1. asd March 2006 Organization Capability Baseline Summary Report HY1 2005-06 1 Organization Capability Baselines Summary Report HY1 2005-06 March 2006

2. asd March 2006 Organization Capability Baseline Summary Report HY1 2005-06 2 Data Received for Baselines – Distribution of Project Type

3. asd March 2006 Organization Capability Baseline Summary Report HY1 2005-06 3 Cumulative Baselines for all Development Projects Metric Standard Deviation Mean Lower Bound Upper Bound Count Effort Estimation Variance (%)5.61.90.09.896 Schedule Estimation Variance (%)3.10.60.06.1110 Cumulative Defect Removal Efficiency (%)2.399.098.0100.055 Review Efficiency (%)11.390.283.5100.051 Delivered Defect Density (Defects/KLOC)0.70.40.01.647 Cost of Quality (%)14.325.411.143.377 Cost of Poor Quality (%)3.42.30.18.376 Baseline Period Apr-05 to Sept-05

4. asd March 2006 Organization Capability Baseline Summary Report HY1 2005-06 4 Capability Baseline for Development Projects – Effort Variance Downward trend in both Standard Deviation and Mean Mean: 1.0 Lower Bound: 0.0 Upper Bound: 9.8 Upward rise in UB

5. asd March 2006 Organization Capability Baseline Summary Report HY1 2005-06 5 Capability Baseline for Development Projects – Schedule Variance Downward trend in both Standard Deviation and Mean Mean: 0.6 Lower Bound: 0.0 Upper Bound: 6.1 Downward shift in UB

6. asd March 2006 Organization Capability Baseline Summary Report HY1 2005-06 6 Capability Baseline for Development Projects – DDD Upward trend in Standard Deviation while Mean remains constant Mean: 0.4 Lower Bound: 0.0 Upper Bound: 1.6 Upward rise in UB

7. asd March 2006 Organization Capability Baseline Summary Report HY1 2005-06 7 Capability Baseline for Development Projects – CDRE Downward trend in Standard Deviation while Upward trend in Mean Mean: 99.0 Lower Bound: 98.0 Upper Bound:100.0 Upward rise in LB

8. asd March 2006 Organization Capability Baseline Summary Report HY1 2005-06 8 Capability Baseline for Development Projects– RE Downward trend in Standard Deviation while Upward trend in Mean Mean: 90.2 Lower Bound: 83.5 Upper Bound:100.0 Upward rise in LB & UB

9. asd March 2006 Organization Capability Baseline Summary Report HY1 2005-06 9 Capability Baseline for Development Projects – COQ Upward trend in Standard Deviation while downward trend in Mean Mean: 25.4 Lower Bound: 11.1 Upper Bound:43.3 Downward shift in LB

10. asd March 2006 Organization Capability Baseline Summary Report HY1 2005-06 10 Capability Baseline for Development Projects – COPQ Upward trend in Standard Deviation while downward trend in Mean Mean: 2.3 Lower Bound: 0.1 Upper Bound:8.3 Downward shift in LB Upward shift in UB

11. asd March 2006 Organization Capability Baseline Summary Report HY1 2005-06 11 Cumulative Baselines for all Maintenance Projects Baseline Period Apr-05 to Sept-05 Metric Standard Deviation Mean Lower Bound Upper Bound Count Effort Estimation Variance (%)2.81.60.05.9201 Schedule Estimation Variance (%)0.20.020.01.9197 Cumulative Defect Removal Efficiency (%)4.496.992.0100.0178 Review Efficiency (%)4.294.792.0100.063 Delivered Defect Density (Defects/KLOC)0.40.20.01.0123 Pre Release Defect Density (Defects / KLOC)4.24.40.67.442 Cost of Quality (%)8.222.415.133.974 Cost of Poor Quality (%)2.01.70.05.0155 Productivity (LOC/PD) Java / J2EE13.286.973.199.47 AS400 (Lines changed / hr)0.51.10.81.64 C35.046.014.088.011

12. asd March 2006 Organization Capability Baseline Summary Report HY1 2005-06 12 Capability Baseline for Maintenance Projects SEV Mean: 0.02 LB: 0.0 UB: 1.9 Variation in the process has come down compared to the previous baseline EEV Mean: 1.6 LB: 0.0 UB: 5.9 Variation in the process has come down compared to the previous baseline

13. asd March 2006 Organization Capability Baseline Summary Report HY1 2005-06 13 Capability Baseline for Maintenance Projects PRDD Mean: 4.4 LB: 0.6 UB: 7.4 An upward shift in the UB is observed. No major changes in Standard deviation & Mean DDD Mean: 0.2 LB: 0.0 UB: 1.0 Variation in the process has reduced, an upward shift in UB is noticed

14. asd March 2006 Organization Capability Baseline Summary Report HY1 2005-06 14 Capability Baseline for Maintenance Projects RE Mean: 94.7 LB: 92.0 UB: 100.0 Process performance has significantly improved when compared to the previous period CDRE Mean: 96.9 LB: 92.0 UB: 100.0 Process performance remains at the same level compared to previous period

15. asd March 2006 Organization Capability Baseline Summary Report HY1 2005-06 15 Capability Baseline for Maintenance Projects COPQ Mean: 1.7 LB: 0.0 UB: 5.0 Significant reduction in COPQ is observed COQ Mean: 22.4 LB: 15.1 UB: 33.9 Significant reduction in COQ is observed

16. asd March 2006 Organization Capability Baseline Summary Report HY1 2005-06 16 Cumulative Baselines for all Production Support Projects Metric Lower Bound Upper Bound Adherence to turnaround time (%)95.0098.00 Delivered Defects (% of Work Requests delivered with defects)0.001.72 Baseline Period Apr-05 to Sept-05

17. asd March 2006 Organization Capability Baseline Summary Report HY1 2005-06 17 Capability Baselines for Production Support Projects DD LB: 0.0 UB: 1.72 Upward trend in the UB when compared to the previous baseline period ATT LB: 95.1 UB: 98.0 Significant improvement in ATT observed

18. asd March 2006 Organization Capability Baseline Summary Report HY1 2005-06 18 Capability Baselines – Enterprise Applications Metric Standard Deviation Mean Lower Bound Upper BoundCount Effort Estimation Variance (%)13.2-0.80.05.8238 Schedule Estimation Variance (%)19.60.20.05.3245 Delivered Defect Density (Defects/KLOC)0.51.00.71.711 Pre-release Defect Density (Defects/KLOC)0.70.50.01.0215 Cumulative Defect Removal Efficiency (%)2.089.090.0 13 Review Efficiency (%)9.795.695.0100.098 Cost of Quality (%)5.911.59.216.44 Cost of Poor Quality (%)3.22.80.310.030 Baseline Period Apr-05 to Sept-05

19. asd March 2006 Organization Capability Baseline Summary Report HY1 2005-06 19 Interpretations based on the data received for baselines for HY1 2005-06 Increase in range for the Effort Estimation Variance is observed with an upward shift in the upper bound indicating effort overruns in many projects. Schedule Estimation Variance has shown downward trend in the UB and reduced standard deviation indicating increased consistency in delivery of projects on-time. The mean Delivered Defect density remains the same but standard deviation shows an upward trend indicating that some projects could have abnormally high DDD. CDRE and RE have significantly improved when compared with the previous baselines. Significant improvements observed in COQ and COPQ in the maintenance projects. Data received did not contain adequate data points on Productivity, and hence productivity trend could not be derived.

20. asd March 2006 Organization Capability Baseline Summary Report HY1 2005-06 20 March 2006 Thank You