For more info on a specific newsletter, click the title. Details will be displayed in a new window.
Subscribe to
Computerworld 40 years of the most authoritative source of news and information for IT leaders.
|
|
|
|
September 23, 2005 (Computerworld) -- One of the supposed truisms of software development is that out of three attributes -- fast, good and cheap -- you can pick only two. Turns out the data from a recent research project says otherwise. Spending more money makes little difference in speed and actually reduces quality.
Quantitative Software Management (QSM) maintains the most comprehensive database of software development project metrics that I know of, including over 7,200 projects spanning almost 30 years. Its data comes from its own projects as well as the repository of an estimation product called SLIM. These projects are 58% IT projects (finance, human resources, etc.), 28% engineering (scientific, process control, etc.) and 14% real-time embedded systems (firmware, hardware controllers, etc.).
Although I haven't used it yet, SLIM first came to my attention when a customer told me in total amazement that her planned six-month project was projected to be three months late by the SLIM model. Her management dismissed this projection, of course, but she quietly kept track of the project anyway ... only to discover it accurately predicted the final delivery within a two-day margin! Accurate estimating is one of a Holy Grail of software development, and what I like about the SLIM approach is that it's based on experience, not theory.
Anyway, QSM recently repeated a study it did in 1996 to measure the effect of adding resources to compress a delivery schedule. This is a common reaction to being in a hurry or panicking over delays: Think fast and good but not cheap.
It studied small teams (five or fewer resources) and large teams (20 or more resources) developing between 10,000 and 200,000 lines of code and took a number of measurements including lines of code developed, schedule progress and defect creation. What it found wasn't a surprise, because the results simply confirmed the 1996 findings, but they should surprise you.
The difference between a large team (29 resources) and a small one (2.5) developing 40,000 lines of code was only about 12 calendar days earlier delivery! It took 191 person-months of resources for the large team and only 40 person-months for the small team. The difference at $12,000 per person month was $1.8 million. Now of course that results in a business decision: If 12 days of product availability is worth more than $1.8 million, it may be worth the investment. But it is worth doing the math.
One reason for the nonlinear productivity was explained by the fact that large teams produced more than six times as many defects as small ones, which took additional time to discover, fix and retest. So adding 11.6 times as many resources produced an increase of six times as many defects ...
|
Print this Story |
|
Send Us Feedback |
|
E-mail this Story |
|
Digg this Story |
|
Slashdot this Story |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
All Zones Application Performance Zone Business Continuity Zone Data Center Management Zone Enterprise-Class Security Zone The File Data Management Zone Grid Computing on Windows Zone Security Management Zone ITIL Best Practices Zone The SAS Zone Storage Virtualization Zone Business Intelligence and Analytics Zone |
 See your link here
|
 |
||||||||
| ||||||||
| ||||||||
| ||||||||
|
Download this white paper, free, compliments of Novell!
Safeguarding Critical Data
Read up on the latest ideas and technologies from companies that sell hardware, software and services.
- Microsoft promises four patches next week
- Google gives away home-cooked Web application security scanner
- Storm botnet stages Fourth of July attacks
- More top stories
Intercept Spam & Viruses With MessageLabs MessageLabs is offering a complimentary 30 day trial of its managed Anti-virus and Anti-spam security solutions. MessageLabs guarantees complete protection against all know and unknown email threats. By providing 24 hour support, your business can increase productivity and decrease risk. Register for a complimentary trial and receive a free datasheet.Download this white paper now!
|
| Detect, identify, and locate RF interference in 802.11 WLANs. AnalyzeAir software provides IT network professionals with the vision they need into the hidden world of RF, providing them with the ability to see the spectrum in a visible and intelligible format. AnalyzeAir software lets you see, monitor, analyze, and manage all the RF sources and wireless devices that influence your Wi-Fi network's performance and security, even if those devices are unauthorized or transient. AnalyzeAir Trial Software v3.1 highlights the features found in AnalyzeAir Software using a set of saved spectrum files. Replay the data and experience the visibility that AnalyzeAir Wi-Fi Spectrum Analyzer provides. Note: The trial software is limited to a player version only. It does not communicate with an AnalyzeAir PC card so it does not collect actual spectrum data. Register for this trial now.
|
CIO
Computerworld
CSO
DEMO
GamePro
Games.net
IDG Connect
IDG World Expo
Infoworld
The Industry Standard
ITworld
JavaWorld
LinuxWorld
MacUser
Macworld
Network World
PC World
Playlist
Copyright © 2008 Computerworld Inc. All
rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part in any form or medium
without express written permission of Computerworld Inc. is prohibited.
Computerworld and Computerworld.com and the respective logos are
trademarks of International Data Group Inc.
|
