Quantify Requirements

All to often terms such as "fast," "responsive," and "extensible" are listed as software product requirements. Software architects often spend a lot of time helping product owners turn these desires into objective requirements. We do this by asking a lot of questions: How often? How many in what period? Increasing or decreasing at what rate?

It is a process that most product owners find maddening. Which is why it is important to explain that an exact answer is not expected. In fact, an exact answer would be a little worrying and I'd want to know how they got it. It is that process of how to get quantitative criteria that often needs to be explained and planned for. Finding ranges for quantitative requirements and checking against them is a time-consuming and expensive process. If no one wants to spend the time, effort, and money to do so then it reveals that the requirement isn't actually needed.

Focus your efforts on the parts of the system that stakeholders actually consider worth paying for.

Plan A Project In Detail

Every software project needs a plan. The level of detail should be appropriate for the size and complexity of the project. At an absolute minimum, you will need:

• A PERT chart showing the interdependencies among tasks.
• A GANTT chart showing when activity will be underway on each task.
• A list of realistic milestones (based on previous projects).
• A set of standards for writing documentation and code.
• An allocation of people to various tasks.

As projects increase in complexity, each of these requirements becomes more detailed and more complex, and other documentation becomes necessary. A project without a plan is out of control before it even starts. As the Cheshire Cat said to Alice in Wonderland, "If you don't know where you are going, any road will get you there!"

Reference:

Glaser, G., "Managing Projects in the Computer Industry," IEEE Computer, October 1984.

Allocate Appropriate Resources

Artificially constrained schedules and inappropriate budgets will doom a project regardless of the quality of the people or the availability of tools, languages, and process.

If you try to compress either schedule or budget, the engineers working on the project will not work efficiently, there will be no wiggle room when the inevitable slippage occurs, morale will suffer, and the project will probably cost more than what would otherwise be considered reasonable anyway.

In short, tightening a schedule or budget to land a contract or to get stakeholder sign-off will only ensure your failure to deliver. The goal isn't to get project approval. The goal is to get approval for a project that can actually succeed.


Reference:
DeMarco, T., "Why Does Software Cost So Much?" IEEE Software, March 1993.

Minor Underestimates Are Not Always Bad

Assuming morale has not been diminished, members of a project that is perceived as slightly behind schedule will tend to work hard at catching up, thus increasing productivity. Similarly, members of a project that is perceived as slightly ahead of schedule often take vacation days, work less hours, read their email longer, and ease up in other ways, thus decreasing productivity. In other words, the cost estimation itself will affect the project outcome. Any specific project may expend less resources if it is slightly underestimated than if it is slightly overestimated.

Be careful, though! If project members believe that the schedule is ridiculously underestimated or that estimates are underestimated on purpose, then morale and productivity will decrease. Worse still, you, as a manager, might start to gain a reputation of being incompetent, manipulative, or both. If that happens then project members will begin to perceive all estimates, even good ones, as bad.

As long as a minor underestimate is a natural occurrence then there is no need to worry that it'll effect the schedule. Team productivity has a certain amount of flexibility to compensate as long as there are minor overestimates to balance things out.


Reference:
Abdel-Hamid, T., and Madnick, S., "Impact on Schedule Estimation on Software Project Behavior," IEEE Software, July 1986.

Reassess Schedules Regularly

Schedules are usually set at the beginning of a project. These include intermediate deadlines as well as the product delivery deadline. As each phase is completed, the schedule must be reassessed. A behind-schedule project rarely recovers during subsequent phases. Thus, a project that is, for example, one month late at completion of design will be at least one month late for delivery. In most cases adding or removing people will only delay the project further. The most common technique is not to change the product delivery date. (After all, we don't want to disappoint the customer just yet; they might stop paying.) As each intermediate milestone is missed by an increasing amount of time, the time allocated to testing is reduced more and more. At the end, one of two situations is inevitable:

1. The product is shipped without the necessary quality.
2. The customer is notified of a very large schedule slip very late in the project.

Neither is acceptable. As a manager, your responsibility is to prevent disasters.

Instead, establish a working relationship with customers and/or management levels above you. Report every possible date change (usually a slip) and discuss the alternative strategies for overcoming them. The Agile methodology is very keen to cut out features in order to hit delivery deadlines. Only early intervention and involvement by all parties can prevent slippage escalation.

Reference:

Shore, J., Warden, S., The Art of Agile Development, O'Reilly Media, 2008.

Gilb, T., Principles of Software Engineering Management, Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1988.