Practical Software Measurement , Performance - Based Earned Value Paul

T his article discusses a set of integrated , performance measurement techniques that increased Northrop Grumman Corporation's software success. These techniques can enable excellent project management in the following ways: • Defining effective metrics for sizing the project and measuring progress. • Using Earned Value Management (EVM) as the key, integrating tool for control. • Defining quality goals in terms of project milestones and metrics. • Planning for incremental releases and rework. • Revising the plan for deferred func-tionality and requirements volatility. • Focusing on requirements, not defects, during rework. • Using testable requirements as an overarching progress indicator. These techniques are based on the following industry and professional standards: • CMU/SEI-92-TR-19, Software Mea-The techniques evolved from lessons learned and continuous process improvement during development of embedded weapons system software for the U.S. Air Force B-2 Stealth Bomber and other programs at Northrop Grumman Corpora-tion's Air Combat Systems (ACS), a business area of the company's Integrated Systems Sector. The ACS software organization achieved Level 4 using the Software Engineering Institute's (SEI) Capability Maturity Model ® (CMM) in 1998 and has a goal of achieving Level 5 in 2001. The essence of EVM, per the Standard, is that at some level of detail appropriate for the degree of technical, schedule, and cost risk or uncertainty associated with the program, a target value (i.e., budget) is established for each scheduled element of work. As these elements of work are completed, their target values are earned. As such, work progress is quantified and the earned value becomes a metric against which to measure both what was spent to perform the work and what was scheduled to have been accomplished. The combination of advance planning, baseline maintenance, and earned value analysis yields earlier and better visibility into program performance than is provided by non-integrated methods of planning and control. Despite being at SEI CMM Level 3 since 1995 and having a validated EVM system , the software development organization was not consistently achieving its objectives and customer expectations. More importantly, the management control system was failing to accurately report project performance. These issues were identified and disclosed in the quality audits of the EVM organization. In 1996, an audit defined the following issues and goals: " The process for managing software projects with regard to base-line planning, determination of schedule milestones, and earned value could be improved to provide better milestones and metrics for …