation methodology, and the introduction of an EPS-framework that accounts for cost drivers specific to each lifecycle stage. Future steps include refining the model, defining cost drivers, and verifying the framework in practical scenarios.
Estimating Packaged Software - The first part of a framework
- 1. The first part of a framework : Implementations NESMA working group “Estimating packaged software”, IWSM - October 2012 18-10-2012 © NESMA 2012; IWSM 2012 1
- 2. About NESMA NEtherlands Software Metrics users Association from 1995; started in 1989 as NEFPUG (NEtherlands Function Point Users Group) Not-for-profit Run by volunteers Vision Improving the predictability of the cost of the delivery and the maintenance of software Making the predictability objective by means of unambiguous measurement data Mission NESMA is the not-for-profit organisation in the area of predictability of the cost of the delivery and the maintenance of software NESMA joins as much as possible existing standards with a different focus than measurement 18-10-2012 © NESMA 2012; IWSM 2012 2
- 3. Estimating packaged software 18-10-2012 © NESMA 2012; IWSM 2012 3
- 4. Introduction Current situation There is no generic and independent framework for estimating the cost of packaged software for both implementation and maintenance Each vendor and implementation partner uses its own proprietary techniques for estimation It’s hard to compare estimates from different sources or to build up benchmark data for public reference Scope of this presentation A generic framework for estimating the realisation stage of packaged software implementations Ambition Iteratively expand the scope of this framework to the total scope of implementation and maintenance and Give insight in how to implement this in an organisation 18-10-2012 © NESMA 2012; IWSM 2012 4
- 5. Scope Implementation of packaged software Blueprint Realization Deployment Maintenance of packaged software Event-driven Planned Run maintenance maintenance 18-10-2012 © NESMA 2012; IWSM 2012 5
- 6. General aspects 18-10-2012 © NESMA 2012; IWSM 2012 6
- 7. Generic architecture model package Project Scope 1. Configuration custom build 6 Standard Industry best practice 2 functionality, geared to the customer by interfaces configuration 4 5 5 5 2. Custom built functionality 1 Organization specific functionality not inside package configuration 3. Implemented modules Core module package (M1) Subset of modules chosen 3 4. External interfaces custom build Interfaces with other applications/data interfaces 5. Internal interfaces Package proprietary interfaces 6. Data Data conversions to use data from existing in/external systems configuration Core module package (M2) 18-10-2012 © NESMA 2012; IWSM 2012 7
- 8. Differences packaged vs bespoke software Aspect Packaged software Bespoke software Functionality overdose exact fit creation of functionality configuration (bulk) and tailor completely bespoke made (missing parts) lifecycle cost usually cheaper mostly more expensive size ability poor: a few aspect methods good: detailed and global (RICEF, CEMLI) (FP’s, Cosmic, UCP, LOC) estimate ability vague (supplier standards, no good: market shared common methods) productivity rates Benchmarking poor: due to size ability good: tooling; benchmark data available cost engineering more complex due to different mostly straightforward element types popularity CxO fast growing only when necessary 18-10-2012 © NESMA 2012; IWSM 2012 8
- 9. Estimating Packaged Software 18-10-2012 © NESMA 2012; IWSM 2012 9
- 10. EPS-Framework Generic cost estimation model for packaged software Implementation Blueprint Realization Deployment Maintenance Run Event-driven maintenance Planned maintenance Two types of cost drivers Size dependent cost drivers Size drivers Productivity drivers Size independent cost drivers Cost drivers are specific for each lifecycle stage 18-10-2012 © NESMA 2012; IWSM 2012 10
- 11. EPS-Framework applied to the realisation stage 18-10-2012 © NESMA 2012; IWSM 2012 11
- 12. Size depedent cost drivers Since... effort(*) = size x productivity where: size = almost linear dependent productivity = logarithmic dependent due to complexity expression ...our model exists of two size dependent cost drivers: size drivers, and productivity drivers (*) effort = effort to realise functionality 18-10-2012 © NESMA 2012; IWSM 2012 12
- 13. Size drivers Size drivers measure the size of the package architecture elements Each size driver can have its own size measure Each size driver has a delivery rate Package architecture elements: 1. Configuration 2. Custom built functionality 3. Implemented modules 4. External interfaces 5. Internal interfaces 6. Data 18-10-2012 © NESMA 2012; IWSM 2012 13
- 14. Size drivers - continued Size drivers measure the size of the package architecture elements This adds up to a combined effort Size dep. driver Size x Delivery rate = Effort 18-10-2012 © NESMA 2012; IWSM 2012 14
- 15. Productivity drivers Cost-drivers that influence the effort are called productivity drivers Productivity drivers are different for each stage The stages for implementation are blueprint, realization and deployment Examples of productivity drivers for the realisation stage are: Number of concurrent users Maturity of the packaged software technology Supplier of the packaged software Required system reliability Percentage of reusable components In formula: Size dep. driver productivity driver x combined effort = total effort 18-10-2012 © NESMA 2012; IWSM 2012 15
- 16. Size independent drivers Cost-drivers that are independent of any type of sizing are called size independent drivers Examples are: Licenses Hardware Data center floor space 18-10-2012 © NESMA 2012; IWSM 2012 16
- 17. The cost estimation model Size dependent Size Driver 1 Size X Delivery Rate = Effort Cost: ... Size Driver n Size X Delivery Rate = Effort Combined Productivity X Drivers Effort Total Effort Size independent Cost Cost Cost: Size independent Size dependent Total Cost 18-10-2012 © NESMA 2012; IWSM 2012 17
- 18. Estimating packaged software 18-10-2012 © NESMA 2012; IWSM 2012 18
- 19. Sizing methods RICEF Reports, Interfaces, Conversions, Enhancements and Forms CEMLI Configurations/Customization, Extensions, Modification, Localization and Integration Configuration Points A Gartner proprietary technique to measure the configuration activities in existing packaged software to realize new functionalities COSMIC An ISO standardized functional sizing method Function Point Analysis An ISO standardized functional size measurement method 18-10-2012 © NESMA 2012; IWSM 2012 19
- 20. Applicability Method Configuration Custom Interfaces Data Modules RICEF Yes, if the Yes, if the Yes, if the Yes, if the No elements are functionality is elements are elements are defined defined defined defined CEMLI Yes, if the Yes, if the Yes, if the Yes, if the No elements are functionality is elements are elements are defined defined defined defined Configuration Yes No Yes Yes No points COSMIC Yes, if the Yes, if the Yes, if the Yes, if a data No functionality is functionality is interface model is defined defined specifications available are defined FPA Yes, if the Yes, if the Yes, only Yes, if a data No functionality is functionality is external model is defined defined interfaces available 18-10-2012 © NESMA 2012; IWSM 2012 20
- 21. Packaged software - Implementation 18-10-2012 © NESMA 2012; IWSM 2012 21
- 22. Summary A first step to define the EPS-framework Currently defined for the realisation stage Model based on cost drivers Complete scope including cost estimation 18-10-2012 © NESMA 2012; IWSM 2012 22
- 23. Next steps Define an independent standard for estimating packaged software Verify the model in practical cases Define cost drivers for implementation and maintenance Refine the model for implementation Enhance the model for maintenance First release EPS-Framework for implementation 18-10-2012 © NESMA 2012; IWSM 2012 23
- 24. Working group members Frank Vogelezang René Nijland Ordina – Proposal Management Center Capgemini – Application outsourcing frank.vogelezang@ordina.nl rene.nijland@capgemini.com Eric van der Vliet John Hommes Logica, now part of CGI – E&M Desk Sogeti Netherlands eric.van.der.vliet@logica.com john.hommes@sogeti.nl Hans Smit Karel van Straaten Atos SNS Reaal hans.smit@atos.net karel.vanstraaten@snsreaal.nl Dirk Vandendaele Peter Bellen Gartner Benelux QSM Europe – Estimation dirk.vandendaele@gartner.com peter.bellen@qsm-europe.com 18-10-2012 © NESMA 2012; IWSM 2012 24
- 25. NESMA NEtherlands Software Metrics users Association www.nesma.nl office@nesma.nl @NesmaNL NESMA-NL 18-10-2012 © NESMA 2012; IWSM 2012 25