Transcript Document

MGT 449 Quality Management & Productivity
WS4: MGT 449 Quality Management and
Productivity
Joseph Lewis Aguirre
WS4: PI Models & Methodologies
•
Variation and continuous improvement
in total quality management
–
–
Variation
Continuous improvement
WS4: PI Models & Methodologies
•
Variation effects
–
–
Effects of variation on processes
Importance of controlling variation in
relationship to TQM
WS4: PI Models & Methodologies
• Total quality processes and organizational
process improvement
–
–
–
–
–
–
Just-in-time (JIT)
Materials Requirements Planning (MRP/MRPII)
Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP)
Continuous Quality Improvement (CQI)
Supply Chain Management (SCM)
Customer Relationship Management (CRM)
WS4: Process Improvement Models
–
–
–
–
–
–
International Organization for Standards
(ISO 9000 and 14,000)
Value Chain Analysis
Six Sigma
Theory of Constraints (TOC)
Lean principles
Baldrige criteria
WS1: Total Quality Management
• Define total quality management (TQM).
• Compare and contrast traditional management styles
with quality-focused management styles.
• Identify the impact of globalization on quality
management.
WS2: STRATEGIC PLANNING AND
CUSTOMER SATISFACTION
• Determine the relationship between an organization's
process improvement plan and its strategic plan.
• Express the importance of leadership in relation to
quality.
• Describe the strategic role of TQM in manufacturing,
service, government, and non-profit organizations.
• Provide examples of techniques and tools to measure
customer satisfaction.
WS3: PROCESS ANALYSIS
• Identify various types of processes.
• Describe how process analysis can be useful in quality
improvement.
• Utilize quality management tools to collect and present
data.
• Recommend quality improvement strategies based
upon data collected.
WS4: PROCESS IMPROVEMENT
MODELS & METHODS
• Define variation.
• Explain the importance of variation in total quality
management.
• Identify models and methodologies used for
organizational process improvement.
Process Improvement
Models
Joseph Lewis Aguirre
ISO9000
– ISO9000 developed as a standard for business
quality systems.
– To be certified, businesses needed to document their
quality system and insure adherence to it with
reviews and audits.
– A key element was the identification of nonconformances and a Corrective Action System to
prevent reoccurences. Specific quality improvement
methodologies were not prescribed.
ISO9000
• Advanced Product Quality Plans
• Design / Process Failure Mode and Effects Analysis
(FMEA)
• Production Part Approval Process
• Control Plans (for production)
• Measurement Systems Analysis
– The Juran methodology was central to
maintaining control of special product and
process characteristics (CTQs).
ISO9000
• Advanced Product Quality Plans
• Design / Process Failure Mode and Effects Analysis
(FMEA)
• Production Part Approval Process
• Control Plans (for production)
• Measurement Systems Analysis
– The Juran methodology was central to
maintaining control of special product and
process characteristics (CTQs).
Software Process Improvement
Models
Joseph Lewis Aguirre
SW PROCESS IMPROVEMENT
MODELS
–
–
–
–
BOOTSTRAP
SPICE (ISO/IEC 15504)
STARS
Capability Maturity Model (CMM)
SW PROCESS IMPROVEMENT
MODELS: US Vs. Europe
- US primarily funded by DoD
• Set up Software Engineering Initiative (SEI)
• Resulted in STARS and CMM
• Enabled evaluation of subcontractors for military
projects
• DoD still funds SEI and CMM
– European development funded through EU
• European Systems & Software Initiative (ESSI)
• Project driven
• No common philosophy
SW PROCESS IMPROVEMENT
MODELS: Bootstrap
– European project in 1993
– Developed method for software process
assessment, quantitative measurement and
improvement.
– Based on Version 1.0 of CMM, ISO 9000 and
ESA PSS-05 process model
– Defines a quality-attribute hierarchy of 31
quality factors
– Divided up into 3 dimensions regarded as
important to process definition - organization,
methodology and technology
SW PROCESS IMPROVEMENT
MODELS: SPICE
• Software Process Improvement and
Capability dEtermination- ISO/IEC15504
– Project began in 1992 under the auspices of the
International Committee on SW Engineering
Standards, Working Group on Software Process
Assessment
– Objectives
• Develop standard for software process assessment
• Conduct industry trials of emerging standard
• Promote technology transfer of software process
assessment into software industry worldwide
– The SPICE suite of documents is the framework
SW PROCESS IMPROVEMENT
MODELS: SPICE - Assmt. Types
SW PROCESS IMPROVEMENT
MODELS: SPICE PI CONTEXT
SW PROCESS IMPROVEMENT
MODELS: STARS
• Software Technology for Adaptable Reliable
Systems
– Program sponsored by DARPA
– Goal:
• To increase software productivity, reliability, and
quality by integrating support for modern software
development processes and reuse concepts within
software engineering environment (SEE) technology.
– STARS is different from other SPI models in that
it focuses on the definition, modelling and support
of existing processes
SW PROCESS IMPROVEMENT
MODELS: STARS
SW PROCESS IMPROVEMENT
MODELS: CMM
• Capability Maturity Model
– Developed by Software Engineering Institute
(SEI) of Carnegie-Mellon University, first
introduced in 1987
– Goal
• To provide a means by which organizations can
appraise their ability to perform their software
process successfully, and to provide guidance to
improve their process capability
SW PROCESS IMPROVEMENT
MODELS: CMM CASE STUDIES
• Raytheon began a CMM-based improvement effort in 1988.
In 1990, they estimated that they saved $4.48M for an
investment of $0.58M giving a return on investment of 7.7.
Over a period of four and a half years, mid-1988 to the end of
1992, the company estimated that they had eliminated
$15.8M in re-work costs. Over a six year period, 1988 to
1994, they saw a 2.7 times increase in productivity and an
improvement in budget accuracy (target/actual) from 40%
overruns to +/-3%.
• Motorola estimate that an organization moving from CMM
Level 2 to CMM Level 5 will see an eightfold reduction in
defects, an eightfold improvement in cycle time and a
threefold increase in productivity.
SW PROCESS IMPROVEMENT
MODELS: CMM CASE STUDIES
• Hewlett-Packard’s Software Engineering Systems
Division achieved a reduction in cycle time of 46%, a
60% reduction in shipped defects and schedule
estimation error reduced to zero over two years May
1994 to May 1996.
• In addition, a number of less tangible benefits are
reported:
– Increased customer focus
– Improved ability to react flexibly to change
– Increased job satisfaction amongst engineers
– Decrease in variability of schedule and cost performance
SW PROCESS IMPROVEMENT
MODELS: CMM
Level 1
The Initial Level
Level 2
The Repeatable Level
Level 3
The Defined Level
Level 4
The Managed Level
Level 5
The Optimising Level
The software process is ad-hoc and occasionally even
chaotic. Few processes are defined and success depends
on individual effort (heroics).
Basic project management processes are established to
track cost, schedule and functionality. The necessary
process discipline is in place to repeat earlier successes
on projects with similar applications..
The software process for both management and
engineering activities is documented, standardised and
integrated into a standard software process for the
organisation. All projects use an approved, tailored
version of the organisation’s standard software process for
developing and maintaining software.
Detailed measures of the software process and product
quality are collected. Both the software process and
products are qualitatively understood and controlled.
Continuous process improvement is enabled by
quantitative feedback from the process and from piloting
innovative ideas and technologies.
Software Issues
High cost, low quality: Use at your own risk
Unpredictable performance
Constant surprises
Excessive maintenance costs
Unsatisfied customers
Take too long
Low visibility into progress and quality
Cost too much
State of Software Projects in the US
Much of the $250 billion in annual U.S. software development
spending is wasted, late, incomplete, or spent on canceled
projects:
53% ($132.5 billion) are considered over budget,
delayed, and less functional than planned.
31% ($77.5 billion) are considered impaired and
must be canceled.
Only 16% ($40 billion) of software projects are
completed within budget, on time, and with all
functions included.
Source: Investor’s Business Daily (Jan. 25, 1995)
Software Project Performance
80%
60%
40%
20%
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
What are the costs of missed delivery dates ?
• Penalties
• Market share
• Lost revenue
• Overrun budgets
• Repeat customer business
on-time
Missed
Major Software Issues
Rapidly changing technology
Many existing systems need upgrade, modernize
Lack of engineering disciplines
Lack of defined architecture for successful integration
Long term vs Short term planning
Product oriented management
Lack of Software project management skills
Scalability Problems
Order of magnitude growth in software size - Every 5 years
Scaling requires fundamental process changes:
• Can’t go from 6 mph to 60 mph by trying harder
• Can’t build skyscraper using carpenter hand tools
Focus on Product Vs Process
Focusing on product alone misses:
• Scalability issues
• Knowledge of how to do it better (CQI)
Focusing on process predicts:
• Repeatability of outcomes
• Project trends
• Product characteristics
Process
The logical organization of people, technology, standards
and procedure into work activities designed to produce
a specified end result
People
Standards
Technology
Perspectives
People:
Must have the skills, training, and motivation necessary to do
the work. They must be managed in a way that will increase
their effectiveness
Standards:
Must be defined to guide people and the application of technology
in the business of providing products and services to the customers
Technology: Must be selected that enhance the business process and product
needs.
Relationships among these components must be managed in order to
achieve the maximum progress. How theses components play together
directly affects how the work is performed.
Relationships
Quality
Standards
Cost
People
Schedule
Technology
Process Management Premise
The quality of a product is governed by the quality
of the process used to develop and maintain it.
To improve quality of the product, one must improve
the quality of the process that creates the product.
Improvement Outcomes
Improvement effort becomes unfocussed and vanishes
Improvement effort
New state
Initial state
Initial state
New methods & tools are forgotten over time
Possible Causes
Misunderstanding of the problem being solved
Lack of consensus in the organization about which
problem to solve first
Too many changes happening at the same time
Newly introduced solution disrupts current process
Everybody busy "Fighting Fires"
Lack of a framework for process improvement
Capability Maturity Model (CMM)
A conceptual framework to help organizations:
Characterize the maturity of their process (As Is)
Establish goals for process improvement (To Be)
Set priorities for immediate actions (Transition)
Manage and sustain change in organizations (Stabilize)
Introduce changes incrementally, to avoid disrupting
current processes
Software Engineering Institute (SEI)
A federally funded research and development center
Affiliated with Carnegie Mellon University (CMU)
Process Maturity Levels
Continuously
Improving
Process
Optimizing (5)
Business Innovation
Predictable
Process
Managed (4)
Product Line Management
Defined (3)
Consistent
Process
Process Architecture
Disciplined
Process
Repeatable (2)
Project Management
Initial
3/23/98
(1)
Maturity Level 2 (Repeatable)
Requirements Management
Software Project Planning
Software Project Control
Software Configuration Management
Software Quality Assurance
Software Acquisition Management
Disciplined Process
(Project Management)
Maturity Level 3 (Defined)
Organization Process Focus
Organization Process Definition
Integrated Software Management
Intergroup Coordination
Software Product Engineering
Peer Reviews
Organization Training Program
Consistent Process
(Process Architecture)
Maturity Level 4 (Quantitatively
Managed)
Organization Asset Alignment
Organization Process Performance
Statistical Process Management
Predictable Process
(Product Line Management)
Maturity Level 5 (Optimized)
Defect Prevention
Organization Process Innovation
Organization Improvement Deployment
Continuous Improving Process
(Business Innovation)
Current State of US SW Development
Population
100%
62%
24%
13%
0.7%
0.3%
0%
1
Initial
2
Repeatable
* Source : Carnegie Mellon University Dec 1997
3
Defined
4
Managed
5
Optimizing
ROI
Hughes Aircraft *
(Ground System Division)
Level 2 in 1987 to level 3 in 1990
Reduce cost overruns 50% for a 5X ROI
Raytheon **
(Software System Lab)
Level 1 in 1988 to level 2 in 1990
Reduce the cost of re-work by $8.2 million
A 7.7X ROI
* IEEE Software, July 1991
** IEEE Software July 1993
QSM Evidence *
Application area: Business and management information system.
Data based on average 100K SLOC projects
SEI
Effort
Defects
Defects
Level (Person/Mos.) Discovered Remain
Average cost
per Project
Number
of Projects
1
243.2
771
33
$ 2,229,000
1166
2
58.6
185
9
537,000
251
3
32.6
104
4
298,000
163
4
17.5
56
2
161,000
85
5
6.5
21
0
60,000
73
(Source: Quantitative Software Management & Stan Rifkin)
Uninflated cost per person month = $ 10,000 Person hours per month = 173 ,
Reflect results of detailed design, code, test, integrated & Delivery only
Employee Satisfaction
Satisfaction Level
Number of Employees
Number of Employees
Extremely Satisfied 10
Highly Satisfied
9
Very Satisfied
8
Satisfied
7
Not Quite Satisfied
6
Neutral
5
Not Excited About It
4
Dissatisfied
3
Very Dissatisfied
2
Highly Dissatisfied
1
Mean = 8.3
74%
96%
Mean = 5.7
Based on bi-annual
survey of employee
Before Process Improvement
After Process Improvement
(Based on data of Boeing Space Transportation Systems)
Summary
There is a systematic approach to improve the way
software is developed and maintained.
There are stages of process maturity in which the
organization will improve by following a
recommended sequence to decrease risk and
increase software performance.
By following an evolutionary path the organization
will continuously improve their knowledge to
produce better, faster, higher quality products, and
achieve customer satisfaction.
Conclusion
Software Process Improvement using the Capability
Maturity Model (CMM) will help an organization
improve its software process to achieve its business
objectives.
Software process maturity will determine which
organization has the potential to deliver higher quality
products at reasonable cost to the customer.
3/23/98
Page 27
J. D. Vu