Japan's Case · 2020-07-01 · Building Best Practices of Advanced Software Development Software...
Transcript of Japan's Case · 2020-07-01 · Building Best Practices of Advanced Software Development Software...
SoftwareEngineeringCenter
Software Engineering Center
http://www.ipa.go.jp/software/sec/index.php
Japan's Case: Highly reliable S/W development technology
Dr. Seishiro TSURUHOPresident, Software Engineering CenterInformation-technology Promotion Agency, Japan
International Software Engineering ConferenceSeoul, Korea, December/3/2004
1
Information-technology Promotion Agency, Japan
SoftwareEngineeringCenterAgenda
1. Situations Surrounding Software Engineering
2. Establishment of Software Engineering Center (SEC)
3. Future of Software Engineering
2
SoftwareEngineeringCenter
Software Engineering Center
SoftwareEngineeringCenter
Software Engineering Center
1. Situations Surrounding Software Engineering
3
Information-technology Promotion Agency, Japan
SoftwareEngineeringCenter
Software as a Basis for Social Infrastructure and Added Values
Software is a social and economic infrastructure that supports all kinds of industries and creates added values of products and services
Electrical Machineries for Information and Communication Systems (e.g. PCs, PDAs, Servers)
Software (e.g. business applications, embedded software)
IT infrastructures (e.g. broadband router)
physical basis /
foundation
source of added values
IT industries
Automotive industries (e.g. ITS, procurement systems, production systems)
Bio industries (e.g. bio-informatics)
Financial business (e.g. electronic commerce systems)
e-Gov.advanced medical systems
Software now plays a critical role to strengthen competitivenessof all kinds of industries and to implement structural reforms
4
Information-technology Promotion Agency, Japan
SoftwareEngineeringCenter
The Software Industry is Getting More Important
Japanese Electronics and Information Industries
8,740
6,930
6,302
8,355
7,230
5,403
10,61113,591
5,873(11.3%)13,618(23.4%)
4,128
4,093
3,579
3,8283,623
4,339
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
1990
sales and output (yen in billions)
Information Service
Electronic Components/Batteries
Semiconductor
Telecommunication Equipments
Electronic Computers
Office Supplies, Electric Measuring Instruments
Consumer Electric Equipments
Consumer Electronic Equipments
2001
52,05358,190
UsingEmbedded Software Systems
Source: “A Survey on Selected Service Industries,” “the Census of Manufactures” and “Dynamic Statistics”
5
Information-technology Promotion Agency, Japan
SoftwareEngineeringCenter
The Scale of the Embedded Software Industries is Continuously Expanding
Examples(SLOC*)
• Car Navigation System with PDA– 3 million
• LCD/Plasma TVs– 0.6 million
• DVD recorder with built-in HDD– 1 million
Source: Nikkei Electronics, 2000 9-11(no.778)
1990 1995 2000
100K
1M
10M
100MB
Car Nav.
TVs
Cell Phones
Hi-Vision TV
voice guidanceCD-ROM VICS
enabled
DVD enabled
Internet TVdigital cell phone
i-mode enabled
packet communication
enabled
i-mode enabled
Java enabled
ITS enabled
data-storage broadcasting
3/4G enabled
Object Size
* SLOC: Source Lines of Code
6
Information-technology Promotion Agency, Japan
SoftwareEngineeringCenter
Source: Dr. M. Hirayama, Toshiba Corp., Software Engineering Center, ET2002 TB-6, “Some Steps for the Quality Improvement of Embedded Software Systems Development”
1989 19991996
Size
of S
oftw
are
(LO
C :
Line
s of
Cod
e)
4-bit generation 16-bit generation8-bit generation
700K
1.5M
2.2M
500K
1M
2M 12 months
Time to Market Size
Current User Needs for Software Systems (esp. for Embedded S/W):Larger Size & Faster Time to Market
Size of Programs of Cell Phones
Current Development Productivity Does NOT Meet the Requirements of the Present Age?
6 months
7
Information-technology Promotion Agency, Japan
SoftwareEngineeringCenter
Profile of the Embedded Software Industry
• Embedded Software Industry– engineers : 150,000.– development size: 2 trillion JPN Yen.
• output of embedded systems (dynamic statistics): 50 trillion JPN Yen.
– output : about 10 billion lines/year• One engineer develops 6,000 lines/year on average.
• cf, Information Service Industry– employees: 510,000– sales: 14 trillion JPN Yen
Source: Report on Embedded Software Industries (The Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industries, 2004)
8
Information-technology Promotion Agency, Japan
SoftwareEngineeringCenter
Is the Quality Declining?LOTS of CAUSES of TROUBLES: development failures, delivery delays, budget overruns, breakdown and operational errors of information systems, defects of embedded software systems...USUAL REQUIREMNENTS, which make the quality management difficult:larger size, more complex systems; faster time to market, cost-reduction... … And OPEN SOURCE SOFTWARE movement.
Examples of the impact of some mission-critical system failures include…
Feb/2001 A SOFTWARE DEFECT caused 230,000 mobile phones recall.
An OVERFLOWMar/2003 of air-traffic control SYSTEM stranded 300,000 passengers in the airport.A SYSTEM MALFUNCTION caused the airline company to cancel 155 flights in two daysOUT-OF SERVICE of a bank ATM from morning to 14.30. ABNORMAL STOP in a bank’s mission-critical system in the evening.A BREAKDOWN
May/2003of an air route surveillance radar system caused 130
flights delay of more than 30 minutes. Apr/2004
9
Information-technology Promotion Agency, Japan
SoftwareEngineeringCenter
estimate on MAN-MONTH
no environment to produce
practical and skilled talents
Software Users
USER: no clear req. definition, no capability of evaluation
A defect in embedded SW systems in mobile
phones → large-scale recall
national institutes
univs.
prime contractors
Software Vendors
SMEs; approx.5600
Discrepancy in public traffic
system
Malfunction of payment systems of leading banks
Financial BusinessCentral/ local governments Manufactures
weak partnership
<industries><academia>
Market Size:13.7 trillion JY
Employees:560,000
no quantitative / competent
evaluation of software
Japan’ “strength”: Japan is recognizing what to do…to strengthen the filed of the integration with HW, i.e., embedded SW
Vendors have little incentive
for quality & productivity improvement
VENDOR: rough estimate→TROUBLES!
hollowing out of the JPN S/W industry caused by the rise of the low-cost & high performance Asian industriesfew personnel exchanges,
few knowledge sharing
Structural Problems of Software Industries in Japan
partner companies
big enterprises:
10-20
10
Information-technology Promotion Agency, Japan
SoftwareEngineeringCenter
Toward Collaboration Between Academia & Industries in JPN
USA: Many universities offer PRACTICAL research programs in SOFTWARE ENGINEERING. Active interactions with industries.
Japan: Mainly THEORY-oriented COMPUTER SCIENCE. Few collaboration (e.g., talents, knowledge) with industries.
【USA】67% of employees in the IT industry hold IT-related degrees (BS, MS, PhD). About half of it (about 34% of the industry) are from computer science departments. 【Japan】24.5% of new employees in the IT industry graduate from universities;19% from technical junior colleges / vocational schools. … 53.7 % in the IT industry have not received formal IT education.【China】More then 400 universities & colleges offer software-related courses to more than 400,000 students.【India】120,000 graduate from IT departments every year; most of them are software-related.
11
SoftwareEngineeringCenter
Software Engineering Center
SoftwareEngineeringCenter
Software Engineering Center
2. Establishment of Software Engineering Center (SEC)
12
Information-technology Promotion Agency, Japan
SoftwareEngineeringCenter
Software Engineering Center (SEC)
ESTABLISHED on Oct. 1, 2004 (some preliminary activities have started since the beginning of the year)
STAFF: Intellects from Industries & Academia(Internal Researchers: 26 Task Force Members: approx. 130)
PRESIDENT: Dr. Seishiro TSURUHO
MISSION OF THE SEC:Develop Qualified Software Efficiently with “Monozukuri” or Craftsmanship in Mind
13
Information-technology Promotion Agency, Japan
SoftwareEngineeringCenterStrategy of the SEC:
Strengthen Competitiveness in Software Engineering
Keep adding values through a spiral value chain
• Add values through marketing & research, development & standardization
• Obtain feedback through promotion and evaluation
• Iterate the value chain
SEC
marketing/ research
development/ standardization
promotion
evaluation
14
Information-technology Promotion Agency, Japan
SoftwareEngineeringCenter
Action Plans to Implement the Strategy
• Concentrate most critical tasks in two major areas– Software Engineering for Enterprise Systems (SEES)
• quantitative data analysis, estimation methods, software life-cycle process– Software Engineering for Embedded Technology (SEET)
• Standard development technologies, management technologies, skilled HRs
• Utilize & Implement the results: Feedback practical expertise– Advanced Software Development (ASD)
• Analyze advanced case examples: Study & Research emerging fields– Collaborative Researches
• Collaboration with national and overseas institutes– Emerging Fields
• E.g. requirements engineering, design & development technologies, Agile
15
Information-technology Promotion Agency, Japan
SoftwareEngineeringCenterActivities of the SEC
Industries
共同研究、技術移転・普及啓発、人材流動等
Software Engineering for Embedded Technology
Strengthen the development capability, Nurture skilled engineers
Building Best Practices of Advanced Software Development
Software Engineering Center, Japan
Univ., National Institutes & Overseas Institutes
Collaborative Researches (sharing raw-data, case examples…)Technology Transfer, Promotion, Standardization, Flexible
Human Resources Exchange
SEI(US), IESE(Germany), MMRC(Tokyo Univ.), EASE(NAIST&Osaka Univ.)
Be a “Platform” for SW Development Capability
Development & Promotion of Methods/Techniques, Standardization, Research & Survey
Users VendorsCollaboration for quality & productivity improvement
Software Engineering for Enterprise Systems
Improve Quality & Productivity
16
Information-technology Promotion Agency, Japan
SoftwareEngineeringCenter
The SEC as a Cornerstone of Partnership among Industries, Academia and the Government
Academia IPA/SEC JPN Government Industries
MMRC (Tokyo Univ.)
NEXCESS Project (Nagoya Univ.)
e-Society Project (JAIST)
Software Engineering for Enterprise Systems
(SEES)
Software Engineering for Embedded Technology
(SEET)
Advanced Software Development
(ASD)
Committee to Strengthen the Capability
of SEES
Committee to Strengthen the Capability
of SEET
Committee of ASD
The SEES Task Force
The SEET Task Force SESSAME
The ASD Task Force
EASE Project (NAIST &
Osaka Univ.)
TOPPERS
JASPAR
EMBLIX
TRON Assn.
Research Associations
JISA
JUAS
Agile Process Association
IPSGSIG-SE JASPIC
Foreign Research Institutes
(IESE, SEI)
JASA
17
Information-technology Promotion Agency, Japan
SoftwareEngineeringCenter
Efforts & Approaches:Software Engineering for Enterprise Systems
Initiate Engineering Approaches for more efficient development & risk reduction• Quantitative Data Analysis
– Collect & Analyze quantitative data; provide statistics; develop a jointly owned view for the current situations
– Provide templates to be used for data collection
– Promote engineering approaches• Estimation methods
– Prove the estimation models / approaches
– Promote best practices• Software Life-cycle processes
– Define roles and activities of the stakeholders; reduce any project risks
No unrealistic, wasteful efforts!
*vendor to userdeliver expected “value”
*user to vendororder reliable systems/service
In Future: ideal & “typical”
req./expectation
systems/service
systems/service
vendor
user
high CS
credit/ brand
deliver
order
vendor
user
At Present: typical situation
・misunderstanding of the roles &
activities among stakeholders
・unrealistic & wasteful efforts
・failed projects, low customer satisfactions
req./expectation
deliver
order
18
Information-technology Promotion Agency, Japan
SoftwareEngineeringCenter
Efforts & Approaches:Software Engineering for Embedded Technology
Organize and Promote Methods & Techniques to Efficiently Develop High-quality Software
• Quality Improvement Technique
– Study & Organize methods to improve quality in both upstream & downstream
• Project Management Technique
– Study & Organize PM methods concerning the characteristics of embedded software development
• Process Technique
– Formulate standard process based on concurrent development with HW.
– Organize a set of guideline for process improvement.
Quality & Productivity Improvement
Quality improvement
technique
Project management
technique
Process technique
Organize and promote techniques to strengthen the capability
of embedded software development
19
Information-technology Promotion Agency, Japan
SoftwareEngineeringCenter
Nurture Skilled Human Resources for Embedded Software Development
Model for works
[reference]
Framework of skills
Model for careers[reference]
Evaluate their skills
Career Advancement& Career Shift
Project Team Design
Skill Improvement
Skill Standards
WG
②Career
Development WG
OutputProfiles of Skills
③Education
Program WG
① Formulate techniques & skills ② Utilize the right skilled engineers ③ Nurture skilled human resources
Input Profiles
of Engineers
Use the results of the evaluationEvaluate the skills
20
Information-technology Promotion Agency, Japan
SoftwareEngineeringCenter
The Organization of SEC, Japan (As of Nov. 16, 2004)
President’s Office
Advanced Software Development
Software Engineering for Enterprise Systems (SEES)
Software Engineering for Embedded Technology (SEET)
Advisory Board
・ITS Platform Development
Project Administrative Group
・Survey on SPI Methods・Administration, PR, & Promotion
・Collecting & Analyzing Quantitative Data・Estimation Methods・Software Life Cycle Processes・Requirements Engineering・Design and Development Technology
・Embedded Software Engineering・Skill Standards
Committee to Strengthen the
Capability of SEES
56 members
Committee to Strengthen the
Capability of SEET
74 members
Software Engineering Center, Japan
LINK9 full-time researchers
8 full-time researchers
9 staff members
President: Dr. Seishiro TSURUHOSenior Vice President: Dr. Toshinori SAEKIVice President: Dr. Kiyoshi MATSUURA
Project Leader: Mamoru YASUDASub-leader: Yasushi ISHIGAI
Project Leader: Hiroshi MONDENSub-leader: Kiichiro TAMARU
Project Leader: Dr. MATSUURA
Project Leader: Dr. SAEKISub-leader: Dr. MATSUURA
METI Ministry of Economy,
Trade & Industry
21
SoftwareEngineeringCenter
Software Engineering Center
SoftwareEngineeringCenter
Software Engineering Center
3. Future of Software Engineering
22
Information-technology Promotion Agency, Japan
SoftwareEngineeringCenter
“Neo-Software Factory Approach”
• Europe : Software is ScienceUS : Software is BusinessJapan : Software is Product
• “Software Factory Approach”Products should be produced in factories
• Negative effects of the “Software Factory Approach”– underestimate coding– overemphasize managements & controls
• “Neo-Software Factory Approach” for new era– management of product line– unified metrics
23
Information-technology Promotion Agency, Japan
SoftwareEngineeringCenter
Can Japanese Software Industries Sustain Growth?
“YES! IT’S POSSIBLE.”• Huge Market:
- excellent companies - general public
with good sense
• Multilayered Culture: - “cool” & attractive seeds
• Fine Engineers on the Line
• Leaders are Aware:– They have realized that the problems of software development is
not temporal but structural.
• “From Japan” business models
• World-class software
• 21st century backbone software
• VENTURE firm as change agent
24
Information-technology Promotion Agency, Japan
SoftwareEngineeringCenterWhat are the “Structural Problems”?
• Local optimization / “Operation-focused” without strategy– Barriers of organizations, dead-letter rules & regulations,
disregards for management staff• Obstacles to understanding & sharing information
– “visible” “measurable”• Software is People
– Education/training take much time & cost a lot. – “Most of us as managers are prone to one particular failing:
a tendency to manage people as though they were modular components.” ((Tom Tom DeMarcoDeMarco, , PeoplewarePeopleware: Productive : Productive Projects and TeamsProjects and Teams))
– “The central question in how to improve the software art centers, as it always has, on people.” (Brooks, Frederick P(Brooks, Frederick P.,.,““No Silver Bullet: Essence and Accidents of Software EngineeringNo Silver Bullet: Essence and Accidents of Software Engineering””))
25
Information-technology Promotion Agency, Japan
SoftwareEngineeringCenter
Classification of SW Industries by their Software Engineering Capabilities
Big Vendor Companies (doing both HW/SW businesses)N, H, F, IBM & others
Tier 1 (200 billion JPY~)4 companies
Tier 2 (50~200 billion JPY)13 companies
Tier 3(10~50 billion JPY) 37 companies
Tier 4 (~10 billions JPY)more than 10,000
Others: 10
10 companies
4 companies
5 companies
4 companies
15 companies Tier1 (Innovator)Its quantitative management is well understood through the organization and regularly exercised
Tier2 (Early Adopter)adopts defined processes; perform high-level development & management.
Tier3 (Early Majority, Followers)follows defined processes; perform development.
Tier4 (Laggard)highly depends on its personnel capability.
Classification by SW Engineering Capability
Current Sample Companies (48)Classification by Sales
<Information Service Industries>
26
Information-technology Promotion Agency, Japan
SoftwareEngineeringCenter
Classification of SW industries & improvement of their engineering development capabilities
large
low
small
SW-ECapability
high
Sales
• ways to improve SW engineering capabilities
– scale-driven type:• Large size can mitigate the
impact of the cost for the capability improvement
– agility-driven type:• Take the advantage of the
smallness of the size. Its mobility helps to improve the SW engineering capability
Tier 2/3
Tier 4
Tier 2/3
Tier 1
27
SoftwareEngineeringCenter
Software Engineering Center
http://www.ipa.go.jp/software/sec/index.php
THANK YOU!
Software Engineering CenterInformation-technology Promotion Agency, Japan
SoftwareEngineeringCenter
Software Engineering Center
http://www.ipa.go.jp/software/sec/index.php
Reference Materials
29
SoftwareEngineeringCenter
Software Engineering Center
SoftwareEngineeringCenter
Software Engineering Center
A. Software Engineering for Enterprise Systems
30
Information-technology Promotion Agency, Japan
SoftwareEngineeringCenter
SEES within Organization Structure of SEC
President
Software Engineering for Enterprise Systems (SEES)
Software Engineering for Embedded Technology (SEET)
Advisory board
- Collect and analyze real project data- Define data items- Infrastructure for benchmarking- Provide common sense among stakeholders
- R&D on requirement engineering
- R&D on development technologies
- Provide “Role and Activities”guidelines for stakeholders- Detail guidelines for effort estimation based on the above guideline
Advanced software development
- Demonstrate best practices of estimation
Requirement Engineering
Development technologies
Quantitative Analysis
Life cycle processes
Estimation Methods
56 members from industries or academia
Launched on Oct. 1, 2004
31
Information-technology Promotion Agency, Japan
SoftwareEngineeringCenter
Current major issues in Japanese software industries
• Software Development are conducted based on individual supplier companies’experiences and there have been little communication among them.
• In addition most users have been playing “nominal” roles and heavily depending on suppliers to define their own requirements. Even advanced users have been struggling with requirement definitions with little knowledge about best practices.
• SEC’s mission is to break though the current states by providing “common understanding” which are already established in most other industries.
– quantitative approach – best practices
• Quantitative approach– collect real project data (quantitative and qualitative) from all over the Japanese
software companies– aim to be able to benchmark
• Best practices– we will provide stakeholders of software development with guidelines about “Roles and
recommended activities” during software life cycle.
32
Information-technology Promotion Agency, Japan
SoftwareEngineeringCenter
Issues and GoalsAs is (many cases)
• Issues– Recognition gap between suppliers and users
• Major causes of projects failure– Lack of engineering approach both in suppliers
and users– Weaknesses in global market in terms of IT
• Goals– Strengthen competitiveness relevant to IT
• Software development capabilities• ROI concerning IT
– Cooperation of suppliers and users• Through cooperation develop and facilitate
engineering methods and minds in both sides• Bridge the gap between users and suppliers• Suppliers provide users with value through
systems• Users satisfy the value and increase trust on
suppliers• By the good cycle strengthen global competition
Suppliers
Users
Value by systems
Service
Trust High CS
Suppliers
Users
Wide G
aps
Failures & Low CS
To be(Make it happen)
Engineering in both sidesBased on objective data
High Quality
33
Information-technology Promotion Agency, Japan
SoftwareEngineeringCenter
Issues and out steps: Quantitative approach
Visualization of software development
Issues Our steps
Research on metrics and modeling
Common sense about quantitative data
Benchmarking concerning size, quality, delivery, and cost
Illustrating relationships among metrics
・・・
Framework for quantitative approachShare it among stakeholders
Quality
Delivery
Cost
Size
Lack of EngineeringEspecially quantitative
Approach
34
Information-technology Promotion Agency, Japan
SoftwareEngineeringCenter
Relations with other organizations
-Provide advanced technologies-Analyze real issues in the fields
JISA, JUAS(Suppliers associations and Users associations)
Academia
-Collaborate with each other-Proliferate best practices-Nurture practitioners
Advanced Software Development
-Provide project data-Use SEC database-Provide real issues-Trial of developed methods/technologies
Enterprise software domain
projects
Embedded software domain
SEC in Japan -Tackle specific issues in each domain
Other software engineering communities
Software Industries-Users companies
-Suppliers companies
35
Information-technology Promotion Agency, Japan
SoftwareEngineeringCenter
Plan of Outputs in Enterprise Software Project
-Benchmarking services-Analysis (2)-Estimation (2)-Start Process visualization R&D(*1)
2004Collection and analysis of data
“Role and activities” in upper stream
2005Benchmarking services
“Role and activities” in middle stream
2006R&D on process visualization
“Role and activities” in lower stream
-Project DB-Definition of Data items-Analysis (1)
-Web services-Extended DB
-Role and activities guidelines- For upper stream- For estimation
Quantitative data analysis
Lifecycle process guidelines
- Web services
- Extended analysis- Process visualization (Metrics, data collection, tools, etc)
- Merge other themes results as requirement, development technology, data analysis
Estimation methods - Estimation (1)
-Role and activities guidelines- For development processes
-Analysis Guidelines-Analysis (3)-Process visualization R&D(1)
-Role and activities guidelines- For V&V, acceptance
Requirement Engineering
成果の出口
Development Technologies
- Theme selection
- Theme selection
- Modeling best practices
- Analysis of real project
- Architecturebest practices
- continue
- continue - Modeling best practices
- Architecture, reuse best practices
- Analysis of real project
*1 Planning to collaborate with EASE project*2 Merge the results from Requirement engineering and Development technologies
36
Information-technology Promotion Agency, Japan
SoftwareEngineeringCenter
Engineering capabilities
*** *
Advanced cases
Quantitative Approach
Example:-Product data-Process data
******
*******
****
*
*
*** *
**
**** *
*
**
*
***
*
**** ** *
** ****
D: Based on both corroborated knowledge and quantitative data
C: Based on quantitative data
*
**
***
** *
** *
** *
*******
*** *
******
*******
***
** ******* *******
** *
*
** *
*********
**
** **
**** *******
** **
*********
** *
**** ******
*******
*******
****
** **
**** *******
*** ***
***********
** *
**** ******
*
**********
** *
**** *****
**********
**** *****
*** *
********
**
* *** ***** *
*********
**
* *** ***** *
***** ****** ********** ******
* ********* ****
** ***
** **
*******
** *
****
*** ********* ****
** ******** **
*** ****** ***
**************
************
*********
* ******* *********
******************
*
*******
* ********
* ****
*
*********
**** *******
*********** *******************
***
**
* *** ***** **********
******* **** ****
****************** *** ****** **
A: Ad-hoc
Example:-Experts’ experiences-Robust processes
***
***
B: Knowledge share and structured way
***
***
*
*
*
*
***
********************
****************************************
**************
*
*
****
*
*
** **
**
** **
****
** ** *
**
**
Example:- Intuition
Example:- Elicit best practices based on both experts’knowledge and data
***
* ** *
Qualitative A
pproach (Experience, processes)
*companies
37
Information-technology Promotion Agency, Japan
SoftwareEngineeringCenter
Various paths to improve QCDCapabilities about QCD
A:C
DB:
Bottom Line made upward
Software Industries in the future
We plan to provide guidelines to step up the next stages according to the current status of companies. Quantitative Approach
38
Information-technology Promotion Agency, Japan
SoftwareEngineeringCenter
Goals of: Quantitative Analysis of Project Data• Sharing quantitative “common understanding” among stakeholders
– Provide statistics • Statistical data concerning size, quality, term, etc. by domains, types of systems and
so on→ Analyze data collected in SEC database→ Share “common sense” at the planning processes
• Relation ship among metrics between size and effort, quality and term, for example→ Analyze effect factors to the relations→ Share “common sense” at the planning processes and during the development
• Proliferating engineering approach based on quantitative data– Demonstration
• Cleaning up a “skepticism” concerning feasibility and effectiveness of quantitative approach
– Provide engineering methods especially in data analysis
* Eventual aim is that individual companies prepare their own databases and, based on them, provide high quality software with high efficiency quantitatively
39
Information-technology Promotion Agency, Japan
SoftwareEngineeringCenter
Output of 2004Output Brief explanation Characteristics
1 Worksheet for data collection
- Compatible data collection - Reduction of effort in data collection
SEC Data Base
3 Analysis results -Size vs effort by domains, relationship among metrics
-Benchmarking-White papers from SEC
4Statistical results providing services(*2)
- According to specific needs, statistical results can be retrieved on the web
-Benchmarking
- The first domestic project data base
- Definition of each data item
2
-Collected from cooperative software suppliers in Japan- Also from users companies (*1)- Data themselves are closed
(*1) Project data will be collected by JUAS based on the same data sheet
(*2) Output 4 may be provided in 2005 for contributing companies
40
Information-technology Promotion Agency, Japan
SoftwareEngineeringCenter
Data items• General items charactering projects
– Types of development, new development, new customers, level of success etc• Application domain
– Domains, types of application, characteristics of users, etc• System characteristics
– Usage of ERP, development platforms, development language, etc.• Development
– Life cycle models, usage of tools, rate of reuse, etc• States of projects
– State of development teams, work environments, etc.• Requirements
– Ambiguity, commitment by users, etc.• Personnel
– Skills of Project Manajor, skills of team members, etc.• Size
– FP methods, FP, SLOC, etc.• Duration
– # of months of development (actual, planned), etc.• Effort
– Total efforts (actual, planned), efforts by phases (actual, planned)• Quality
– Total defects, defects of each phase, etc.
41
Information-technology Promotion Agency, Japan
SoftwareEngineeringCenter
Analysis results – example size vs. effortRelationships based on Domain, Application Type, System architecture
-Domain: Telecom-Type: Accounting-Architecture: C/S
××
×××
××
××
××
××
×
××
×
××
×
×
Frequency
Efficiency
Size: Middle
effort
SizeSmall Middle Large
42
Information-technology Promotion Agency, Japan
SoftwareEngineeringCenter
Statistical results providing services
- Domain: Telecom- Skill: PM high, Team middle,…………
SECData base
Provide conditions
Frequency
Efficiency
For selected companies, such as those who provide project data
43
Information-technology Promotion Agency, Japan
SoftwareEngineeringCenter
Goals of: Estimation Methods Study• Pervasive usage of accountable estimation methods
– Replace ad-hoc ways to engineering methods– Understandable for stakeholders
• Demonstration of engineering approach– Demonstration through estimation
• Cleaning up a “skepticism” concerning feasibility and effectiveness of quantitative approach
– Provide guidelines for engineering approach in estimation • Analyze best practices both in Japan and overseas• Trial of some selected methods
* Eventual aim is that individual companies prepare their own databases and best practices, and, based on them, conduct accountable estimation to cultivate trust each other
44
Information-technology Promotion Agency, Japan
SoftwareEngineeringCenter
Output of 2004Output Brief explanation Characteristics
1Guidebook for estimation methods
-Guide for the methods- Domestic best practices- Best practices outside Japan
-Reference for companies without estimation methods-Refine methods of “have”companies
2 Publication of each method
- Publicize on the SEC journal or other media
- Early notification about estimation methods
3 Trial
-Trial on some selected methods at cooperative companies-Publicize the results anonymously
-Demonstration / Corroboration-Incentives for cooperation
45
Information-technology Promotion Agency, Japan
SoftwareEngineeringCenter
Guidebook (Image)
Plan Requirement Design Implementation
Information/RiskInformation/Risk
Little information / Little information / High riskHigh risk
# Req.# Use cases
Function PointsLine of codes # Test cases
TimeTimeFull information / Low Full information / Low riskrisk
InformationInformation
RiskRisk
- How precise estimation can be done in each phase
-Share estimation risks according to the phase
- Provide best practices to improve estimation (Simplified estimation methods, multi-phased contract, etc.)
Estimation (3)Estimation (2)Estimation (1)
46
Information-technology Promotion Agency, Japan
SoftwareEngineeringCenterExample of contents of guidebook
(Early estimation (1))• Related tasks
• Necessary data
Preparation of analysis
Analysis of work flows and system
Establish work flow model
-Function-Amount of Data-Quality-System architecture
Cost Estimation
-Size-Effort-Term
Types Example DescriptionFunction # of componets Predict necessary # of components based on domain, type of application
Data Amount of Data (MB)# of records
Predict from # of operators, users, etc.
Quality (1) Reliability, (2) Usability, (3) Efficiency, (4) Portability, (5) Maintenability
High reliability(24 hours 365 days), Anonymous users, Transfer to other platforms, etc.
Architecture Stand alone, Mainframe, Layered Client/Server, etc.
Must use the current system or new one, etc.
(Relevant task)
(Most relevant task)
(Necessary Data)
・Planning Information systems
47
Information-technology Promotion Agency, Japan
SoftwareEngineeringCenterExample: Estimation (1)
Parameters- Requirement: # components- Data: XXXMB, # records- Quality: High reliability- Architecture: Mainframe & Web
SEC Database
Data base of individual
companies
FrequencyRetrieved based on Parameters
Frequency
Time, effort, cost, efficeincy
Retrieved based on ParametersParameters
Estimation from distributions of
past data
Generally estimation based on individual database is the most precise
Median
Max
Statistical methods can be used
Determine by distribution
Make use of SEC Database
Time, effort, cost, efficeincy
48
Information-technology Promotion Agency, Japan
SoftwareEngineeringCenter
Structure of Output
(1) Upper stream(2) Middle stream(3) Lower stream
Framework
Guidelines
Enhanced SLCP guidelines
Guideline(Plan/Req)
TerminologyDefinition of processesConcept
(1) Plan, requirement
(2) Design, Implementation
(3) V&V, Acceptance
Engineering processes
Organization processes
Support
processes
Guideline(Design/Imple
mentaion)
Guildeline(V&V,
acceptance)
Life cycle models
Waterfall model IterativeAgile
Based on waterfall models Considering state-of-the-art models such as iterative and agile models
49
Information-technology Promotion Agency, Japan
SoftwareEngineeringCenter
Timeframe
widespread
Framework Enhanced SLCP guidelines
Lifecycle models Waterfall model Iterative/Agile …..
Cope with more models
Guidelines Roles and activities guidelines (Planning, Requirement)
Guidelines (Outsourcing)
Guidelines (V&V, Acceptance)
Cover all life cyclesFeedbacks from the fields
2004 2005 2006
50
SoftwareEngineeringCenter
Software Engineering Center
SoftwareEngineeringCenter
Software Engineering Center
B. Embedded Software Industry Report
Results of Questionnaire from:548 Japanese Firms
58 USA Firms57 European Firms
“Embedded Software Industry Report” Ministry of Economy Trade and Industry, 2004
51
Information-technology Promotion Agency, Japan
SoftwareEngineeringCenter
Newly Developed Size (SLOC)JapanEurope USA
10M
5-10M
1-5M
500K-1M
100K-500K
50K-100K
10K-50K
1K-10K
Under 1K
不明
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%0% 10% 20%30% 40%50% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
52
Information-technology Promotion Agency, Japan
SoftwareEngineeringCenter
Average Time to Market: Whole Product
Under 6 months19.0%
6 months to 1 year43.2%
1 to 1.5 years19.2%
1.5 to 2 years 10.0%
Over 2 years3.9%
Unknown4.6%
53
Information-technology Promotion Agency, Japan
SoftwareEngineeringCenter
Average Time to Market: Embedded Software
Under 6 months39.6%
6 months to 1 years41.3%
Unknown4.9%
Over 2 years1.5%
1.5 to 2 years3.1%
1 to 1.5 years9.6%
54
Information-technology Promotion Agency, Japan
SoftwareEngineeringCenter
Software Cost over Total Development Cost
Under 10%18.2%
10 to 20%13.2%
20 to 30%13.7%
30 to 40%10.5%
40 to 50%6.6%
50 to 60%14.0%
60 to 70%4.8%
70 to 80%4.4%
80 to 90%3.5%
90 to 100%1.5%
100%3.2%
None6.3%
55
Information-technology Promotion Agency, Japan
SoftwareEngineeringCenter
Software Cost over Total Development CostEurope Japan USA
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
なし
10%未満
10~20%未満
20~30%未満
30~40%未満
30~50%未満
50~60%未満
60~70%未満
70~80%未満
80~90%未満
90~100%未満
100%
なし
Under 10%
10~20%
20~30%
30~40%
40~50%
50~60%
60~70%
70~80%
80~90%
90~100%
100%
90~100%未満
80~90%未満
70~80%未満
60~70%未満
50~60%未満
40~50%未満
20~30%未満
10~20%未満
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
56
Information-technology Promotion Agency, Japan
SoftwareEngineeringCenter
Do You Subcontract Your Development?
53.4%46.6%
USA
Yes
75.7%
No
24.3%
Japan
34.5%
65.5%
Europe
57
Information-technology Promotion Agency, Japan
SoftwareEngineeringCenterReason for Using Subcontractors
30.9%
14.5%27.3%
3.6%
16.4%
3.6%1.8%
1.8%
0.0%
67.7%
3.2%6.5%
12.9%
3.2%
6.5%
Europe
USAJapan
Affiliated Firm requiresto Outsource
Manage Fluctuationsof Workload
53%
Outsourcer or OEMrequires development
2%
Save DevelopmentCost 7%
Lack of Technologywithin the Organization
15%
Shorten DevelopmentSchedule 13%
8%
2%
Other0.3%
Lack of InternalResources