1. Solving Problems with the BPCH
Mikael Lindvall
Michele Shaw
Forrest Shull
Fraunhofer Center Maryland
Systems and Software
Technology Conference (SSTC) 2005
Salt Lake City, Utah

2. The DoD Acquisition Best Practices Clearinghouse
Useful Information
Active Knowledge Base
A Single Source
For answers about practices, how to apply them, when they are good to use; lessons learned; and risks to avoid
Repository
Primary source for practice information in the DOD and industry, domains include
Acquisition
Software Development
Systems Engineering
Maintains information on practices to help determine “best” practices
Selection
Adoption
Effective Utilization
Applicability and implementation characteristics are analyzed, aggregated, distilled, and vetted by experts
Relies on communities of practice
Living Knowledge
Validated practices
SSTC 2005

3. I’m an acquisition program manager on a project with a tight budget.
One day, the developer wants to cut out inspections saying it’s a waste and takes time from development
I don’t feel that cutting out inspections is a good idea
I would like to base my argumentation on some hard evidence before I meet with the developer
Let’s try Google – it always works
SSTC 2005

4. We will now demonstrate how you can use the BPCh to address this particular problem
SSTC 2005

5. SSTC 2005

6. Inspections
SSTC 2005

7. SSTC 2005

8. It is comforting to know that the collected evidence shows that inspections have a better ROI than testing because my contractor is in favor of testing
SSTC 2005

9. I realize that someone might believe that cutting out inspections could save them time that can be used for development oriented activities. Instead inspections should be seen as an investment. Detecting defects early will save effort later.
SSTC 2005

10. My question now is: Is there any evidence that Inspections will actually save us time and money?
SSTC 2005

11. “Measuring Inspections at Litton” sounds like a study that might provide some real industry data
SSTC 2005

12. SSTC 2005

13. Net Impact on Cost:
During design and coding, about 3% of the total project effort was used for inspection
The net return per inspection range from 64 to 200 person-hours saved per inspection
SSTC 2005

14. Let’s pick another evidence and see if we can get some more information on the return on investment
SSTC 2005

15. “Advances in Software Inspections” is highly rated, let’s pick it
SSTC 2005

16. SSTC 2005

17. Excessive SIZE OF MATERIALS leads to high PREPARATION RATES
Barriers:
Excessive SIZE OF MATERIALS leads to high PREPARATION RATES
High PREPARATION RATES contributes to excessive RATES OF INSPECTION
An excessive RATE OF INSPECTION causes fewer defects to be found
SSTC 2005

18. Net Impact on Cost:
Inspections slightly front-end loads the commitment of resources, adding to requirements and design
Inspections reduce the effort required during testing and for rework of design and code
In each instance, the new uses of inspection were found to improve product quality and to be cost effective, i.e., it saved more than it cost.
SSTC 2005

19. Enablers:
Management must show encouragement for proper inspections. Requiring inspections and then asking for shortcuts will not do.
SSTC 2005

20. I learned from IBM that the process is front-loaded and that the return is somewhat delayed. This is the delay that the developer confuses with lack of results
It is important to keep down the amount of material that is covered by each inspection for inspections to be efficient
Management support is necessary and I realize if I don’t insist on inspections now, the developer will probably never do it again!
SSTC 2005

21. Instead, I will insist on keeping this practice and doing it right
I now can argue that it is not a good idea to cut out inspections and instead move into development.
Instead, I will insist on keeping this practice
and doing it right
I’m now ready to meet the developer and discuss this!
SSTC 2005

22. The User View YOU may be the expert
Demo machines are loaded up with initial content
Follow the scenarios and browse the info
We want your war stories… Feel free to give feedback, disagree, or second the opinions that are there!
We may follow up with you to help insert lessons learned into the next version of the BPCh!
SSTC 2005

23. Fraunhofer Center Maryland
Contact Information
Mikael Lindvall
Fraunhofer Center Maryland
Michele Shaw
Forrest Shull
SSTC 2005