© Copyright Richard W. Selby. All rights reserved. 0 Rick Selby Director of Software Products Northrop Grumman Aerospace Systems , Adjunct Professor of Computer Science University of Southern California Lessons Learned for Development and Management of Large-Scale Software Systems
© Copyright Richard W. Selby. All rights reserved. 1 Embedded software for Advanced robotic spacecraft platforms High-bandwidth satellite payloads High-power laser systems Emphasis on both system management and payload software Reusable, reconfigurable software architectures and components Languages: O-O to C to assembly CMMI Level 5 for Software in February 2004; ISO/AS9100; Six Sigma High-reliability, long-life, real-time embedded software systems Organizational Charter Focuses on Embedded Software Products Prometheus / JIMO Software Peer Review Software Development Lab Restricted JWST NPOESS EOS Aqua/Aura Chandra Airborne Laser Software Analysis Software Process Flow for Each Build, with 3-15 Builds per Program GeoLITE AEHFMTHEL
© Copyright Richard W. Selby. All rights reserved. Lessons Learned for Development and Management of Large-Scale Software Systems Early planning People are the largest lever Engage your stakeholders and set expectations Embrace change because change is value Lifecycle and architecture strategy Prioritize features and align resources for high-payoff Develop products incrementally Iteration facilitates efficient learning Reuse drives favorable effort and quality economics Execution Organize to enable parallel activities Invest resources in high return-on-investment activities Automate testing for early and frequent defect detection Create schedule margin by delivering early Decision making Measurement enables visibility Modeling and estimation improve decision making Apply risk management to mitigate risks early 2
© Copyright Richard W. Selby. All rights reserved. Lessons Learned for Development and Management of Large-Scale Software Systems Early planning Lifecycle and architecture strategy Execution Decision making 3
© Copyright Richard W. Selby. All rights reserved. People are the Largest Lever 4 Barry Boehm’s comparisons of actual productivity rates across projects substantiated the COCOMO productivity multiplier factors of 4.18 due to personnel/team capability, etc. Source: B. Boehm, “Improving Software Productivity,” IEEE Computer, Vol. 20, Issue 9, September 1987, pp
© Copyright Richard W. Selby. All rights reserved. Engage Your Stakeholders and Set Expectations 5 Source: B. Boehm, “Critical Success Factors for Schedule Estimation and Improvement,” 26 th International Forum on Systems, Software, and COCOMO Cost Modeling, November 2, 2011.
© Copyright Richard W. Selby. All rights reserved. 6 Embrace Change because Change is Value Criteria for high adoption rate for innovations: Relative advantage – The innovation is technically superior (in terms of cost, functionality, “image”, etc.) than the technology it supersedes. Compatibility – The innovation is compatible with existing values, skills, and work practices of potential adopters. Lack of complexity – The innovation is not relatively difficult to understand and use. Trialability – The innovation can be experimented with on a trial basis without undue effort and expense; it can be implemented incrementally and still provide a net positive benefit. Observability – The results and benefits of the innovation’s use can be easily observed and communicated to others. Source: E. M. Rogers, Diffusion of Innovations, Free Press, New York, 1983.
© Copyright Richard W. Selby. All rights reserved. Lessons Learned for Development and Management of Large-Scale Software Systems Early planning Lifecycle and architecture strategy Execution Decision making 7
© Copyright Richard W. Selby. All rights reserved. 8 Prioritize Features and Align Resources for High- Payoff Synchronize-and-stabilize lifecycle has planning, development, and stabilization phases Planning phase Vision statement – Product and program management use extensive customer input to identify and prioritize product features Specification document – Based on vision statement, program management and development group define feature functionality, architectural issues, and component interdependencies Schedule and feature team formation – Based on specification document, program management coordinates schedule and arranges feature teams that each contain approximately 1 program manager, 3-8 developers, and 3-8 testers (who work in parallel 1:1 with developers) Development phase Program managers coordinate evolution of specification. Developers design, code, and debug. Testers pair up with developers for continuous testing. Subproject I – First 1/3 of features: Most critical features and shared components. Subproject II – Second 1/3 of features. Subproject III – Final 1/3 of features: Least critical features. Stabilization phase Program managers coordinate OEMs and ISVs and monitor customer feedback. Developers perform final debugging and code stabilization. Testers recreate and isolate errors. Internal testing – Thorough testing of complete product within the company. External testing – Thorough testing of complete product outside the company by “beta” sites such as OEMs, ISVs, and end-users. Release preparation – Prepare final release of “golden master” version and documentation for manufacturing.
© Copyright Richard W. Selby. All rights reserved. 9 Develop Products Incrementally Development 6-16 months Synchronize-and- stabilize lifecycle timeline and milestones enable frequent incremental deliveries
© Copyright Richard W. Selby. All rights reserved. 10 Iteration Facilitates Efficient Learning Power Incremental software builds deliver early capabilities and accelerate integration and test Iteration helps refine problem statements, create potential solutions, and elicit feedback
© Copyright Richard W. Selby. All rights reserved. 11 Reuse Drives Favorable Effort and Quality Economics Analyses of component-based software reuse shows favorable trends for decreasing faults Data from 25 NASA systems Overall difference is statistically significant ( <.0001). Number of components (or modules) in each category is: 1629, 205, 300, 820, and 2954, respectively.
© Copyright Richard W. Selby. All rights reserved. Lessons Learned for Development and Management of Large-Scale Software Systems Early planning Lifecycle and architecture strategy Execution Decision making 12
© Copyright Richard W. Selby. All rights reserved. Organize to Enable Parallel Activities 13
© Copyright Richard W. Selby. All rights reserved. 14 TotalAve.Ave. / EKSLOC Reviews25729N/A Prevention cycles 151.7N/A Defects Defects per review N/A15N/A Defects out- of-phase N/A8.1%1.3 Invest Resources in High Return-on-Investment Activities Return-on-investment (ROI) for software peer reviews ranges from 9:1 to 3800:1 per project Return-on-investment (ROI) = Net cost avoidance divided by non-recurring cost 2621 defects, 257 reviews, 9 systems, 1.5 years High ROI drivers Mature and effective processes already in place Significant new scope under development Early lifecycle peer reviews (e.g., requirements phase) Four of the five programs with >80% requirements and design defects had relatively higher ROI Projects
© Copyright Richard W. Selby. All rights reserved. 15 Automate Testing for Early and Frequent Defect Detection Distribution of software defect injection phases based on using peer reviews across 12 system development phases 3418 defects, 731 peer reviews, 14 systems, 2.67 years 49% of defects injected during requirements phase
© Copyright Richard W. Selby. All rights reserved. 16 Create Schedule Margin by Delivering Early Source: “The Network Diagram and Critical Path,” May Legend Critical path Critical path defines the path through the network containing activities with zero slack
© Copyright Richard W. Selby. All rights reserved. Lessons Learned for Development and Management of Large-Scale Software Systems Early planning Lifecycle and architecture strategy Execution Decision making 17
© Copyright Richard W. Selby. All rights reserved. 18 Measurement Enables Visibility Interactive metric dashboards provide framework for visibility, flexibility, integration, and automation Interactive metric dashboards incorporate a variety of information and features to help developers and managers characterize progress, identify outliers, compare alternatives, evaluate risks, and predict outcomes
© Copyright Richard W. Selby. All rights reserved. 19 Modeling and Estimation Improve Decision Making Target: Identify error-prone (top 25%) and effort- prone (top 25%) components 16 large NASA systems 960 configurations Models use metric- driven decision trees and networks Analyses tradeoff prediction consistency versus completeness
© Copyright Richard W. Selby. All rights reserved. 20 SDR Moderate High Low Apply Risk Management to Mitigate Risks Early Last Updated: 03-October-05 CSRR PDR Last Updated: 14-Dec-05 Events CDR TRL 4 TRL 5 TRL 6 TRL 7 Exit/Success Criteria: 1.BM1 complete; customer concurs with approach 2.Software requirements scope estimated (preliminary). 3.Software control board established (preliminary); change control process established. 4.SDP released. Spec tree defined. 5.RTOS lab evaluation completed. Capabilities validated using sim. 6.Software requirements scope estimated (final) 7.System development process flow models implemented. 8.Spacecraft/subsystems/etc. users define use cases (for I/Fs, functions, nominal ops, off-nominal ops, etc.) completed. Validated using models/sim. 9.Finalize IFC1 requirements: Infrastructure SW completed. Validated requirements using models/sim. 10.Baseline allocation of SW requirements to IFCs with growth/correction/deficiency completed. 11.Software control board (final) established 12.SwRR conducted. NASA customer agrees with software requirements. 13.Finalize IFC2 requirements: Inter-module & inter-subsystem I/Fs completed. Validated requirements using models/sim. 14.Initial end-to-end architecture model completed. 15.Finalize IFC3 requirements: Subsystems major functions completed. Validated requirements using models/sim. 16.Finalize IFC4 requirements: Nominal operations completed. Validated requirements using models/sim. 17.Deliver IFC3: Subsystems major functions completed. Validated capabilities using sim. 18.Finalize IFC5 requirements: Subsystems off-nominal operations completed. Validated requirements using models/sim. 19.Finalize IFC5 requirements: Subsystems off-nominal operations completed. Validated requirements using models/sim. 20.Deliver IFC7: No new capabilities; Only system I&T corrections completed. SW complete for 1st mission. Projects define risk mitigation “burn down” charts with specific tasks and exit criteria
© Copyright Richard W. Selby. All rights reserved. Lessons Learned for Development and Management of Large-Scale Software Systems Early planning People are the largest lever Engage your stakeholders and set expectations Embrace change because change is value Lifecycle and architecture strategy Prioritize features and align resources for high-payoff Develop products incrementally Iteration facilitates efficient learning Reuse drives favorable effort and quality economics Execution Organize to enable parallel activities Invest resources in high return-on-investment activities Automate testing for early and frequent defect detection Create schedule margin by delivering early Decision making Measurement enables visibility Modeling and estimation improve decision making Apply risk management to mitigate risks early 21