Instructions: Provide ratings for each of the COCOMOII scale factor and cost driver base
To do: First individually fill out the scores. Then discuss among all team members
Ratings Use scale between -1.0 to 1.0, where -1.0 implies negative impact to the p
values should be real number in between -1.0 and 1.0 depending on how
Not all the parameters are impacted by the each question. For those that
change color to red.
Submission Incorporate all the individually filled out forms and the final team consens
team's website under "Final Deliverables".
Naming: COCOMOIIRatings_S11b_Txx.xlsx
Team: 5
Project Name: Turbo Budget
ID Category Subject
Ex Example Example
Architecture
1 Development Validation
Architecture
2 Development Alternatives
Architecture
3 Development Evolutionary
4 Business Case Business case
Prototype/Verification
5 Business Case and Validation
Business
6 Business Case Process/Scoping
7 Business Case Alternatives
8 Business Case System Context
9 Business Case Prototyping
10 Collaboration Review
11 Collaboration Meetings
12 Collaboration Technology support
13 Collaboration Co-ordination
Collaboration
14 Aid
15 Feasibility Evidence Alternatives
16 Feasibility Evidence Level of Service
17 Feasibility Evidence NDI Feasibilitiy
18 Feasibility Evidence Risk Management
19 Feasibility Evidence Operational scenarios
Validation and
20 Feasibility Evidence Verification
Domain Knowledge and
21 Personnel Capability Expertise/Experience
22 Personnel Capability Validation
23 Personnel Capability Personnel capabilities
24 Personnel Capability CRACK
25 Personnel Capability Team Spirit
26 Planning and Control Work Distribution
Strengths and
27 Planning and Control Weaknesses
28 Planning and control Detail Plans
29 Planning and control Project Monitoring
30 Planning and Control Personnel capabilities
31 Planning and Control Overall plan
32 Planning and Control Risk Management
33 Planning and Control Project Monitoring
Validation
34 Planning and Control
Roles and
35 Planning and Control Responsibilities
36 Planning and Control Rescheduling
Requirements
37 Gathering WinWin
Requirements
38 Gathering WinWin
Requirements
39 Gathering Evolutionary
Requirements
40 Gathering Clarity
ngs for each of the COCOMOII scale factor and cost driver based on the impact that each question has on the
ually fill out the scores. Then discuss among all team members and develop the consensus on the values.
tween -1.0 to 1.0, where -1.0 implies negative impact to the parameter and 1.0 implies positive impact. The
d be real number in between -1.0 and 1.0 depending on how much the question impact the parameter.
arameters are impacted by the each question. For those that are not impacted, put "N/A" in the box and
r to red.
all the individually filled out forms and the final team consensus form into a single Excel workbook and post
site under "Final Deliverables".
atings_S11b_Txx.xlsx
Turbo Budget
Scale Factors
Question PREC FLEX RESL TEAM
Are your programmers capabled and experienced with the type of
system to be developed? N/A N/A N/A N/A
Do you constantly validate the architecture with the requirements,
prototypes, and concepts? N/A N/A 0.2 N/A
Have you explored the alternatives for technologies to be used or
jump to a familiar one? 0.4 0.2 0.2 N/A
Has the system been architected for ease of adding or dropping
borderline features? Were these evolutionary requirements visualized
properly by the team? 0.6 0.2 N/A N/A
Is there a valid business case for the system, relating the life cycle
system benefits to the system total cost of ownership? N/A 0.2 0.5 N/A
Do prototypes developed for verifying the validation of requirements
addresses the critical issues(risks,use cases and GUI) and eventually
evolve as requirement changes amongst stakeholders 0.1 0.1 0.4 N/A
Do you and the stakeholders understand the existing and proposed
scope,boundary and business workflow ? N/A 0.4 0.5 0.1
Do you explore the alternatives and competitors before prototyping a
new system and workflow? N/A 0.2 0.4 N/A
Have questions about the fit of the system into the stakeholders'
context - acquirers, end users, administrators, interoperators,
maintainers, etc. - been adequately explored? N/A 0.2 0.5 N/A
Are the prototypes developed early enough to address conceptual
issues and knowledge? N/A N/A 0.5 N/A
Do you consistently review each other's work before integrating them
together? N/A N/A 0.7 0.8
Do the stakeholders meeting are held weekly with clearly defined
agendas and does the project progress is discussed extensively.
N/A 0.3 0.6 0.7
Do you have the proper mechanisms to ensure high level of
collaboration and keeping all stakeholders in the loop (i.e. use of
Google Groups, MSN meetings, etc.)? N/A N/A 0.6 0.7
Are the team members co-operative and share the knowledge of their
expertise? N/A N/A 0.6 0.8
Did the team members were co-operative and helped each other in
development? N/A N/A 0.3 0.8
Have at least two alternative approaches(considering COTS/NDI/NCS)
been explored and evaluated? 0.2 0.4 0.2 0.7
Have the claimed quality of service guarantees been validated? N/A 0.2 N/A N/A
Have COTS/NDI/Services scalability, compatibility, quality of service,
and life cycle support risks been thoroughly addressed? N/A N/A 0.6 N/A
Did the team identify the riskiest modules and whether the riskiest
modules development strategy has been considered. 0.5 0.1 0.4 0.6
Has the project identified a full set of representative operational
scenarios across which to evaluate feasibility? N/A N/A N/A N/A
Does the project have adequate processes in place to define the
verification, test, and validation, and acceptance of systems and
system elements at all phases of definition and development? N/A N/A N/A N/A
Does the team have required Domain knowledge and experience to
develop a stable architecture for the system
0.4 0.2 N/A 0.2
Do you have the necessary knowledge to test the validity and stability
of the architecture? N/A N/A N/A N/A
Have sufficiently talented and experienced program and systems
engineering managers been identified? Have they been empowerd to
tailor process and to enforce development stability? 0.3 0.2 0.4 N/A
Are the stakeholders who have been identified as critical to the
success of the project represented by highly qualified personnel -
those who are collaborative, representative, empowered, committed,
and knowledgeable? N/A N/A N/A 0.5
Did the team take any effort for improving the technological skills and
experience? How badly was the system affected by team's lack of
motivation to excel? N/A N/A N/A N/A
Do you distribute the workload evenly based on people's roles and
responsibilities, or are they distributed based on people's
experience?Did uneven distribution of work affected team's
performance. N/A 0.3 N/A 0.3
Do the team members communicate to the project manager their
areas of strengths and weaknesses so the plan and work distribution
can be adjusted accordingly? N/A N/A 0.1 0.6
Do the team has a realistic scheduled project plan according to the
current situation and can the plan sustain any unprecedented changes
in the future? N/A 0.3 N/A 0.6
2 N/A 0.1 0.2 N/A
Is the quantity of developer systems engineering personnel assigned,
their skill and seniority mix, and the time phasing of their application
throughout the program life cycle, appropriate? N/A N/A 0.2 N/A
Is there a top-to-bottom plan for how the total system will be
integrated and tested? Does it adequately consider integration
facilities development and earlier integration testing? N/A 0.1 0.3 N/A
Is the project adequately identifying and managing its risks? N/A N/A -0.1 N/A
Is the project successfully monitoring progress and applying corrective
action where necessary? N/A N/A 0.4 N/A
Are all the modules being tested and validated by testers and the
stakeholders.? N/A N/A 0.4 N/A
Is the team and stakeholders aware of each and every team members
roles and responsibilites and is the work distribution fair and according
to the expertise? N/A N/A 0.2 0.5
Rescheduling client meetings, did it affect the system adversely in
delivering the artifacts on time? N/A N/A 0.2 0.5
Are the win conditions constantly maintained by the shaper
throughout the project life cycle? N/A 0.4 0.2 N/A
Was the WinWin negotiation successful in terms of capturing,
agreeing, and prioritizing the requirements? N/A 0.4 0.3 0.5
Do the shaped requirements and scope of the project take into
consideration the evolutionary changes? N/A 0.4 0.3 N/A
Project details,requirements,boundaries and scope are thoroughly
researched and understood by the team? N/A 0.4 0.4 0.7
h question has on them.
sus on the values.
s positive impact. The
t the parameter.
/A" in the box and
el workbook and post on
actors Cost Drivers
Product Platform Personnel Project
PMAT RELY DATA DOCU CPLX RUSE TIME STOR PVOL ACAP APEX PCAP PLEX LTEX PCON TOOL
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.1 0.5 1.0 0.9 0.7 N/A NA
N/A 0.1 N/A 0.5 -0.2 0.4 N/A N/A N/A 0.5 N/A N/A 0.3 N/A N/A 0.2
N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.4 0.1 N/A 0.3 0.4 N/A 0.2
N/A N/A N/A 0.5 0.5 0.3 N/A N/A N/A 0.4 0.1 N/A N/A 0.5 N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A 0.5 0.2 0.4 N/A N/A N/A 0.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
0.1 N/A 0.1 0.3 0.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A 0.1 0.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.5 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A 0.2 0.5 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.4 N/A N/A N/A 0.1 N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A 0.1 0.5 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A 0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
0.9 N/A N/A 0.3 0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.2 N/A 0.2 0.3 N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.2 N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.3 N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.4 N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.2 0.2 0.3 N/A 0.3 N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.2 0.1 N/A N/A N/A 0.4 0.1 N/A 0.3 0.2 N/A N/A
N/A N/A 0.1 0.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.4 0.1 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A 0.1 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.4 0.1 N/A 0.2 0.2 N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A 0.3 0.1 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.3 N/A 0.1 0.1 N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A 0.2 0.1 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.1 0.4 N/A N/A 0.1 N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.3 0.4 0.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.4 0.4 N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.6 -0.3 N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.3 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 N/A
N/A N/A N/A 0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.2 0.4 0.1 0.2 0.2 N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.3 N/A 0.1 N/A 0.1 N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.4 N/A 0.1 N/A 0.2 N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.1 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.1 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A 0.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.3 0.4 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.1 0.2
N/A N/A N/A 0.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.2 0.2 N/A 0.2 0.1 N/A 0.3
N/A 0.2 N/A 0.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.3 N/A 0.1 N/A 0.1 N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A 0.4 0.1 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.1 0.1 0.3 N/A 0.2 N/A N/A
N/A 0.1 N/A 0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.2 N/A 0.1
N/A N/A N/A 0.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.3 0.1 N/A 0.2 0.1 N/A
N/A N/A N/A 0.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.2 N/A 0.1 N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A 0.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.3 N/A
N/A N/A N/A 0.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A 0.3 0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.5 0.1 0.1 N/A N/A N/A N/A
Project
SCED SITE
NA N/A
0.2 N/A
0.3 N/A
0.3 N/A
N/A N/A
0.3 N/A
0.2 N/A
0.4 N/A
0.3 N/A
0.3 N/A
0.2 N/A
0.1 N/A
0.1 0.1
0.1 N/A
0.1 N/A
0.2 N/A
N/A N/A
0.1 N/A
0.2 N/A
N/A N/A
N/A N/A
0.1 N/A
0.1 N/A
0.1 N/A
N/A N/A
0.2 N/A
0.2 N/A
N/A N/A
0.5 N/A
0.2 N/A
N/A N/A
N/A N/A
0.2 N/A
0.2 N/A
N/A N/A
N/A N/A
-0.1 N/A
N/A N/A
N/A N/A
N/A N/A
N/A N/A
Instructions: Provide ratings for each of the COCOMOII scale factor and cost driver bas
To do: First individually fill out the scores. Then discuss among all team member
Ratings Use scale between -1.0 to 1.0, where -1.0 implies negative impact to the
values should be real number in between -1.0 and 1.0 depending on how
Not all the parameters are impacted by the each question. For those that
change color to red.
Submission Incorporate all the individually filled out forms and the final team consen
on team's website under "Final Deliverables".
Naming: COCOMOIIRatings_S11b_Txx.xlsx
Team: 5
Project Name: Turbo Budget
ID Category Subject
Ex Example Example
Architecture
1 Development Validation
Architecture
2 Development Alternatives
Architecture
3 Development Evolutionary
4 Business Case Business case
Prototype/Verification
5 Business Case and Validation
Business
6 Business Case Process/Scoping
7 Business Case Alternatives
8 Business Case System Context
9 Business Case Prototyping
10 Collaboration Review
11 Collaboration Meetings
12 Collaboration Technology support
13 Collaboration Co-ordination
Collaboration
14 Aid
15 Feasibility Evidence Alternatives
16 Feasibility Evidence Level of Service
17 Feasibility Evidence NDI Feasibilitiy
18 Feasibility Evidence Risk Management
19 Feasibility Evidence Operational scenarios
Validation and
20 Feasibility Evidence Verification
Domain Knowledge and
21 Personnel Capability Expertise/Experience
22 Personnel Capability Validation
23 Personnel Capability Personnel capabilities
24 Personnel Capability CRACK
25 Personnel Capability Team Spirit
26 Planning and Control Work Distribution
Strengths and
27 Planning and Control Weaknesses
28 Planning and control Detail Plans
29 Planning and control Project Monitoring
30 Planning and Control Personnel capabilities
31 Planning and Control Overall plan
32 Planning and Control Risk Management
33 Planning and Control Project Monitoring
Validation
34 Planning and Control
Roles and
35 Planning and Control Responsibilities
36 Planning and Control Rescheduling
Requirements
37 Gathering WinWin
Requirements
38 Gathering WinWin
Requirements
39 Gathering Evolutionary
Requirements
40 Gathering Clarity
ngs for each of the COCOMOII scale factor and cost driver based on the impact that each question has on the
ually fill out the scores. Then discuss among all team members and develop the consensus on the values.
etween -1.0 to 1.0, where -1.0 implies negative impact to the parameter and 1.0 implies positive impact. The
ld be real number in between -1.0 and 1.0 depending on how much the question impact the parameter.
parameters are impacted by the each question. For those that are not impacted, put "N/A" in the box and
or to red.
all the individually filled out forms and the final team consensus form into a single Excel workbook and post
website under "Final Deliverables".
Ratings_S11b_Txx.xlsx
Turbo Budget
Scale Factors
Question PREC FLEX RESL TEAM PMAT
Are your programmers capabled and experienced with the type of
system to be developed? N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Do you constantly validate the architecture with the requirements,
prototypes, and concepts? N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Have you explored the alternatives for technologies to be used or
jump to a familiar one? 1.0 -0.3 0.3 N/A 0.6
Has the system been architected for ease of adding or dropping
borderline features? Were these evolutionary requirements visualized
properly by the team? N/A -0.5 0.5 0.3 0.5
Is there a valid business case for the system, relating the life cycle
system benefits to the system total cost of ownership? 1.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A
Do prototypes developed for verifying the validation of requirements
addresses the critical issues(risks,use cases and GUI) and eventually
evolve as requirement changes amongst stakeholders 0.3 N/A 0.7 0.5 0.5
Do you and the stakeholders understand the existing and proposed
scope,boundary and business workflow ? 1.0 0.4 N/A 0.7 1.0
Do you explore the alternatives and competitors before prototyping a
new system and workflow? 1.0 -0.2 0.2 N/A 0.3
Have questions about the fit of the system into the stakeholders'
context - acquirers, end users, administrators, interoperators,
maintainers, etc. - been adequately explored? N/A N/A N/A 1.0 1.0
Are the prototypes developed early enough to address conceptual
issues and knowledge? 1.0 N/A 0.6 0.5 0.5
Do you consistently review each other's work before integrating them
together? N/A N/A N/A 1.0 N/A
Do the stakeholders meeting are held weekly with clearly defined
agendas and does the project progress is discussed extensively.
N/A N/A N/A 1.0 0.7
Do you have the proper mechanisms to ensure high level of
collaboration and keeping all stakeholders in the loop (i.e. use of
Google Groups, MSN meetings, etc.)? N/A N/A N/A 0.6 N/A
Are the team members co-operative and share the knowledge of their
expertise? N/A N/A N/A 1.0 N/A
Did the team members were co-operative and helped each other in
development? N/A N/A N/A 1.0 N/A
Have at least two alternative approaches(considering COTS/NDI/NCS)
been explored and evaluated? 0.6 -0.2 N/A N/A 0.2
Have the claimed quality of service guarantees been validated? N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Have COTS/NDI/Services scalability, compatibility, quality of service,
and life cycle support risks been thoroughly addressed? N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Did the team identify the riskiest modules and whether the riskiest
modules development strategy has been considered. 0.5 -0.1 N/A N/A 0.4
Has the project identified a full set of representative operational
scenarios across which to evaluate feasibility? 0.5 N/A N/A 0.8 0.3
Does the project have adequate processes in place to define the
verification, test, and validation, and acceptance of systems and
system elements at all phases of definition and development? N/A N/A N/A N/A 1.0
Does the team have required Domain knowledge and experience to
develop a stable architecture for the system
0.6 N/A N/A 1.0 N/A
Do you have the necessary knowledge to test the validity and stability
of the architecture? 0.6 N/A 0.3 N/A 0.3
Have sufficiently talented and experienced program and systems
engineering managers been identified? Have they been empowerd to
tailor process and to enforce development stability? 0.5 N/A N/A N/A N/A
Are the stakeholders who have been identified as critical to the
success of the project represented by highly qualified personnel -
those who are collaborative, representative, empowered, committed,
and knowledgeable? N/A N/A N/A 1.0 N/A
Did the team take any effort for improving the technological skills and
experience? How badly was the system affected by team's lack of
motivation to excel? N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Do you distribute the workload evenly based on people's roles and
responsibilities, or are they distributed based on people's
experience?Did uneven distribution of work affected team's
performance. N/A N/A N/A 1.0 N/A
Do the team members communicate to the project manager their
areas of strengths and weaknesses so the plan and work distribution
can be adjusted accordingly? N/A N/A N/A 1.0 N/A
Do the team has a realistic scheduled project plan according to the
current situation and can the plan sustain any unprecedented changes
in the future? 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.5
Do you constantly monitor and review the progress of the project
giving yourself enough buffer time to respond to changes and
unexpected situations? N/A 0.4 N/A N/A N/A
Is the quantity of developer systems engineering personnel assigned,
their skill and seniority mix, and the time phasing of their application
throughout the program life cycle, appropriate? N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Is there a top-to-bottom plan for how the total system will be
integrated and tested? Does it adequately consider integration
facilities development and earlier integration testing? N/A N/A 0.6 N/A 0.6
Is the project adequately identifying and managing its risks? 0.6 N/A 0.8 N/A 0.3
Is the project successfully monitoring progress and applying corrective
action where necessary? N/A N/A 0.3 0.5 N/A
Are all the modules being tested and validated by testers and the
stakeholders.? N/A N/A N/A 0.6 N/A
Is the team and stakeholders aware of each and every team members
roles and responsibilites and is the work distribution fair and according
to the expertise? N/A N/A N/A 1.0 N/A
Rescheduling client meetings, did it affect the system adversely in
delivering the artifacts on time? N/A N/A N/A 0.7 N/A
Are the win conditions constantly maintained by the shaper
throughout the project life cycle? 0.5 N/A N/A N/A 0.5
Was the WinWin negotiation successful in terms of capturing,
agreeing, and prioritizing the requirements? 0.5 N/A 0.7 1.0 N/A
Do the shaped requirements and scope of the project take into
consideration the evolutionary changes? 0.7 -0.4 N/A 0.3 -0.3
Project details,requirements,boundaries and scope are thoroughly
researched and understood by the team? 0.8 N/A 0.3 0.7 0.6
question has on them.
us on the values.
positive impact. The
the parameter.
A" in the box and
workbook and post
Cost Drivers
Product Platform Personnel Project
RELY DATA DOCU CPLX RUSE TIME STOR PVOL ACAP APEX PCAP PLEX LTEX PCON TOOL SCED
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.1 0.5 1.0 0.9 0.7 N/A NA NA
N/A 1.0 1.0 0.5 0.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A NA NA
N/A N/A N/A -0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A NA NA
N/A 0.1 -0.2 -0.5 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.1 0.5 1.0 0.9 0.7 N/A NA -0.5
N/A N/A 0.5 0.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A 1.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A NA NA
N/A N/A 0.3 0.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A NA NA
N/A N/A 0.2 -0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A 1.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A NA NA
N/A N/A 0.2 0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A 1.0 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3 N/A NA NA
N/A N/A 0.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 1.0 0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A NA NA
N/A N/A 0.5 0.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.7 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A NA 0.2
N/A N/A 0.5 -0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.5 0.3 0.3 0.6 N/A NA NA
N/A N/A 1.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.5 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.7 NA -0.2
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.5 1.0 NA
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 1.0 NA NA
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.3 0.5 0.5 N/A 1.0 NA NA
N/A N/A N/A -0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.7 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A NA NA
N/A -0.6 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.7 0.5 N/A N/A N/A 0.6 NA
N/A -0.6 0.5 -0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.6 NA
N/A N/A 0.2 -0.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.7 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A NA NA
N/A N/A N/A -0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.8 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A NA NA
N/A N/A 1.0 -0.5 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 1.0 NA
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.1 0.6 1.0 0.4 0.4 0.5 NA NA
N/A N/A N/A -0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.4 0.3 0.5 N/A N/A N/A NA NA
N/A N/A N/A -0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.6 0.4 1.0 0.8 1.0 0.5 NA NA
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.5 0.4 1.0 0.8 0.7 0.5 NA NA
N/A N/A N/A -0.5 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.3 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.5 0.2 NA
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 NA NA
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 1.0 N/A N/A N/A N/A 1.0 NA NA
N/A N/A N/A -0.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.6 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A NA -0.4
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.3 NA -0.6
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.6 0.6 0.9 0.7 0.8 0.5 NA NA
N/A -0.7 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.2 0.6 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.5 -0.2
N/A N/A 0.6 -0.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.7 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A NA NA
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.1 0.3 0.7 N/A N/A N/A NA NA
N/A -0.3 N/A -0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.4 0.3 N/A N/A N/A NA NA
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 1.0 NA NA
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.6 0.4 0.4 0.7 NA -0.5
N/A N/A 0.5 -0.1 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.5 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A NA NA
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 1.0 NA NA
N/A N/A N/A -0.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A NA NA
N/A N/A N/A -0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.7 0.2 1.0 N/A N/A N/A NA NA
Project
SITE
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
-0.5
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
-0.4
N/A
N/A
-0.2
N/A
-0.2
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Scale Factors Cost Drivers
Product Platform Personnel Project
ID Category Subject Question PREC FLEX RESL TEAM PMAT RELY DATA DOCU CPLX RUSE TIME STOR PVOL ACAP APEX PCAP PLEX LTEX PCON TOOL SCED SITE
Are your programmers capabled and experienced with the type of
Ex Example Example system to be developed? N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.1 0.5 1.0 0.9 0.7 N/A NA NA N/A
Architecture Do you constantly validate the architecture with the requirements,
1 Development Validation prototypes, and concepts? N/A N/A 0.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.6 -0.4 0.8 N/A N/A N/A 0.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.6 -0.4 N/A
Architecture Have you explored the alternatives for technologies to be used or jump
2 Development Alternatives to a familiar one? 0.4 0.4 0.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.6 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.2 0.5 N/A
Has the system been architected for ease of adding or dropping
Architecture borderline features? Were these evolutionary requirements visualized
3 Development Evolutionary properly by the team? N/A 0.4 0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.6 0.6 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.5 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.5 N/A
Is there a valid business case for the system, relating the life cycle
4 Business Case Business case system benefits to the system total cost of ownership? 0.7 -0.2 0.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.4 0.6 0.7 N/A N/A N/A 0.5 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Do prototypes developed for verifying the validation of requirements
Prototype/Verification addresses the critical issues(risks,use cases and GUI) and eventually
5 Business Case and Validation evolve as requirement changes amongst stakeholders N/A N/A 0.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.7 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.7 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.5 N/A
Business Do you and the stakeholders understand the existing and proposed
6 Business Case Process/Scoping scope,boundary and business workflow ? N/A N/A 0.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.5 N/A
Do you explore the alternatives and competitors before prototyping a
7 Business Case Alternatives new system and workflow? N/A 0.4 0.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.6 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.6 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.5 N/A
Have questions about the fit of the system into the stakeholders'
context - acquirers, end users, administrators, interoperators,
8 Business Case System Context maintainers, etc. - been adequately explored? N/A -0.4 0.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.6 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.5 N/A
Are the prototypes developed early enough to address conceptual
9 Business Case Prototyping issues and knowledge? N/A N/A 0.8 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.5 N/A
Do you consistently review each other's work before integrating them
10 Collaboration Review together? N/A N/A 0.8 0.9 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.3 N/A 0.2 N/A
Do the stakeholders meeting are held weekly with clearly defined 0.4 0.7 0.7
agendas and does the project progress is discussed extensively.
11 Collaboration Meetings N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.1 0.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.2 N/A 0.2 N/A
Do you have the proper mechanisms to ensure high level of
collaboration and keeping all stakeholders in the loop (i.e. use of
12 Collaboration Technology support Google Groups, MSN meetings, etc.)? N/A N/A 0.7 0.7 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.2 N/A 0.1 N/A
Are the team members co-operative and share the knowledge of their 0.7 0.7
13 Collaboration Co-ordination expertise? N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.2 N/A 0.1 N/A
Collaboration Did the team members were co-operative and helped each other in
14 Aid development? N/A N/A 0.3 0.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.2 N/A 0.1 N/A
Have at least two alternative approaches(considering COTS/NDI/NCS) 0.7
15 Feasibility Evidence Alternatives been explored and evaluated? N/A 0.4 0.1 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.1 0.2 N/A N/A N/A 0.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.2 N/A
16 Feasibility Evidence Level of Service Have the claimed quality of service guarantees been validated? N/A 0.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Have COTS/NDI/Services scalability, compatibility, quality of service,
17 Feasibility Evidence NDI Feasibilitiy and life cycle support risks been thoroughly addressed? N/A N/A 0.9 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.1 N/A
Did the team identify the riskiest modules and whether the riskiest 0.4 0.4 0.3
18 Feasibility Evidence Risk Management modules development strategy has been considered. N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.1 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.2 N/A
Has the project identified a full set of representative operational
19 Feasibility Evidence Operational scenarios scenarios across which to evaluate feasibility? N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Does the project have adequate processes in place to define the
Validation and verification, test, and validation, and acceptance of systems and system
20 Feasibility Evidence Verification elements at all phases of definition and development? N/A N/A 0.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.4 0.2 0.3 0.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Does the team have required Domain knowledge and experience to 0.2
Domain Knowledge and develop a stable architecture for the system
21 Personnel Capability Expertise/Experience N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.2 N/A
Do you have the necessary knowledge to test the validity and stability
22 Personnel Capability Validation of the architecture? N/A N/A 0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.2 N/A
Have sufficiently talented and experienced program and systems
engineering managers been identified? Have they been empowerd to
23 Personnel Capability Personnel capabilities tailor process and to enforce development stability? N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 N/A N/A 0.2 N/A
Are the stakeholders who have been identified as critical to the success
of the project represented by highly qualified personnel - those who
are collaborative, representative, empowered, committed, and
24 Personnel Capability CRACK knowledgeable? N/A N/A N/A 0.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.3 0.4 0.3 0.3 -0.3 N/A N/A N/A
Did the team take any effort for improving the technological skills and
experience? How badly was the system affected by team's lack of
25 Personnel Capability Team Spirit motivation to excel? N/A N/A N/A 0.7 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.3 0.4 0.3 0.3 -0.3 N/A 0.2 N/A
Do you distribute the workload evenly based on people's roles and
responsibilities, or are they distributed based on people's
experience?Did uneven distribution of work affected team's
26 Planning and Control Work Distribution performance. N/A 0.1 N/A 0.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.3 N/A
Do the team members communicate to the project manager their
Strengths and areas of strengths and weaknesses so the plan and work distribution
27 Planning and Control Weaknesses can be adjusted accordingly? N/A N/A 0.1 0.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Do the team has a realistic scheduled project plan according to the
current situation and can the plan sustain any unprecedented changes
28 Planning and control Detail Plans in the future? N/A N/A N/A 0.4 N/A N/A N/A 0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.6 N/A
Do you constantly monitor and review the progress of the project
giving yourself enough buffer time to respond to changes and
29 Planning and control Project Monitoring unexpected situations? N/A N/A 0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.3 N/A
Is the quantity of developer systems engineering personnel assigned,
their skill and seniority mix, and the time phasing of their application
30 Planning and Control Personnel capabilities throughout the program life cycle, appropriate? N/A N/A 0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 N/A 0.2 N/A N/A
Is there a top-to-bottom plan for how the total system will be
integrated and tested? Does it adequately consider integration facilities
31 Planning and Control Overall plan development and earlier integration testing? N/A N/A 0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.2 0.2 N/A 0.2 0.2 N/A 0.2 N/A N/A
32 Planning and Control Risk Management Is the project adequately identifying and managing its risks? N/A N/A -0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.3 N/A
Is the project successfully monitoring progress and applying corrective
33 Planning and Control Project Monitoring action where necessary? N/A N/A 0.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.3 N/A
Validation Are all the modules being tested and validated by testers and the 0.1
34 Planning and Control stakeholders.? N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.2 0.2 N/A 0.2 0.2 N/A 0.2 N/A N/A
Is the team and stakeholders aware of each and every team members
Roles and roles and responsibilites and is the work distribution fair and according
35 Planning and Control Responsibilities to the expertise? N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Rescheduling client meetings, did it affect the system adversely in
36 Planning and Control Rescheduling delivering the artifacts on time? N/A N/A 0.1 0.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A -0.1 N/A
Requirements Are the win conditions constantly maintained by the shaper throughout
37 Gathering WinWin the project life cycle? N/A N/A 0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.6 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Requirements Was the WinWin negotiation successful in terms of capturing, agreeing,
38 Gathering WinWin and prioritizing the requirements? N/A N/A 0.2 0.2 N/A N/A N/A 0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.6 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Requirements Do the shaped requirements and scope of the project take into
39 Gathering Evolutionary consideration the evolutionary changes? N/A N/A 0.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.6 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Requirements Project details,requirements,boundaries and scope are thoroughly 0.2 0.4 0.4
40 Gathering Clarity researched and understood by the team? N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.5 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.5 N/A
ID Category Subject
Ex Example Example
Architecture
1 Development Validation
Architecture
2 Development Alternatives
Architecture
3 Development Evolutionary
4 Business Case Business case
Prototype/Verification
5 Business Case and Validation
Business
6 Business Case Process/Scoping
7 Business Case Alternatives
8 Business Case System Context
9 Business Case Prototyping
10 Collaboration Review
11 Collaboration Meetings
12 Collaboration Technology support
13 Collaboration Co-ordination
Collaboration
14 Aid
15 Feasibility Evidence Alternatives
16 Feasibility Evidence Level of Service
17 Feasibility Evidence NDI Feasibilitiy
18 Feasibility Evidence Risk Management
19 Feasibility Evidence Operational scenarios
Validation and
20 Feasibility Evidence Verification
Domain Knowledge and
21 Personnel Capability Expertise/Experience
22 Personnel Capability Validation
23 Personnel Capability Personnel capabilities
24 Personnel Capability CRACK
25 Personnel Capability Team Spirit
26 Planning and Control Work Distribution
Strengths and
27 Planning and Control Weaknesses
28 Planning and control Detail Plans
29 Planning and control Project Monitoring
30 Planning and Control Personnel capabilities
31 Planning and Control Overall plan
32 Planning and Control Risk Management
33 Planning and Control Project Monitoring
Validation
34 Planning and Control
Roles and
35 Planning and Control Responsibilities
36 Planning and Control Rescheduling
Requirements
37 Gathering WinWin
Requirements
38 Gathering WinWin
Requirements
39 Gathering Evolutionary
Requirements
40 Gathering Clarity
Scale Factors
Question PREC FLEX RESL TEAM PMAT
Are your programmers capabled and experienced with the type of
system to be developed? N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Do you constantly validate the architecture with the requirements,
prototypes, and concepts? N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Have you explored the alternatives for technologies to be used or
jump to a familiar one? 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.2 N/A
Has the system been architected for ease of adding or dropping
borderline features? Were these evolutionary requirements visualized
properly by the team? N/A N/A 0.3 N/A N/A
Is there a valid business case for the system, relating the life cycle
system benefits to the system total cost of ownership? 0.2 0.1 0.5 N/A N/A
Do prototypes developed for verifying the validation of requirements
addresses the critical issues(risks,use cases and GUI) and eventually
evolve as requirement changes amongst stakeholders 0.4 0.5 0.7 0.3 0.1
Do you and the stakeholders understand the existing and proposed
scope,boundary and business workflow ? 0.5 0.4 0.1 0.7 0.1
Do you explore the alternatives and competitors before prototyping a
new system and workflow? 0.5 0.2 0.4 0.2 0.1
Have questions about the fit of the system into the stakeholders'
context - acquirers, end users, administrators, interoperators,
maintainers, etc. - been adequately explored? 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.5 0.2
Are the prototypes developed early enough to address conceptual
issues and knowledge? 0.5 0.6 0.5 0.5 0.1
Do you consistently review each other's work before integrating them
together? 0.5 0.3 0.6 0.9 0.1
Do the stakeholders meeting are held weekly with clearly defined 0.4 0.6 0.6 0.8 0.1
agendas and does the project progress is discussed extensively.
Do you have the proper mechanisms to ensure high level of
collaboration and keeping all stakeholders in the loop (i.e. use of
Google Groups, MSN meetings, etc.)? 0.5 0.2 0.4 0.9 0.1
Are the team members co-operative and share the knowledge of their 0.4 0.2 0.4 0.9 0.1
expertise?
Did the team members were co-operative and helped each other in
development? 0.3 0.2 0.5 1 0.1
Have at least two alternative approaches(considering COTS/NDI/NCS)
been explored and evaluated? 0.2 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.1
Have the claimed quality of service guarantees been validated? 0.3 0.4 0.3 0.5 0.1
Have COTS/NDI/Services scalability, compatibility, quality of service,
and life cycle support risks been thoroughly addressed? 0.1 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.1
Did the team identify the riskiest modules and whether the riskiest 0.3 0.5 0.8 0.9 0.1
modules development strategy has been considered.
Has the project identified a full set of representative operational
scenarios across which to evaluate feasibility? N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Does the project have adequate processes in place to define the
verification, test, and validation, and acceptance of systems and
system elements at all phases of definition and development? 0.2 0.4 0.3 0.8 0.1
Does the team have required Domain knowledge and experience to 0.2 0.4 0.3 0.7 0.1
develop a stable architecture for the system
Do you have the necessary knowledge to test the validity and stability
of the architecture? 0.4 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.1
Have sufficiently talented and experienced program and systems
engineering managers been identified? Have they been empowerd to
tailor process and to enforce development stability? 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.1
Are the stakeholders who have been identified as critical to the
success of the project represented by highly qualified personnel -
those who are collaborative, representative, empowered, committed,
and knowledgeable? 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.7 0.1
Did the team take any effort for improving the technological skills and
experience? How badly was the system affected by team's lack of
motivation to excel? 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.7 0.1
Do you distribute the workload evenly based on people's roles and
responsibilities, or are they distributed based on people's
experience?Did uneven distribution of work affected team's
performance. 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.8 0.1
Do the team members communicate to the project manager their
areas of strengths and weaknesses so the plan and work distribution
can be adjusted accordingly? 0.3 0.6 0.2 0.9 0.1
Do the team has a realistic scheduled project plan according to the 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.3 0.1
current situation and can the plan sustain any unprecedented changes
in the future?
Do you constantly monitor and review the progress of the project
giving yourself enough buffer time to respond to changes and
unexpected situations? 0.1 0.3 0.2 0.4 0.1
Is the quantity of developer systems engineering personnel assigned,
their skill and seniority mix, and the time phasing of their application
throughout the program life cycle, appropriate? 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.9 0.1
Is there a top-to-bottom plan for how the total system will be
integrated and tested? Does it adequately consider integration
facilities development and earlier integration testing? 0.2 0.4 0.4 0.9 0.1
Is the project adequately identifying and managing its risks? 0.3 0.2 0.7 0.1 0.1
Is the project successfully monitoring progress and applying corrective
action where necessary? 0.1 0.4 0.5 0.9 0.1
Are all the modules being tested and validated by testers and the 0.3 0.3 0.4 1 0.1
stakeholders.?
Is the team and stakeholders aware of each and every team members 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.9 0.1
roles and responsibilites and is the work distribution fair and according
to the expertise?
Rescheduling client meetings, did it affect the system adversely in
delivering the artifacts on time? 0.2 0.4 0.1 0.7 0.1
Are the win conditions constantly maintained by the shaper
throughout the project life cycle? 0.1 0.4 0.1 0.8 0.1
Was the WinWin negotiation successful in terms of capturing,
agreeing, and prioritizing the requirements? 0.1 0.5 0.2 1 0.1
Do the shaped requirements and scope of the project take into 0.1 0.4 0.4 0.7 0.1
consideration the evolutionary changes?
Project details,requirements,boundaries and scope are thoroughly 0.2 0.5 0.5 0.7 0.1
researched and understood by the team?
Cost Drivers
Product Platform Personnel Project
RELY DATA DOCU CPLX RUSE TIME STOR PVOL ACAP APEX PCAP PLEX LTEX PCON TOOL SCED SITE
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.1 0.5 1.0 0.9 0.7 N/A NA NA N/A
0.1 0.1 0.9 0.4 0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.4 0.3 N/A
0.1 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.3 0.1 0.4 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 N/A 0.4 0.2 N/A
0.2 0.1 0.5 0.5 0.1 0.6 N/A N/A 0.4 0.2 0.4 0.3 0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A 0.7 0.1 0.2 N/A N/A N/A 0.5 0.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
0.1 0.1 0.4 0.3 0.1 N/A N/A N/A 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.3 0.3 0.6 0.1 N/A
n/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A 0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.3 0.5 0.3 0.5 0.5 N/A 0.7 N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.2
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A n/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.5 0.4 0.5 0.4 0.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A 0.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.4 0.3 0.4 0.3 0.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A
0.1 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.1 N/A N/A N/A 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.3 0.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
0.3 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.1 N/A N/A N/A 0.3 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A 0.1 0.5 0.3 0.1 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
0.1 N/A 0.5 0.2 0.1 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A n/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.5 0.6 0.5 0.6 0.6 N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A 0.6 0.5 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.5 0.4 0.5 0.4 0.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 N/A N/A 0.1 N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.1 N/A N/A N/A
0.2 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.5 n/A N/A N/A 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 N/A N/A N/A
0.4 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.1 N/A N/A N/A 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 N/A N/A N/A
0.1 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.1 N/A N/A N/A 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.1 N/A N/A N/A
0.1 0.2 0.4 0.3 0.1 N/A N/A N/A 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.1 N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.4 0.6 0.4 0.6 0.6 0.1 N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.2 N/A N/A N/A
0.1 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 N/A N/A N/A 0.4 0.5 0.4 0.5 0.4 0.1 N/A N/A N/A
ID Category Subject
Ex Example Example
Architecture
1 Development
Architecture Validation
2 Development
Architecture Alternatives
3 Development Evolutionary
4 Business Case Business case
Prototype/Verification
5 Business Case and Validation
Business
6 Business Case Process/Scoping
7 Business Case Alternatives
8 Business Case System Context
9 Business Case Prototyping
10 Collaboration Review
11 Collaboration Meetings
12 Collaboration Technology support
13 Collaboration Co-ordination
Collaboration
14 Aid
15 Feasibility Evidence Alternatives
16 Feasibility Evidence Level of Service
17 Feasibility Evidence NDI Feasibilitiy
18 Feasibility Evidence Risk Management
19 Feasibility Evidence Operational scenarios
Validation and
20 Feasibility Evidence Verification
Domain Knowledge and
21 Personnel Capability Expertise/Experience
22 Personnel Capability Validation
23 Personnel Capability Personnel capabilities
24 Personnel Capability CRACK
25 Personnel Capability Team Spirit
26 Planning and Control Work Distribution
Strengths and
27 Planning and Control Weaknesses
28 Planning and control Detail Plans
29 Planning and control Project Monitoring
30 Planning and Control Personnel capabilities
31 Planning and Control Overall plan
32 Planning and Control Risk Management
33 Planning and Control Project Monitoring
Validation
34 Planning and Control
Roles and
35 Planning and Control Responsibilities
36 Planning and Control Rescheduling
Requirements
37 Gathering WinWin
Requirements
38 Gathering WinWin
Requirements
39 Gathering Evolutionary
Requirements
40 Gathering Clarity
30 Planning and Control Personnel capabilities
31 Planning and Control Overall plan
32 Planning and Control Risk Management
33 Planning and Control Project Monitoring
Validation
34 Planning and Control
Roles and
35 Planning and Control Responsibilities
36 Planning and Control Rescheduling
Requirements
37 Gathering WinWin
Requirements
38 Gathering WinWin
Requirements
39 Gathering Evolutionary
Requirements
40 Gathering Clarity
Scale Factors
Are your programmers capabled and experienced with the type of
Question PREC FLEX RESL TEAM PMAT
system to be developed? N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Do you constantly validate the architecture with the requirements,
prototypes, and concepts?
Have you explored the alternatives for technologies to be used or N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
jump to system been architected for ease of adding or dropping
Has the a familiar one? N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
borderline features? Were these evolutionary requirements visualized N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Is there a valid business case for the system, relating the life cycle
system benefits to the system total cost of ownership? N/A N/A N/A N/A
Do prototypes developed for verifying the validation of requirements
addresses the critical issues(risks,use cases and GUI) and eventually
evolve as requirement changes amongst stakeholders N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.6
Do you and the stakeholders understand the existing and proposed
scope,boundary and business workflow ? N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Do you explore the alternatives and competitors before prototyping a
new system and workflow? N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Have questions about the fit of the system into the stakeholders'
context - acquirers, end users, administrators, interoperators,
maintainers, etc. - been adequately explored? N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Are the prototypes developed early enough to address conceptual
issues and knowledge? N/A N/A 0.6 N/A N/A
Do you consistently review each other's work before integrating them
together? N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Do the stakeholders meeting are held weekly with clearly defined
agendas and does the project progress is discussed extensively.
N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.3
Do you have the proper mechanisms to ensure high level of
collaboration and keeping all stakeholders in the loop (i.e. use of
Google Groups, MSN meetings, etc.)? N/A N/A N/A 0.7 0.3
Are the team members co-operative and share the knowledge of their
expertise? N/A N/A N/A 1 N/A
Did the team members were co-operative and helped each other in
development? N/A N/A N/A 1 N/A
Have at least two alternative approaches(considering COTS/NDI/NCS)
been explored and evaluated? N/A N/A 0.3 N/A N/A
Have the claimed quality of service guarantees been validated? N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Have COTS/NDI/Services scalability, compatibility, quality of service,
and life cycle support risks been thoroughly addressed? N/A N/A 0.6 N/A N/A
Did the team identify the riskiest modules and whether the riskiest
modules development strategy has been considered. N/A N/A 0.6 N/A N/A
Has the project identified a full set of representative operational
scenarios across which to evaluate feasibility? N/A N/A 0.5 N/A N/A
Does the project have adequate processes in place to define the
verification, test, and validation, and acceptance of systems and
system elements at all phases of definition and development? N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.7
Does the team have required Domain knowledge and experience to
develop a stable architecture for the system
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Do you have the necessary knowledge to test the validity and stability
of the architecture? N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Have sufficiently talented and experienced program and systems
engineering managers been identified? Have they been empowerd to
tailor process and to enforce development stability? N/A N/A 0.3 N/A N/A
Are the stakeholders who have been identified as critical to the
success of the project represented by highly qualified personnel -
those who are collaborative, representative, empowered, committed,
and knowledgeable? N/A N/A N/A 0.3 N/A
Did the team take any effort for improving the technological skills and
experience? How badly was the system affected by team's lack of
motivation to excel? N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Do you distribute the workload evenly based on people's roles and
responsibilities, or are they distributed based on people's
experience?Did uneven distribution of work affected team's
performance. N/A N/A N/A 0.1 N/A
Do the team members communicate to the project manager their
areas of strengths and weaknesses so the plan and work distribution
can be adjusted accordingly? N/A N/A N/A 0.3 N/A
Do the team has a realistic scheduled project plan according to the
current situation and can the plan sustain any unprecedented changes
in the future? N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.3
Do you constantly monitor and review the progress of the project
giving yourself enough buffer time to respond to changes and
unexpected situations? N/A N/A 0.6 N/A N/A
Is the quantity of developer systems engineering personnel assigned,
their skill and seniority mix, and the time phasing of their application
throughout the program life cycle, appropriate? N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.1
Is there a top-to-bottom plan for how the total system will be
integrated and tested? Does it adequately consider integration
facilities development and earlier integration testing? N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.3
Is the project adequately identifying and managing its risks? N/A N/A 0.8 N/A N/A
Is the project successfully monitoring progress and applying corrective
action where necessary? N/A N/A 0.6 N/A 0.3
Are all the modules being tested and validated by testers and the
stakeholders.? N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.3
Is the team and stakeholders aware of each and every team members
roles and responsibilites and is the work distribution fair and according
to the expertise? N/A N/A N/A 0.3 0.1
Rescheduling client meetings, did it affect the system adversely in
delivering the artifacts on time? N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.1
Are the win conditions constantly maintained by the shaper
throughout the project life cycle? N/A N/A N/A N/A -0.3
Was the WinWin negotiation successful in terms of capturing,
agreeing, and prioritizing the requirements? N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Do the shaped requirements and scope of the project take into
consideration the evolutionary changes? N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Project details,requirements,boundaries and scope are thoroughly
researched and understood by the team? N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Is the quantity of developer systems engineering personnel assigned,
their skill and seniority mix, and the time phasing of their application
throughout the program life cycle, appropriate? N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.1
Is there a top-to-bottom plan for how the total system will be
integrated and tested? Does it adequately consider integration
facilities development and earlier integration testing? N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.3
Is the project adequately identifying and managing its risks? N/A N/A 0.8 N/A N/A
Is the project successfully monitoring progress and applying corrective
action where necessary? N/A N/A 0.6 N/A 0.3
Are all the modules being tested and validated by testers and the
stakeholders.? N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.3
Is the team and stakeholders aware of each and every team members
roles and responsibilites and is the work distribution fair and according
to the expertise? N/A N/A N/A 0.3 0.1
Rescheduling client meetings, did it affect the system adversely in
delivering the artifacts on time? N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.1
Are the win conditions constantly maintained by the shaper
throughout the project life cycle? N/A N/A N/A N/A -0.3
Was the WinWin negotiation successful in terms of capturing,
agreeing, and prioritizing the requirements? N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Do the shaped requirements and scope of the project take into
consideration the evolutionary changes? N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Project details,requirements,boundaries and scope are thoroughly
researched and understood by the team? N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Cost Drivers
Product Platform Personnel Project
RELY DATA DOCU CPLX RUSE TIME STOR PVOL ACAP APEX PCAP PLEX LTEX PCON TOOL SCED
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.1 0.5 1.0 0.9 0.7 N/A NA NA
1 N/A 0.8 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.9 0.9 N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.5 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.5 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.1 0.1 N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A 0.7 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.2 0.8 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.1 0.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.6 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.3 0.1 0.3 0.1 0.1 N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.5
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A -0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.7 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A -0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.7 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Project
SITE
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
0.3
0.4
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
ID Category Subject
Ex Example Example
Architecture
1 Development Validation
Architecture
2 Development Alternatives
Architecture
3 Development Evolutionary
4 Business Case Business case
Prototype/Verification
5 Business Case and Validation
Business
6 Business Case Process/Scoping
7 Business Case Alternatives
8 Business Case System Context
9 Business Case Prototyping
10 Collaboration Review
11 Collaboration Meetings
12 Collaboration Technology support
13 Collaboration Co-ordination
Collaboration
14 Aid
15 Feasibility Evidence Alternatives
16 Feasibility Evidence Level of Service
17 Feasibility Evidence NDI Feasibilitiy
18 Feasibility Evidence Risk Management
19 Feasibility Evidence Operational scenarios
Validation and
20 Feasibility Evidence Verification
Domain Knowledge and
21 Personnel Capability Expertise/Experience
22 Personnel Capability Validation
23 Personnel Capability Personnel capabilities
24 Personnel Capability CRACK
25 Personnel Capability Team Spirit
26 Planning and Control Work Distribution
Strengths and
27 Planning and Control Weaknesses
28 Planning and control Detail Plans
29 Planning and control Project Monitoring
30 Planning and Control Personnel capabilities
31 Planning and Control Overall plan
32 Planning and Control Risk Management
33 Planning and Control Project Monitoring
Validation
34 Planning and Control
Roles and
35 Planning and Control Responsibilities
36 Planning and Control Rescheduling
Requirements
37 Gathering WinWin
Requirements
38 Gathering WinWin
Requirements
39 Gathering Evolutionary
Requirements
40 Gathering Clarity
Scale Factors
Question PREC FLEX RESL
Are your programmers capabled and experienced with the type of
system to be developed? N/A N/A N/A
Do you constantly validate the architecture with the requirements,
prototypes, and concepts? N/A N/A 0.5
Have you explored the alternatives for technologies to be used or
jump to a familiar one? 0.4 0.3 0.5
Has the system been architected for ease of adding or dropping
borderline features? Were these evolutionary requirements visualized
properly by the team? N/A 0.3 0.1
Is there a valid business case for the system, relating the life cycle
system benefits to the system total cost of ownership? 0.7 0.1 0.4
Do prototypes developed for verifying the validation of requirements
addresses the critical issues(risks,use cases and GUI) and eventually
evolve as requirement changes amongst stakeholders N/A N/A 0.3
Do you and the stakeholders understand the existing and proposed
scope,boundary and business workflow ? N/A 0.4 0.4
Do you explore the alternatives and competitors before prototyping a
new system and workflow? N/A 0.2 N/A
Have questions about the fit of the system into the stakeholders'
context - acquirers, end users, administrators, interoperators,
maintainers, etc. - been adequately explored? N/A 0.2 0.4
Are the prototypes developed early enough to address conceptual
issues and knowledge? N/A N/A 0.6
Do you consistently review each other's work before integrating them
together? N/A N/A 0.7
Do the stakeholders meeting are held weekly with clearly defined 0.2 0.4
agendas and does the project progress is discussed extensively.
N/A
Do you have the proper mechanisms to ensure high level of
collaboration and keeping all stakeholders in the loop (i.e. use of
Google Groups, MSN meetings, etc.)? N/A N/A 0.6
Are the team members co-operative and share the knowledge of their 0.5
expertise? N/A N/A
Did the team members were co-operative and helped each other in
development? N/A N/A 0.3
Have at least two alternative approaches(considering COTS/NDI/NCS)
been explored and evaluated? 0.4 0.7 0.2
Have the claimed quality of service guarantees been validated? N/A N/A N/A
Have COTS/NDI/Services scalability, compatibility, quality of service,
and life cycle support risks been thoroughly addressed? N/A N/A N/A
Did the team identify the riskiest modules and whether the riskiest 0.4
modules development strategy has been considered. 0.6 N/A
Has the project identified a full set of representative operational
scenarios across which to evaluate feasibility? N/A N/A N/A
Does the project have adequate processes in place to define the
verification, test, and validation, and acceptance of systems and
system elements at all phases of definition and development? N/A N/A 0.2
Does the team have required Domain knowledge and experience to
develop a stable architecture for the system
0.4 N/A N/A
Do you have the necessary knowledge to test the validity and stability
of the architecture? N/A N/A 0.4
Have sufficiently talented and experienced program and systems
engineering managers been identified? Have they been empowerd to
tailor process and to enforce development stability? 0.5 N/A N/A
Are the stakeholders who have been identified as critical to the
success of the project represented by highly qualified personnel -
those who are collaborative, representative, empowered, committed,
and knowledgeable? N/A N/A N/A
Did the team take any effort for improving the technological skills and
experience? How badly was the system affected by team's lack of
motivation to excel? N/A N/A N/A
Do you distribute the workload evenly based on people's roles and
responsibilities, or are they distributed based on people's
experience?Did uneven distribution of work affected team's
performance. N/A 0.3 N/A
Do the team members communicate to the project manager their
areas of strengths and weaknesses so the plan and work distribution
can be adjusted accordingly? N/A N/A N/A
Do the team has a realistic scheduled project plan according to the
current situation and can the plan sustain any unprecedented changes
in the future? N/A 0.5 N/A
Do you constantly monitor and review the progress of the project
giving yourself enough buffer time to respond to changes and
unexpected situations? N/A N/A 0.3
Is the quantity of developer systems engineering personnel assigned,
their skill and seniority mix, and the time phasing of their application
throughout the program life cycle, appropriate? N/A N/A 0.4
Is there a top-to-bottom plan for how the total system will be
integrated and tested? Does it adequately consider integration
facilities development and earlier integration testing? N/A 0.3 0.2
Is the project adequately identifying and managing its risks? N/A N/A 0.3
Is the project successfully monitoring progress and applying corrective
action where necessary? N/A N/A 0.4
Are all the modules being tested and validated by testers and the 0.5
stakeholders.? N/A N/A
Is the team and stakeholders aware of each and every team members
roles and responsibilites and is the work distribution fair and according
to the expertise? N/A N/A N/A
Rescheduling client meetings, did it affect the system adversely in
delivering the artifacts on time? N/A N/A 0.2
Are the win conditions constantly maintained by the shaper
throughout the project life cycle? N/A 0.6 0.3
Was the WinWin negotiation successful in terms of capturing,
agreeing, and prioritizing the requirements? N/A 0.3 0.4
Do the shaped requirements and scope of the project take into
consideration the evolutionary changes? N/A 0.4 0.2
Project details,requirements,boundaries and scope are thoroughly 0.2 0.2
researched and understood by the team? N/A
cale Factors Cost Drivers
Product Platform Personnel
TEAM PMAT RELY DATA DOCU CPLX RUSE TIME STOR PVOL ACAP APEX
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.1 0.5
N/A N/A 0.1 N/A 0.6 0.2 0.8 0.2 N/A 0.6 0.7 0.2
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.3 0.4 N/A N/A N/A 0.5 0.4
N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.6 0.6 0.6 N/A N/A N/A 0.5 0.3
N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.4 0.3 0.7 N/A N/A N/A 0.2 N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.2 N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.4 N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.3 0.6 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.6 N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.3 0.6 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.4 N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.3 N/A
0.6 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
0.6
N/A N/A N/A 0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
0.7 N/A N/A 0.1 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
0.6
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
0.6 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
0.2
0.7 N/A N/A 0.5 0.1 0.2 N/A N/A N/A 0.1 0.2
N/A N/A N/A 0.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.3 0.1
0.1
N/A N/A N/A 0.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.5 0.5
0.2
N/A N/A N/A 0.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.3 0.4
N/A N/A N/A 0.1 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.4 0.4
0.5 0.2
N/A N/A 0.2 0.7 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.5 0.2
0.5
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.2 0.3
0.3
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.4 0.5
0.4
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.5 0.4
0.2
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.2
0.3
0.7 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.3
0.2
0.5 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.4
0.3
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.4 N/A
0.4
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.3 N/A
0.2
0.1 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.1 N/A
0.5
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.2 0.2
0.3
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.2 0.2
0.4
N/A N/A 0.1 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.2 N/A
0.4
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.2 N/A
0.2
N/A N/A 0.1 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.2 0.4
0.3
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.3
0.4
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.2
0.6
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.1 N/A N/A N/A 0.6 N/A
0.7
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.1 N/A N/A N/A 0.6 N/A
0.4 0.2
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.1 N/A N/A 0.6 N/A
0.4 0.5 0.3
N/A N/A N/A 0.2 0.1 N/A N/A 0.5 N/A
s
Personnel Project
PCAP PLEX LTEX PCON TOOL SCED SITE
1.0 0.9 0.7 N/A NA NA N/A
N/A 0.3 0.4 N/A 0.2 0.8 N/A
N/A 0.4 0.5 N/A 0.3 0.3 N/A
N/A 0.3 0.6 N/A 0.4 0.5 N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.3 N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.2 N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.5 N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.4 N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.3 N/A
N/A N/A N/A 0.1 N/A 0.6 N/A
N/A N/A N/A 0.2 N/A 0.4 N/A
N/A N/A N/A 0.3 N/A 0.3 N/A
N/A N/A N/A 0.4 N/A 0.4 N/A
N/A N/A N/A 0.3 N/A 0.1 N/A
N/A 0.3 0.2 N/A N/A 0.3 N/A
N/A 0.2 0.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A 0.4 0.4 N/A N/A 0.4 N/A
N/A 0.3 0.5 0.3 N/A 0.3 N/A
N/A 0.2 0.3 N/A N/A N/A N/A
0.3 0.4 0.4 N/A N/A N/A N/A
0.6 N/A 0.2 N/A N/A 0.4 N/A
0.7 N/A 0.5 N/A N/A 0.4 N/A
0.6 0.4 0.4 N/A N/A 0.3 N/A
0.7 0.2 0.6 N/A N/A N/A N/A
0.1 0.1 0.4 N/A N/A 0.3 N/A
0.1 N/A 0.2 N/A 0.1 0.3 N/A
0.2 N/A 0.3 N/A 0.3 0.3 N/A
0.2 N/A 0.5 N/A 0.4 0.4 N/A
0.1 N/A 0.4 N/A 0.2 0.3 N/A
0.2 0.3 0.6 N/A 0.3 N/A N/A
0.1 0.2 0.1 N/A 0.3 N/A N/A
0.2 N/A 0.3 N/A 0.4 0.4 N/A
0.2 N/A 0.4 N/A 0.5 0.3 N/A
0.1 0.4 0.5 N/A 0.1 N/A N/A
0.1 N/A 0.3 N/A 0.2 N/A N/A
0.2 N/A 0.2 N/A 0.2 0.2 N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.4 N/A