Implementation Options and Project Management WECC DEWG EIDE Workshop

Goals Identify available options Describe how to manage each

EIDE implementation options Can implement only certain functions In house, one programmer In house, multiple programmers Contractor/In house split Contractor only Specified as part of larger system Integration of third party EIDE implementation

Which methods? You can limit project scope by identifying compliance with only a few methods. Spec supports this (GetServerInfo). This may drive your method for implementation. Ensure that you can add more in the future

In house/one programmer Management is relatively easy in this case Verbal communications of requirements may be adequate Single programmer is accountable for system working and performing well Ensure system documentation is produced and maintenance is possible

In house/multiple programmers Specification of interfaces is required and system specification may be required Clear responsibilities/accountability for each Separation of testing/development environments Risks are mismatch of interfaces or function

Contractor/In House More difficult to manage Requires specification, acceptance testing Eliminate finger pointing by clearly defining responsibilities Eliminate costs associated with misalignment of timing Set up problem reporting and classification

Contractor only Requires specification document Recommend that customer and contractor produced detailed design together Plan for what happens if contractor goes away and changes are necessary Software ownership is usually negotiable

Specified with EMS/Scheduling System requirements need to be provided Do detailed design with vendor Include upgrade/modifications in maintenance agreement Discuss possibility of user upgrades Timing considerations

What worked and didn’t discussion