Team

Document Sample
Team Powered By Docstoc
					         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

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:2
posted:10/28/2011
language:English
pages:63
xiaohuicaicai xiaohuicaicai
About