CS 577a Overall FCR Feedback [Updated/More] Fall 2010

1. CS 577a Overall FCR Feedback [Updated/More] Fall 2010 Winsor Brown October 27, 2010 (C) 2009-2010 USC CSSE 1

2. IICSM-Sw ARB Review Success Criteria • FCR • For at least one architecture, a system built to that architecture will: • Support the Ops Concept • Satisfy the Requirements • Be faithful to the Prototype • Be buildable within the budgets and schedules in the Plan • Show viable business case [requires presenting OCD [all parts] and LCP • Most major risks identified and resolved or covered by risk management plan • Key stakeholders committed to support Foundations Phase (to DCR) • DCR • For the selected architecture, a system built to the architecture will: • Support the Ops Concept • Satisfy the Requirements • Be faithful to the Prototype • Be buildable within the budgets and schedules in the Plan • As shown in an early lecture, ALL the documentation and models need to be up to date • All major risks resolved or covered by risk management plan • Key stakeholders committed to support full life cycle (C) 2009-2010 USC CSSE 2

3. Overall FCR Feedback • Most (6 of 8) done well (presentations, client rapport), but • Time Management (usually because of NO practice?) and too many pages • Few helped the review team (and clients) by saying what type of project you were doing on the cover of the presentation. • AND unreconciled FCR content with ARB Success Criteria • OCD (Shared Vision, especially) was focus of ARB: • All had some problem with Benefits Realization Chain (BRC) • Most did NOT have all benefits in BRC (even intangibles) • Some had System LOSs which were not • 2 of 8 had serious English problems obvious in at least 1 doc. • LCP: poor valuation & risk identification • FED • Poor risk not all present (too many not continuing in 2nd Sem.) • Poor ROI (off by 6 months; did not include intangibles (C) 2009-2010 USC CSSE 3

4. Overall FCR Feedback - 2 • Not reconciled with FCR content with ARB Success Criteria (continued) • SID • Few Defined ALL key terms and acronyms in SID's glossary • Tailoring not correct: only for deferring or skipping a normally-included artifact; explain why (e.g. COTS internals unavailable) • Presentation • Occasional order changes in presentation without telling us in a modified agenda at the beginning • Very occasionally, slides with NO value added • Role of primary DEN/remote student often misstated • ONE is System/Project Engineer (S/PE) • Always Includes IIV&V (also done by second DEN/remote student) • Includes Shaping (and re-shaping throughout semesters) • IF&F 2 DEN/remote, 2nd is QFP (C) 2009-2010 USC CSSE 4

5. Overall FCR Feedback - 3 • Occasional pointing at laptop screen, not projected image (even better with screen sharing, use mouse) • When asked a question: • Give the answer in brief, this will help your time management and the Review Board will get the desired information • Do NOT answer back while Review Board attempts to provide guidance (C) 2009-2010 USC CSSE

6. Overall FCR Feedback - 4 • Many teams did not cover correctly • Risks in going forward with too few team members (should have come talk with me & DEN-remote) • Recognition that teams in 577b will be very different: • Most teams will only have 1-2 people maintaining documents • Every team needs developers & testers after DCR (usually 2-3) • Team size will be only 5 to 6 (maximum); DEN-remote students can do anything (and some QFP work?) (C) 2009-2010 USC CSSE

7. Overall FCR Feedback - 5 • My lessons-learned • Project Selection Process needs updates • Need to plot trends in continuation by ARB over year • Need to add "Field of Dreams" concept with Benefits Chain diagram and specific suggestions • Students/Teams need COCOMO Tutorial before FCR ARB, not just general lecture (C) 2009-2010 USC CSSE