spm2
TRANSCRIPT
Žiga
Tur
k, A
ssoc
.Pro
f.zi
ga.t
urk@
uni-l
j.si
Uni
vers
ity o
f Lj
ublja
na, F
acul
ty o
f Ci
vil a
nd G
eode
tic E
ngin
eerin
g
Ista
nbul
Tec
hnic
al U
nive
rsity
MBA
in C
onst
ruct
ion
Info
rmat
ics
in C
onst
ruct
ion
Man
agem
ent
CM
IT 5
58:
Info
rmat
ion
Sys
tem
s fo
r C
onst
ruct
ion
M
anag
emen
t
Softw
are
Engi
neer
ing
Softw
are
Engi
neer
ing
2
CM
IT 5
58 M
apC
MIT
558
Map
softw
are
engi
neer
ing
anal
ysis
and
desi
gn
deve
lopm
ent
use
man
agem
ent
visi
ons,
stra
tegi
es,
requ
irem
ents
prod
uct
mod
ellin
gpr
oces
sm
odel
ling
clie
nt-s
erve
rte
chno
logy
Web
tech
nolo
gies
,Ja
va, X
ML
thes
auri
clas
sific
atio
nsy
stem
s
cons
truct
ion
as a
new
econ
omy
IT s
trate
gies
limits
of
tech
nolo
gy
com
pute
rin
tegr
ated
cons
truct
ion
dist
ance
wor
king
prod
uct
data
base
s
docu
men
tm
anag
emen
t
info
rmat
ion
retri
eval
mod
ellin
gm
etho
d
new
way
s of
wor
king
3
Lea
rnin
g ob
ject
ive
Lea
rnin
g ob
ject
ive
how
info
rmat
ion
syst
ems
are
desi
gned
how
info
rmat
ion
syst
ems
are
desi
gned
man
agem
ent
is in
volv
ed a
s cl
ient
man
agem
ent
is in
volv
ed a
s cl
ient
IT m
anag
emen
t,IT
man
agem
ent,
IT s
peci
alis
ts a
s su
pplie
rsIT
spe
cial
ists
as
supp
liers
info
rmat
ion
syst
ems
deve
lopm
ent
as a
n in
form
atio
n sy
stem
s de
velo
pmen
t as
an
engi
neer
ing
proc
ess
engi
neer
ing
proc
ess
soft
war
e en
gine
erin
gso
ftw
are
engi
neer
ing
civi
l eng
inee
ring
civi
l eng
inee
ring
som
e si
mila
ritie
sso
me
sim
ilarit
ies
one
of a
kin
d pr
oduc
ton
e of
a k
ind
prod
uct
wor
k on
mul
tiple
pro
ject
sw
ork
on m
ultip
le p
roje
cts
4
Con
text
Con
text
soft
war
e en
gine
erin
gso
ftw
are
engi
neer
ing
the
mod
ellin
g m
etho
dth
e m
odel
ling
met
hod
proc
ess
mod
els
proc
ess
mod
els
prod
uct
mod
els
prod
uct
mod
els
5
Con
tent
Con
tent
Wha
t is
sof
twar
e en
gine
erin
gW
hat
is s
oftw
are
engi
neer
ing
Soft
war
e as
a p
roce
ssSo
ftw
are
as a
pro
cess
Soft
war
e pr
ojec
t m
anag
emen
tSo
ftw
are
proj
ect
man
agem
ent
Soft
war
e m
etric
s (s
hort
)So
ftw
are
met
rics
(sho
rt)
Risk
man
agem
ent
Risk
man
agem
ent
Anal
ysis
and
des
ign
(sep
arat
e pr
esen
tatio
ns)
Anal
ysis
and
des
ign
(sep
arat
e pr
esen
tatio
ns)
stru
ctur
ed m
etho
dst
ruct
ured
met
hod
UM
L (o
bjec
t or
ient
ed m
etho
d)U
ML
(obj
ect
orie
nted
met
hod)
Lab:
UM
LLa
b: U
ML
6
Lit
erat
ure
Lit
erat
ure
Pres
sman
, Sof
twar
e En
gine
erin
g, A
Pra
ctiti
oner
’s
Pres
sman
, Sof
twar
e En
gine
erin
g, A
Pra
ctiti
oner
’s
Appr
oach
, McG
raw
Hill
Appr
oach
, McG
raw
Hill
Ratio
nal W
ebsi
te
Ratio
nal W
ebsi
te w
ww
.rat
iona
l.com
ww
w.r
atio
nal.c
om
7
Soft
war
e E
ngin
eeri
ng —
Intr
oduc
tion
Soft
war
e E
ngin
eeri
ng —
Intr
oduc
tion
Wha
t is
Sof
twar
e En
gine
erin
g (S
E)?
Wha
t is
Sof
twar
e En
gine
erin
g (S
E)?
The
proc
ess
of b
uild
ing
a so
ftw
are
prod
uct.
The
proc
ess
of b
uild
ing
a so
ftw
are
prod
uct.
Som
e qu
estio
ns t
o pu
t SE
in p
ersp
ectiv
e:So
me
ques
tions
to
put
SE in
per
spec
tive:
Wha
t ar
e th
e si
zes
of s
ome
typi
cal s
oftw
are
prod
ucts
?W
hat
are
the
size
s of
som
e ty
pica
l sof
twar
e pr
oduc
ts?
Map
le.e
xe =
1.3
Mby
tes.
Map
le.e
xe =
1.3
Mby
tes.
----Sy
stem
ove
r 3.
8 M
byte
sSy
stem
ove
r 3.
8 M
byte
sN
etsc
ape.
exe
= 1
.26
meg
abyt
es.
Net
scap
e.ex
e =
1.2
6 m
egab
ytes
.M
icro
soft
Off
ice
97
> 1
80 m
egab
ytes
.M
icro
soft
Off
ice
97
> 1
80 m
egab
ytes
.
How
man
y pe
ople
wou
ld it
tak
e to
bui
ld t
hese
in
How
man
y pe
ople
wou
ld it
tak
e to
bui
ld t
hese
in
1 ye
ar?
2?
1 ye
ar?
2?
Wha
t w
ould
you
do
if a
bug
coul
d co
st li
ves
and
$2
Wha
t w
ould
you
do
if a
bug
coul
d co
st li
ves
and
$2
billi
on?
billi
on?
Wha
t w
ould
you
do
if a
dela
y co
uld
cost
$10
0’s
of
Wha
t w
ould
you
do
if a
dela
y co
uld
cost
$10
0’s
of
mill
ions
?m
illio
ns?
8
Som
e So
ftw
are
Cha
ract
eris
tics
Som
e So
ftw
are
Cha
ract
eris
tics
Soft
war
e is
So
ftw
are
is
engi
neer
ed o
r en
gine
ered
or
deve
lope
d,
deve
lope
d, n
otno
tm
anuf
actu
red
in
man
ufac
ture
d in
th
e tr
aditi
onal
th
e tr
aditi
onal
se
nse.
sens
e.So
ftw
are
does
not
So
ftw
are
does
not
w
ear
out
in t
he
wea
r ou
t in
the
sa
me
sens
e as
sa
me
sens
e as
ha
rdw
are.
hard
war
e.Ri
ght:
har
dwar
e Ri
ght:
har
dwar
e fa
ilure
rat
efa
ilure
rat
e
9
Som
e So
ftw
are
Cha
ract
eris
tics
Som
e So
ftw
are
Cha
ract
eris
tics
In t
heor
y, s
oftw
are
In t
heor
y, s
oftw
are
does
not
wea
r ou
t do
es n
ot w
ear
out
at a
ll.at
all.
BUT,
BU
T,
Har
dwar
e H
ardw
are
upgr
ades
.up
grad
es.
Soft
war
e up
grad
es.
Soft
war
e up
grad
es.
Righ
t: f
ailu
re c
urve
Ri
ght:
fai
lure
cur
ve
for
soft
war
efo
r so
ftw
are
10
Som
e So
ftw
are
Cha
ract
eris
tics
Som
e So
ftw
are
Cha
ract
eris
tics
Real
ity is
mor
e lik
e Re
ality
is m
ore
like
this
.th
is.
Mos
t se
rious
M
ost
serio
us
corp
orat
ions
con
trol
co
rpor
atio
ns c
ontr
ol
and
cons
trai
n an
d co
nstr
ain
chan
ges.
chan
ges.
Mos
t so
ftw
are
is
Mos
t so
ftw
are
is
cust
om b
uilt,
and
cu
stom
bui
lt, a
nd
cust
omer
nev
er r
eally
cu
stom
er n
ever
rea
lly
know
s w
hat
she/
he
know
s w
hat
she/
he
wan
tsw
ants
Rig
ht:
actu
al f
ailu
re
Rig
ht:
actu
al f
ailu
re
rate
for
sof
twar
era
te f
or s
oftw
are
11
Som
e G
ener
al A
ppro
ache
sSo
me
Gen
eral
App
roac
hes
Dev
elop
and
use
goo
d en
gine
erin
g pr
actic
es f
or
Dev
elop
and
use
goo
d en
gine
erin
g pr
actic
es f
or
build
ing
soft
war
e.bu
ildin
g so
ftw
are.
Mak
e he
avy
use
of r
eusa
ble
soft
war
e M
ake
heav
y us
e of
reu
sabl
e so
ftw
are
com
pone
nts.
com
pone
nts.
Use
mod
ern
lang
uage
s th
at s
uppo
rt g
ood
Use
mod
ern
lang
uage
s th
at s
uppo
rt g
ood
soft
war
e de
velo
pmen
t pr
actic
es, e
.g.,
Ada9
5,
soft
war
e de
velo
pmen
t pr
actic
es, e
.g.,
Ada9
5,
Java
.Ja
va.
Use
4th
gen
erat
ion
lang
uage
s.U
se 4
th g
ener
atio
n la
ngua
ges.
But,
alm
ost
ever
ythi
ng is
a t
wo
But,
alm
ost
ever
ythi
ng is
a t
wo --
edge
d sw
ord.
edge
d sw
ord.
Cons
ider
long
ter
m t
ool m
aint
enan
ce.
Cons
ider
long
ter
m t
ool m
aint
enan
ce.
Righ
t no
w, t
his
is a
maj
or p
robl
em f
or N
ASA.
Righ
t no
w, t
his
is a
maj
or p
robl
em f
or N
ASA.
12
Soft
war
e is
com
plex
Soft
war
e is
com
plex
addi
ng a
noth
er b
utto
n to
an
alar
m c
lock
cos
ts
addi
ng a
noth
er b
utto
n to
an
alar
m c
lock
cos
ts
mon
ey d
urin
g m
anuf
actu
ring
of e
ach
piec
em
oney
dur
ing
man
ufac
turin
g of
eac
h pi
ece
the
cost
is m
anuf
actu
rer’s
the
cost
is m
anuf
actu
rer’s
addi
ng a
but
ting
to a
pro
gram
may
cos
t ad
ding
a b
uttin
g to
a p
rogr
am m
ay c
ost
som
ethi
ng d
urin
g so
ftw
are
deve
lopm
ent
(or
not)
som
ethi
ng d
urin
g so
ftw
are
deve
lopm
ent
(or
not)
cons
eque
nce
is m
ore
com
plex
sof
twar
eco
nseq
uenc
e is
mor
e co
mpl
ex s
oftw
are
mor
e di
ffic
ult
to u
sem
ore
diff
icul
t to
use
the
user
pay
sth
e us
er p
ays
13
Soft
war
e M
yths
Soft
war
e M
yths
Myt
h: I
t’s in
the
sof
twar
e.
So, w
e ca
n ea
sily
M
yth:
It’s
in t
he s
oftw
are.
So
, we
can
easi
ly
chan
ge it
.ch
ange
it.
Real
ity:
Requ
irem
ents
cha
nges
are
a m
ajor
cau
se o
f Re
ality
: Re
quire
men
ts c
hang
es a
re a
maj
or c
ause
of
soft
war
e de
grad
atio
n.so
ftw
are
degr
adat
ion.
Myt
h: W
e ca
n so
lve
sche
dule
pro
blem
s by
M
yth:
We
can
solv
e sc
hedu
le p
robl
ems
by
addi
ng m
ore
prog
ram
mer
s.ad
ding
mor
e pr
ogra
mm
ers.
Real
ity:
May
be.
It in
crea
ses
coor
dina
tion
effo
rts
and
Real
ity:
May
be.
It in
crea
ses
coor
dina
tion
effo
rts
and
may
slo
w t
hing
s do
wn.
may
slo
w t
hing
s do
wn.
Myt
h: W
hile
we
don’
t ha
ve a
ll re
quire
men
ts in
M
yth:
Whi
le w
e do
n’t
have
all
requ
irem
ents
in
writ
ing
yet,
we
know
wha
t w
e w
ant
and
can
writ
ing
yet,
we
know
wha
t w
e w
ant
and
can
star
t w
ritin
g co
de.
star
t w
ritin
g co
de.
Real
ity:
Inco
mpl
ete
upRe
ality
: In
com
plet
e up
-- fro
nt d
efin
ition
is t
he m
ajor
fr
ont
defin
ition
is t
he m
ajor
ca
use
of s
oftw
are
proj
ect
failu
res.
caus
e of
sof
twar
e pr
ojec
t fa
ilure
s.14
Soft
war
e M
yths
Soft
war
e M
yths
Myt
h: I
can
’t te
ll yo
u ho
w w
ell w
e ar
e do
ing
until
I g
et
Myt
h: I
can
’t te
ll yo
u ho
w w
ell w
e ar
e do
ing
until
I g
et
part
s of
it r
unni
ng.
part
s of
it r
unni
ng.
Real
ity:
Form
al r
evie
ws
of v
ario
us t
ypes
bot
h ca
n gi
ve g
ood
Real
ity:
Form
al r
evie
ws
of v
ario
us t
ypes
bot
h ca
n gi
ve g
ood
info
rmat
ion
and
are
criti
cal t
o su
cces
s in
larg
e pr
ojec
ts.
info
rmat
ion
and
are
criti
cal t
o su
cces
s in
larg
e pr
ojec
ts.
Myt
h: T
he o
nly
deliv
erab
le t
hat
mat
ters
is w
orki
ng c
ode.
M
yth:
The
onl
y de
liver
able
tha
t m
atte
rs is
wor
king
cod
e.
Real
ity:
Doc
umen
tatio
n, t
est
hist
ory,
and
pro
gram
con
figur
atio
n Re
ality
: D
ocum
enta
tion,
tes
t hi
stor
y, a
nd p
rogr
am c
onfig
urat
ion
are
criti
cal p
arts
of
the
deliv
ery.
are
criti
cal p
arts
of
the
deliv
ery.
Myt
h: I
am
a (
supe
r) p
rogr
amm
er.
Let
me
prog
ram
it,
Myt
h: I
am
a (
supe
r) p
rogr
amm
er.
Let
me
prog
ram
it,
and
I w
ill g
et it
don
e.
and
I w
ill g
et it
don
e.
Real
ity:
A si
gn o
f im
mat
urity
. A
form
ula
for
failu
re.
Soft
war
eRe
ality
: A
sign
of
imm
atur
ity.
A fo
rmul
a fo
r fa
ilure
. So
ftw
are
proj
ects
are
don
e by
tea
ms,
not
indi
vidu
als,
and
suc
cess
pr
ojec
ts a
re d
one
by t
eam
s, n
ot in
divi
dual
s, a
nd s
ucce
ss
requ
ires
muc
h m
ore
than
just
cod
ing.
requ
ires
muc
h m
ore
than
just
cod
ing.
15
Soft
war
e M
yths
Soft
war
e M
yths
Myt
h: W
ritin
g M
yth:
Writ
ing
code
is t
he m
ajor
co
de is
the
maj
or
part
of
crea
ting
a pa
rt o
f cr
eatin
g a
soft
war
e pr
oduc
t.so
ftw
are
prod
uct.
Real
ity:
Codi
ng
Real
ity:
Codi
ng
may
be
as li
ttle
m
ay b
e as
litt
le
as 1
0% o
f th
e as
10%
of
the
effo
rt, a
nd 5
0 ef
fort
, and
50
--70
% m
ay o
ccur
70
% m
ay o
ccur
af
ter
deliv
ery.
afte
r de
liver
y.
Belo
w:
Impa
ct o
f Be
low
: Im
pact
of
chan
ge.
chan
ge.
16
Soft
war
e as
a P
roce
ssSo
ftw
are
as a
Pro
cess
Def
initi
on:
Soft
war
e En
gine
erin
g is
the
D
efin
ition
: So
ftw
are
Engi
neer
ing
is t
he
esta
blis
hmen
t an
d us
e of
sou
nd e
ngin
eerin
g es
tabl
ishm
ent
and
use
of s
ound
eng
inee
ring
prin
cipl
es in
ord
er t
o ob
tain
eco
nom
ical
ly
prin
cipl
es in
ord
er t
o ob
tain
eco
nom
ical
ly
soft
war
e th
at is
rel
iabl
e an
d w
orks
eff
icie
ntly
on
soft
war
e th
at is
rel
iabl
e an
d w
orks
eff
icie
ntly
on
real
mac
hine
s.re
al m
achi
nes.
Soft
war
e En
gine
erin
g is
a la
yere
d te
chno
logy
.So
ftw
are
Engi
neer
ing
is a
laye
red
tech
nolo
gy.
17
A L
ayer
ed T
echn
olog
yA
Lay
ered
Tec
hnol
ogy
Tool
sTo
ols
Edito
rsEd
itors
Des
ign
aids
Des
ign
aids
Com
pile
rsCo
mpi
lers
Com
pute
r Ai
ded
Soft
war
e En
gine
erin
g (C
ASE)
Com
pute
r Ai
ded
Soft
war
e En
gine
erin
g (C
ASE)
Met
hods
Met
hods
Incl
udes
In
clud
es s
tand
ards
stan
dard
s(f
orm
al o
r in
form
al)
(for
mal
or
info
rmal
)M
ay in
clud
e M
ay in
clud
e co
nven
tions
conv
entio
ns, e
.g.,
low
leve
l suc
h as
, e
.g.,
low
leve
l suc
h as
na
min
g, v
aria
ble,
lang
uage
con
stru
ct u
se, e
tc.
nam
ing,
var
iabl
e, la
ngua
ge c
onst
ruct
use
, etc
.M
ay in
volv
e de
sign
M
ay in
volv
e de
sign
met
hodo
logi
esm
etho
dolo
gies
..
18
Som
e G
ener
ic E
ngin
eeri
ng
Pha
ses:
Bui
ldin
gSo
me
Gen
eric
Eng
inee
ring
P
hase
s: B
uild
ing
Syst
em o
r in
form
atio
n en
gine
erin
g (le
adin
g to
Sy
stem
or
info
rmat
ion
engi
neer
ing
(lead
ing
to
requ
irem
ents
)re
quire
men
ts)
Soft
war
e pr
ojec
t pl
anni
ngSo
ftw
are
proj
ect
plan
ning
Requ
irem
ents
ana
lysi
sRe
quire
men
ts a
naly
sis
Dev
elop
men
tD
evel
opm
ent
Soft
war
e de
sign
Soft
war
e de
sign
Codi
ngCo
ding
Test
ing
Test
ing
Mig
ratio
nM
igra
tion
Mai
nten
ance
Mai
nten
ance
19
Som
e G
ener
ic E
ngin
eeri
ng
Pha
ses:
Mai
nten
ance
Som
e G
ener
ic E
ngin
eeri
ng
Pha
ses:
Mai
nten
ance
Mai
nten
ance
Mai
nten
ance
Corr
ectio
n Co
rrec
tion
----bu
gs w
ill a
ppea
rbu
gs w
ill a
ppea
rAd
apta
tion
Adap
tatio
n ----
to c
hang
ing
oper
atin
g sy
stem
s,
to c
hang
ing
oper
atin
g sy
stem
s,
CPU
’s, e
tc.
CPU
’s, e
tc.
Enha
ncem
ent
Enha
ncem
ent
----ch
angi
ng c
usto
mer
nee
ds
chan
ging
cus
tom
er n
eeds
Pr
even
tion
Prev
entio
n ----
soft
war
e re
engi
neer
ing
soft
war
e re
engi
neer
ing
20
Typ
ical
act
ivit
ies
in th
ese
phas
es
Typ
ical
act
ivit
ies
in th
ese
phas
es
Proj
ect
trac
king
and
con
trol
Proj
ect
trac
king
and
con
trol
Form
al r
evie
ws
Form
al r
evie
ws
Soft
war
e qu
ality
ass
uran
ceSo
ftw
are
qual
ity a
ssur
ance
Conf
igur
atio
n m
anag
emen
tCo
nfig
urat
ion
man
agem
ent
vers
ions
, gro
up o
f ve
rsio
ns =
con
figur
atio
nve
rsio
ns, g
roup
of
vers
ions
= c
onfig
urat
ion
Doc
umen
tatio
nD
ocum
enta
tion
Reus
abili
ty m
anag
emen
tRe
usab
ility
man
agem
ent
Mea
sure
men
tsM
easu
rem
ents
Risk
man
agem
ent
Risk
man
agem
ent
21
SEI
Soft
war
e P
roce
ss M
atur
ity
Mod
elSE
I So
ftw
are
Pro
cess
Mat
urit
y M
odel
Leve
l 1:
Leve
l 1:
Initi
alIn
itial
----Th
e so
ftw
are
proc
ess
is c
hara
cter
ized
Th
e so
ftw
are
proc
ess
is c
hara
cter
ized
as
ad
hoc,
and
occ
asio
nally
eve
n ch
aotic
. Fe
w p
roce
sses
as
ad
hoc,
and
occ
asio
nally
eve
n ch
aotic
. Fe
w p
roce
sses
de
fined
.de
fined
.Le
vel 2
: Le
vel 2
: Re
peat
able
Repe
atab
le----
Basi
c pr
ojec
t m
anag
emen
t Ba
sic
proj
ect
man
agem
ent
proc
esse
s es
tabl
ishe
d to
tra
ck c
ost,
sch
edul
e an
d pr
oces
ses
esta
blis
hed
to t
rack
cos
t, s
ched
ule
and
func
tiona
lity.
func
tiona
lity.
Leve
l 3:
Leve
l 3:
Def
ined
Def
ined
----Pr
oces
s fo
r bo
th m
anag
emen
t an
d Pr
oces
s fo
r bo
th m
anag
emen
t an
d en
gine
erin
g is
doc
umen
ted,
sta
ndar
dize
d an
d in
tegr
ated
.en
gine
erin
g is
doc
umen
ted,
sta
ndar
dize
d an
d in
tegr
ated
.Le
vel 4
: Le
vel 4
: M
anag
edM
anag
ed----
Det
aile
d m
easu
res
of t
he p
roce
ss
Det
aile
d m
easu
res
of t
he p
roce
ss
and
prod
uct
qual
ity c
olle
cted
. Bo
th a
re q
uant
itativ
ely
and
prod
uct
qual
ity c
olle
cted
. Bo
th a
re q
uant
itativ
ely
unde
rsto
od a
nd c
ontr
olle
d.un
ders
tood
and
con
trol
led.
Leve
l 5:
Leve
l 5:
Opt
imiz
ing
Opt
imiz
ing
----Co
ntin
uous
pro
cess
impr
ovem
ent
Cont
inuo
us p
roce
ss im
prov
emen
t en
able
d by
qua
ntita
tive
feed
back
and
tes
ting
inno
vativ
e en
able
d by
qua
ntita
tive
feed
back
and
tes
ting
inno
vativ
e id
eas.
idea
s.SE
I =
Sof
twar
e En
gine
erin
g In
stitu
te, C
MU.
SEI
= S
oftw
are
Engi
neer
ing
Inst
itute
, CM
U.22
Soft
war
e P
roce
ss M
odel
sSo
ftw
are
Pro
cess
Mod
els
phas
es o
f pr
oble
m
phas
es o
f pr
oble
m
solv
ing
loop
solv
ing
loop
prob
lem
sol
ving
pr
oble
m s
olvi
ng
appl
ied
recu
rsiv
ely
appl
ied
recu
rsiv
ely
23
Pro
cess
mod
els
Pro
cess
mod
els
Wat
erfa
llW
ater
fall
Rapi
d Pr
otot
ypin
gRa
pid
Prot
otyp
ing
Evol
utio
nary
Evol
utio
nary
incr
emen
tal
incr
emen
tal
spira
lsp
iral
com
pone
nt a
ssem
bly
com
pone
nt a
ssem
bly
conc
urre
nt d
evel
opm
ent
conc
urre
nt d
evel
opm
ent
Oth
erO
ther form
alfo
rmal
4GL
4GL
proc
ess
tech
nolo
gypr
oces
s te
chno
logy
24
Wat
erfa
ll M
odel
Wat
erfa
ll M
odel
Req
uire
men
tsR
equi
rem
ents
Ana
lysi
sA
naly
sis
Des
ign
Des
ign
Cod
eC
ode
Test
Test
Syst
em/In
form
atio
n En
gine
erin
g
Mai
ntai
nM
aint
ain
25
The
Rap
id P
roto
typi
ng M
odel
The
Rap
id P
roto
typi
ng M
odel
26
Evo
luti
onar
y pr
oces
s m
odel
s:In
crem
enta
l Mod
elE
volu
tion
ary
proc
ess
mod
els :
Incr
emen
tal M
odel
27
Evo
luti
onar
y P
roce
ss M
odel
s:T
he S
pira
l Mod
elE
volu
tion
ary
Pro
cess
Mod
els :
The
Spi
ral M
odel
28
Evo
luti
onar
y P
roce
ss M
odel
s:C
ompo
nent
Ass
embl
y M
odel
Evo
luti
onar
y P
roce
ss M
odel
s :C
ompo
nent
Ass
embl
y M
odel
29
Evo
luti
onar
y P
roce
ss M
odel
s:C
oncu
rren
t Dev
elop
men
t Mod
elE
volu
tion
ary
Pro
cess
Mod
els :
Con
curr
ent D
evel
opm
ent M
odel
30
Oth
er M
odel
sO
ther
Mod
els
Form
al M
etho
dsFo
rmal
Met
hods
Rigo
rous
mat
hem
atic
al r
epre
sent
atio
n of
Ri
goro
us m
athe
mat
ical
rep
rese
ntat
ion
of
requ
irem
ents
requ
irem
ents
Prov
ides
bas
is f
or a
utom
atic
ver
ifica
tion
test
Pr
ovid
es b
asis
for
aut
omat
ic v
erifi
catio
n te
st
gene
ratio
nge
nera
tion
Four
th G
ener
atio
n Te
chni
ques
Four
th G
ener
atio
n Te
chni
ques
Use
cod
e ge
nera
tors
to
prod
uce
spec
ific
part
s of
U
se c
ode
gene
rato
rs t
o pr
oduc
e sp
ecifi
c pa
rts
of
prod
uct
prod
uct
Proc
ess
Tech
nolo
gyPr
oces
s Te
chno
logy
Prov
ides
a v
arie
ty o
f to
ols
to a
id s
oftw
are
deve
lope
rs,
Prov
ides
a v
arie
ty o
f to
ols
to a
id s
oftw
are
deve
lope
rs,
e.g.
, wor
kloa
d flo
w, c
onfig
urat
ion
man
agem
ent,
e.
g., w
orkl
oad
flow
, con
figur
atio
n m
anag
emen
t,
qual
ity a
ssur
ance
man
agem
ent,
etc
.qu
ality
ass
uran
ce m
anag
emen
t, e
tc.
31
Pro
ject
Man
agem
ent C
once
pts
Pro
ject
Man
agem
ent C
once
pts
Why
is p
roje
ct m
anag
emen
t im
port
ant?
Why
is p
roje
ct m
anag
emen
t im
port
ant?
Cost
Cost D
oDD
oDal
read
y sp
endi
ng $
30 b
illio
n an
nual
ly o
n al
read
y sp
endi
ng $
30 b
illio
n an
nual
ly o
n so
ftw
are
in la
te 8
0’s
soft
war
e in
late
80’
sTh
e U
S sp
ent
$150
bill
ion
The
US
spen
t $1
50 b
illio
n$2
25 b
illio
n w
orld
wid
e$2
25 b
illio
n w
orld
wid
e
Proj
ects
fre
quen
tly f
ail o
r ha
ve s
ever
e di
ffic
ultie
sPr
ojec
ts f
requ
ently
fai
l or
have
sev
ere
diff
icul
ties
“New
” FA
A ai
r tr
affic
con
trol
sys
tem
“New
” FA
A ai
r tr
affic
con
trol
sys
tem
They
don
’t m
eet
spec
ifica
tions
They
don
’t m
eet
spec
ifica
tions
They
tak
e m
uch
long
er t
han
expe
cted
They
tak
e m
uch
long
er t
han
expe
cted
32
Why
Do
Maj
or E
ngin
eeri
ng
Und
erta
king
s O
ften
Fai
l?W
hy D
o M
ajor
Eng
inee
ring
U
nder
taki
ngs
Oft
en F
ail?
Larg
e pr
ojec
ts o
ften
fai
l for
tw
o pr
inci
pal r
easo
ns:
Larg
e pr
ojec
ts o
ften
fai
l for
tw
o pr
inci
pal r
easo
ns:
Com
mun
icat
ion
Com
mun
icat
ion :
In
adeq
uate
com
mun
icat
ion
: I
nade
quat
e co
mm
unic
atio
n le
ads
to p
roje
ct f
ailu
rele
ads
to p
roje
ct f
ailu
reCo
ordi
natio
nCo
ordi
natio
n : L
ack
of c
omm
unic
atio
n im
plie
s :
La
ck o
f co
mm
unic
atio
n im
plie
s th
at t
he t
eam
can
not
coo
rdin
ate.
Thu
s ea
ch
that
the
tea
m c
an n
ot c
oord
inat
e. T
hus
each
gr
oup
mov
es in
an
inde
pend
ent
dire
ctio
n an
d gr
oup
mov
es in
an
inde
pend
ent
dire
ctio
n an
d th
e pr
ojec
t w
ill g
rind
to a
hal
t.th
e pr
ojec
t w
ill g
rind
to a
hal
t.
no n
ews
to c
ivil
engi
neer
s!no
new
s to
civ
il en
gine
ers!
33
The
Spe
ctru
m o
f Man
agem
ent
Con
cern
sT
he S
pect
rum
of M
anag
emen
t C
once
rns
Effe
ctiv
e So
ftw
are
man
agem
ent
enco
mpa
sses
Ef
fect
ive
Soft
war
e m
anag
emen
t en
com
pass
es
thre
e m
ain
area
s:th
ree
mai
n ar
eas:
Peop
lePe
ople
Prob
lem
Prob
lem
Proc
ess
Proc
ess
34
Peo
ple
Peo
ple
The
Play
ers
The
Play
ers
----It
is im
port
ant
to r
ecog
nize
the
It
is im
port
ant
to r
ecog
nize
the
di
ffer
ent
cate
gorie
s of
peo
ple
invo
lved
in a
larg
e di
ffer
ent
cate
gorie
s of
peo
ple
invo
lved
in a
larg
e so
ftw
are
proj
ect.
soft
war
e pr
ojec
t.Se
nior
Man
ager
s Se
nior
Man
ager
s --
who
def
ine
busi
ness
issu
es.
who
def
ine
busi
ness
issu
es.
Proj
ect
Man
ager
s Pr
ojec
t M
anag
ers
--w
ho p
lan,
mot
ivat
e, o
rgan
ize
who
pla
n, m
otiv
ate,
org
aniz
e an
d co
ntro
l the
pra
ctiti
oner
san
d co
ntro
l the
pra
ctiti
oner
sPr
actit
ione
rs
Prac
titio
ners
--w
ho d
eliv
er t
he t
echn
ical
ski
ll th
at
who
del
iver
the
tec
hnic
al s
kill
that
ar
e ne
cess
ary
to e
ngin
eer
the
proj
ect
are
nece
ssar
y to
eng
inee
r th
e pr
ojec
tCu
stom
ers
Cust
omer
s --
who
spe
cify
the
req
uire
men
tsw
ho s
peci
fy t
he r
equi
rem
ents
End
user
s En
d us
ers
--w
ho in
tera
ct w
ith t
he s
oftw
are
once
w
ho in
tera
ct w
ith t
he s
oftw
are
once
it
is r
elea
sed.
it is
rel
ease
d.
35
Tea
m L
eade
rshi
p --
A C
riti
cal I
tem
T
eam
Lea
ders
hip
--A
Cri
tica
l Ite
m
The
Prob
lem
:The
bes
t pr
ogra
mm
ers
ofte
n m
ake
The
Prob
lem
:The
bes
t pr
ogra
mm
ers
ofte
n m
ake
poor
tea
m le
ader
s.po
or t
eam
lead
ers.
Diff
eren
t sk
ills
are
requ
ired.
D
iffer
ent
skill
s ar
e re
quire
d.
Tech
nica
l lea
ders
hip
mod
elTe
chni
cal l
eade
rshi
p m
odel
Mot
ivat
ion
Mot
ivat
ion
--th
e ab
ility
to
enco
urag
e te
chni
cal p
eopl
e th
e ab
ility
to
enco
urag
e te
chni
cal p
eopl
e to
pro
duce
to
thei
r be
st a
bilit
y.to
pro
duce
to
thei
r be
st a
bilit
y.O
rgan
izat
ion
Org
aniz
atio
n --
the
abili
ty t
o m
old
exis
ting
proc
esse
s th
e ab
ility
to
mol
d ex
istin
g pr
oces
ses
that
will
ena
ble
the
initi
al c
once
pt t
o be
tra
nsla
ted
that
will
ena
ble
the
initi
al c
once
pt t
o be
tra
nsla
ted
into
rea
lity.
into
rea
lity.
Idea
s an
d In
nova
tion
Idea
s an
d In
nova
tion
--th
e ab
ility
to
invi
te
the
abili
ty t
o in
vite
cr
eativ
enes
s ev
en w
ithin
a s
et o
f re
stric
tions
.cr
eativ
enes
s ev
en w
ithin
a s
et o
f re
stric
tions
.
36
Org
anis
atio
nal M
odel
s:M
arily
n M
ante
i Mod
elO
rgan
isat
iona
l Mod
els :
Mar
ilyn
Man
tei M
odel
Dem
ocra
tic d
ecen
tral
ized
(D
D).
D
emoc
ratic
dec
entr
aliz
ed (
DD
).
----D
oes
not
have
a
Doe
s no
t ha
ve a
de
fined
lead
er. “
Task
Coo
rdin
ator
s” a
re a
ppoi
nted
to
defin
ed le
ader
. “Ta
sk C
oord
inat
ors”
are
app
oint
ed t
o as
sure
tha
t a
part
icul
ar jo
b is
to
be e
xecu
ted.
Th
ese
are
assu
re t
hat
a pa
rtic
ular
job
is t
o be
exe
cute
d.
Thes
e ar
e la
ter
repl
aced
by
othe
r “T
ask
Coor
dina
tors
” as
new
tas
ks
late
r re
plac
ed b
y ot
her
“Tas
k Co
ordi
nato
rs”
as n
ew t
asks
ar
ise.
aris
e.Co
ntro
lled
dece
ntra
lized
(CD
) Co
ntro
lled
dece
ntra
lized
(CD
) ----
Has
a d
efin
ed le
ader
H
as a
def
ined
lead
er
who
coo
rdin
ates
tas
ks, a
nd s
econ
dary
lead
ers
who
car
ry
who
coo
rdin
ates
tas
ks, a
nd s
econ
dary
lead
ers
who
car
ry
out
subt
asks
. Pro
blem
sol
ving
is d
one
by t
he g
roup
, ou
t su
btas
ks. P
robl
em s
olvi
ng is
don
e by
the
gro
up,
impl
emen
tatio
n is
don
e by
sub
grou
ps.
impl
emen
tatio
n is
don
e by
sub
grou
ps.
Cont
rolle
d Ce
ntra
lized
(CC
)
Cont
rolle
d Ce
ntra
lized
(CC
) --
Top
Top --
leve
l pro
blem
sol
ving
le
vel p
robl
em s
olvi
ng
and
team
coo
rdin
atio
n m
anag
ed b
y th
e te
am le
ader
. an
d te
am c
oord
inat
ion
man
aged
by
the
team
lead
er.
The
com
mun
icat
ion
betw
een
the
lead
er a
nd m
embe
rs is
Th
e co
mm
unic
atio
n be
twee
n th
e le
ader
and
mem
bers
is
vert
ical
.ve
rtic
al.
37
Pro
ject
Fea
ture
s Im
pact
ing
Org
aniz
atio
nP
roje
ct F
eatu
res
Impa
ctin
g O
rgan
izat
ion
Diff
icul
ty o
f pr
oble
m t
o be
sol
ved.
Diff
icul
ty o
f pr
oble
m t
o be
sol
ved.
Expe
cted
siz
e of
the
res
ulta
nt p
rogr
am.
Expe
cted
siz
e of
the
res
ulta
nt p
rogr
am.
The
time
the
team
will
rem
ain
toge
ther
.Th
e tim
e th
e te
am w
ill r
emai
n to
geth
er.
The
degr
ee t
o w
hich
the
pro
blem
can
be
The
degr
ee t
o w
hich
the
pro
blem
can
be
mod
ular
ized
.m
odul
ariz
ed.
The
requ
ired
qual
ity a
nd r
elia
bilit
y of
the
Th
e re
quire
d qu
ality
and
rel
iabi
lity
of t
he
syst
em.
syst
em.
The
rigid
ity o
f th
e de
liver
y da
te.
The
rigid
ity o
f th
e de
liver
y da
te.
The
degr
ee o
f co
mm
unic
atio
n re
quire
d fo
r th
e Th
e de
gree
of
com
mun
icat
ion
requ
ired
for
the
proj
ect.
proj
ect.
38
Impa
ct o
f Pro
ject
Cha
ract
eris
tics
Impa
ct o
f Pro
ject
Cha
ract
eris
tics
dem
ocra
tic
dem
ocra
tic
dece
ntra
lised
dece
ntra
lised
cont
rolle
d co
ntro
lled
dece
ntra
lised
dece
ntra
lised
cont
rolle
d co
ntro
lled
cent
ralis
edce
ntra
lised
39
Und
erly
ing
Org
aniz
atio
nal F
acto
rs:
Mat
rix
mod
elU
nder
lyin
g O
rgan
izat
iona
l Fac
tors
:M
atri
x m
odel
The
orga
niza
tion
has
divi
sion
s or
gani
zed
by
The
orga
niza
tion
has
divi
sion
s or
gani
zed
by
skill
s, e
.g.,
engi
neer
ing,
saf
ety
and
mis
sion
sk
ills,
e.g
., en
gine
erin
g, s
afet
y an
d m
issi
on
assu
ranc
e, h
uman
fac
tors
, etc
.as
sura
nce,
hum
an f
acto
rs, e
tc.
Proj
ects
“re
nt”
peop
le f
rom
the
div
isio
ns, a
s Pr
ojec
ts “
rent
” pe
ople
fro
m t
he d
ivis
ions
, as
need
ed.
need
ed.
Issu
esIs
sues
Who
eva
luat
es p
erso
n fo
r ra
ises
?W
ho e
valu
ates
per
son
for
rais
es?
Inde
pend
ence
of
repo
rtin
g fo
r sa
fety
& q
ualit
y is
sues
?In
depe
nden
ce o
f re
port
ing
for
safe
ty &
qua
lity
issu
es?
Who
is b
oss?
Who
is b
oss?
40
How
Do
We
Com
mun
icat
e?H
ow D
o W
e C
omm
unic
ate?
Info
rmal
ly
Info
rmal
ly --
Goo
d ph
one/
elec
tron
ic s
ervi
ce, a
G
ood
phon
e/el
ectr
onic
ser
vice
, a
clea
r de
finiti
on o
f gr
oup
inte
rdep
ende
ncie
s an
d cl
ear
defin
ition
of
grou
p in
terd
epen
denc
ies
and
good
rel
atio
nshi
ps h
elp
enco
urag
e go
od r
elat
ions
hips
hel
p en
cour
age
com
mun
icat
ion
com
mun
icat
ion
41
Pro
ject
Coo
rdin
atio
n te
chni
ques
Pro
ject
Coo
rdin
atio
n te
chni
ques
Form
al, i
mpe
rson
al a
ppro
ache
s Fo
rmal
, im
pers
onal
app
roac
hes
--so
ftw
are
engi
neer
ing
soft
war
e en
gine
erin
g do
cum
ents
and
del
iver
able
s, t
echn
ical
mem
os, p
roje
ct
docu
men
ts a
nd d
eliv
erab
les,
tec
hnic
al m
emos
, pro
ject
m
ilest
ones
, sch
edul
es a
nd c
ontr
ol t
ools
mile
ston
es, s
ched
ules
and
con
trol
too
lsFo
rmal
inte
rper
sona
l pro
cedu
res
Form
al in
terp
erso
nal p
roce
dure
s --
qual
ity a
ssur
ance
qu
ality
ass
uran
ce
activ
ities
ac
tiviti
es --
revi
ews
and
desi
gn a
nd c
ode
insp
ectio
nsre
view
s an
d de
sign
and
cod
e in
spec
tions
Info
rmal
, int
erpe
rson
al p
roce
dure
s In
form
al, i
nter
pers
onal
pro
cedu
res
--gr
oup
mee
tings
grou
p m
eetin
gsEl
ectr
onic
com
mun
icat
ion
Elec
tron
ic c
omm
unic
atio
n --
Emai
l, bu
lletin
boa
rds,
web
Em
ail,
bulle
tin b
oard
s, w
eb
site
s, e
xten
sion
and
vid
eo c
onfe
renc
essi
tes,
ext
ensi
on a
nd v
ideo
con
fere
nces
Inte
rper
sona
l net
wor
k In
terp
erso
nal n
etw
ork
--di
scus
sion
s w
ith t
hose
out
side
of
disc
ussi
ons
with
tho
se o
utsi
de o
f th
e pr
ojec
t.th
e pr
ojec
t.
42
Val
ue a
nd u
se o
f coo
rdin
atio
n an
d co
mm
unic
atio
n te
chni
ques
Val
ue a
nd u
se o
f coo
rdin
atio
n an
d co
mm
unic
atio
n te
chni
ques
43
Sum
mar
ySu
mm
ary
Soft
war
e pr
ojec
t m
anag
emen
t is
an
umbr
ella
So
ftw
are
proj
ect
man
agem
ent
is a
n um
brel
la
activ
ity t
hat
cont
inue
s th
roug
hout
the
life
cyc
le
activ
ity t
hat
cont
inue
s th
roug
hout
the
life
cyc
le
of t
he s
yste
m.
of t
he s
yste
m.
Soft
war
e m
anag
emen
t in
clud
es t
he p
eopl
e, t
he
Soft
war
e m
anag
emen
t in
clud
es t
he p
eopl
e, t
he
prob
lem
, and
the
pro
cess
.pr
oble
m, a
nd t
he p
roce
ss.
The
mos
t cr
itica
l ele
men
t in
all
soft
war
e sy
stem
Th
e m
ost
criti
cal e
lem
ent
in a
ll so
ftw
are
syst
em
proj
ects
is t
he p
eopl
e.
The
team
can
hav
e an
pr
ojec
ts is
the
peo
ple.
Th
e te
am c
an h
ave
an
num
ber
of s
truc
ture
s th
at e
ffec
t th
e w
ay w
ork
is
num
ber
of s
truc
ture
s th
at e
ffec
t th
e w
ay w
ork
is
acco
mpl
ishe
d.ac
com
plis
hed.
How
ever
, com
plet
e, c
onsi
sten
t pr
oble
m
How
ever
, com
plet
e, c
onsi
sten
t pr
oble
m
defin
ition
and
an
effe
ctiv
e pr
oces
s ar
e al
so
defin
ition
and
an
effe
ctiv
e pr
oces
s ar
e al
so
esse
ntia
l ing
redi
ents
.es
sent
ial i
ngre
dien
ts.
44
Ana
lysi
s an
d D
esig
nA
naly
sis
and
Des
ign
Two
prim
ary
met
hods
tod
ayTw
o pr
imar
y m
etho
ds t
oday
Stru
ctur
ed A
naly
sis
Stru
ctur
ed A
naly
sis
Obj
ect
Obj
ect --
orie
nted
ana
lysi
sor
ient
ed a
naly
sis
Som
e im
port
ant
cons
ider
atio
nsSo
me
impo
rtan
t co
nsid
erat
ions
Anal
ysis
pro
duct
s m
ust
be m
aint
aina
ble
Anal
ysis
pro
duct
s m
ust
be m
aint
aina
ble
Effe
ctiv
e pa
rtiti
onin
g is
ess
entia
lEf
fect
ive
part
ition
ing
is e
ssen
tial
Gra
phic
s sh
ould
be
used
whe
neve
r po
ssib
leG
raph
ics
shou
ld b
e us
ed w
hene
ver
poss
ible
Dis
tingu
ish
betw
een
logi
cal a
nd im
plem
enta
tion
Dis
tingu
ish
betw
een
logi
cal a
nd im
plem
enta
tion
Sepa
rate
pre
sent
atio
ns!
Sepa
rate
pre
sent
atio
ns!
Žiga
Tur
k, A
ssoc
.Pro
f.zi
ga.t
urk@
uni-l
j.si
Uni
vers
ity o
f Lj
ublja
na, F
acul
ty o
f Ci
vil a
nd G
eode
tic E
ngin
eerin
g
Ista
nbul
Tec
hnic
al U
nive
rsity
MBA
in C
onst
ruct
ion
Info
rmat
ics
in C
onst
ruct
ion
Man
agem
ent
CM
IT 5
58:
Info
rmat
ion
Sys
tem
s fo
r C
onst
ruct
ion
M
anag
emen
t
End
of t
he s
hort
ve
rsio
nE
nd o
f the
sho
rt
vers
ion
46
Soft
war
e P
roce
ss a
nd P
roje
ct
Met
rics
: Out
line
Soft
war
e P
roce
ss a
nd P
roje
ct
Met
rics
: Out
line
Soft
war
e M
etric
s D
omai
ns:
Soft
war
e M
etric
s D
omai
ns:
prod
uct
met
rics
prod
uct
met
rics
proj
ect
met
rics
proj
ect
met
rics
proc
ess
met
rics
proc
ess
met
rics
Soft
war
e M
easu
rem
ent
Soft
war
e M
easu
rem
ent
size
size
-- orie
nted
met
rics
orie
nted
met
rics
func
tion
func
tion --
orie
nted
met
rics
orie
nted
met
rics
met
rics
for
Soft
war
e Q
ualit
ym
etric
s fo
r So
ftw
are
Qua
lity
47
Mea
sure
, Met
rics
, and
Ind
icat
orM
easu
re, M
etri
cs, a
nd I
ndic
ator
Mea
sure
Mea
sure
----Pr
ovid
es a
qua
ntita
tive
indi
catio
n of
Pr
ovid
es a
qua
ntita
tive
indi
catio
n of
th
e ex
tent
, am
ount
, dim
ensi
ons,
cap
acity
, or
the
exte
nt, a
mou
nt, d
imen
sion
s, c
apac
ity, o
r si
ze o
f so
me
prod
uct
or p
roce
ss a
ttrib
ute
(100
0 si
ze o
f so
me
prod
uct
or p
roce
ss a
ttrib
ute
(100
0 lin
es)
lines
)M
etric
sM
etric
s----
A qu
antit
ativ
e m
easu
re o
f th
e de
gree
A
quan
titat
ive
mea
sure
of
the
degr
ee
to w
hich
a s
yste
m, c
ompo
nent
, or
proc
ess
to w
hich
a s
yste
m, c
ompo
nent
, or
proc
ess
poss
esse
s a
give
n at
trib
ute
(40%
)po
sses
ses
a gi
ven
attr
ibut
e (4
0%)
Soft
war
eSo
ftw
are
Met
rics
Met
rics
----re
fers
to
a br
oad
rang
e of
re
fers
to
a br
oad
rang
e of
m
easu
rem
ents
for
com
pute
r so
ftw
are
mea
sure
men
ts f
or c
ompu
ter
soft
war
eIn
dica
tor
Indi
cato
r----
a m
etric
or
com
bina
tion
of m
etric
s a
met
ric o
r co
mbi
natio
n of
met
rics
that
pro
vide
insi
ght
into
the
sof
twar
e pr
oces
s, a
th
at p
rovi
de in
sigh
t in
to t
he s
oftw
are
proc
ess,
a
soft
war
epr
ojec
t,or
the
prod
uct
itsel
f.so
ftw
are
proj
ect,
orth
epr
oduc
tits
elf.
48
Use
of S
oftw
are
Met
rics
Use
of S
oftw
are
Met
rics
Use
com
mon
sen
se a
nd o
rgan
izat
iona
l sen
sitiv
ity.
Use
com
mon
sen
se a
nd o
rgan
izat
iona
l sen
sitiv
ity.
Prov
ide
regu
lar
feed
back
to
indi
vidu
als
and
team
s.Pr
ovid
e re
gula
r fe
edba
ck t
o in
divi
dual
s an
d te
ams.
Don
’t us
e m
etric
s to
app
rais
e in
divi
dual
s.D
on’t
use
met
rics
to a
ppra
ise
indi
vidu
als.
Set
clea
r go
al a
nd m
etric
s.Se
t cl
ear
goal
and
met
rics.
Nev
er u
se m
etric
s to
thr
eate
n in
divi
dual
s or
tea
ms
Nev
er u
se m
etric
s to
thr
eate
n in
divi
dual
s or
tea
ms
Prob
lem
s !=
neg
ativ
e. T
hese
dat
a ar
e m
erel
y an
Pr
oble
ms
!= n
egat
ive.
The
se d
ata
are
mer
ely
an
indi
cato
r fo
r pr
oces
s im
prov
emen
t.in
dica
tor
for
proc
ess
impr
ovem
ent.
Don
’t ob
sess
on
a si
ngle
met
ric t
o th
e ex
clus
ion
of o
ther
D
on’t
obse
ss o
n a
sing
le m
etric
to
the
excl
usio
n of
oth
er
impo
rtan
t m
etric
s.im
port
ant
met
rics.
Do
not
rely
on
met
rics
to s
olve
you
r pr
oble
ms.
Do
not
rely
on
met
rics
to s
olve
you
r pr
oble
ms.
Bew
are
of p
eopl
e pe
rfor
min
g to
met
rics
rath
er t
han
Bew
are
of p
eopl
e pe
rfor
min
g to
met
rics
rath
er t
han
prod
uct
qual
ity o
r sa
fety
.pr
oduc
t qu
ality
or
safe
ty.
49
Typ
ical
Cau
ses
of P
rodu
ct
Def
ects
Typ
ical
Cau
ses
of P
rodu
ct
Def
ects
50
Mea
sure
s of
Sof
twar
e Q
ualit
y:
Cor
rect
ness
and
Mai
ntai
nabi
lity
Mea
sure
s of
Sof
twar
e Q
ualit
y:
Cor
rect
ness
and
Mai
ntai
nabi
lity
Corr
ectn
ess
is t
he d
egre
e to
whi
ch t
he s
oftw
are
Corr
ectn
ess
is t
he d
egre
e to
whi
ch t
he s
oftw
are
perf
orm
s its
req
uire
d fu
nctio
n.
The
mos
t pe
rfor
ms
its r
equi
red
func
tion.
Th
e m
ost
com
mon
mea
sure
for
cor
rect
ness
is d
efec
ts p
er
com
mon
mea
sure
for
cor
rect
ness
is d
efec
ts p
er
KLO
CKL
OC
Mai
ntai
nabi
lity
is t
he e
ase
that
a p
rogr
am c
an b
e M
aint
aina
bilit
y is
the
eas
e th
at a
pro
gram
can
be
corr
ecte
d:co
rrec
ted:
adap
ted
if th
e en
viro
nmen
t ch
ange
sad
apte
d if
the
envi
ronm
ent
chan
ges
enha
nced
if t
he c
usto
mer
des
ires
chan
ges
in
enha
nced
if t
he c
usto
mer
des
ires
chan
ges
in
requ
irem
ents
requ
irem
ents
base
d on
the
tim
eba
sed
on t
he t
ime --
orie
nted
mea
sure
mea
n tim
e to
or
ient
ed m
easu
re m
ean
time
to
chan
ge.
chan
ge.
51
Mea
sure
s of
Sof
twar
e Q
ualit
y:
Inte
grit
y an
d U
sabi
lity
Mea
sure
s of
Sof
twar
e Q
ualit
y:
Inte
grit
y an
d U
sabi
lity
Inte
grity
is a
sys
tem
’s a
bilit
y to
with
stan
d In
tegr
ity is
a s
yste
m’s
abi
lity
to w
ithst
and
atta
cks
(bot
h ac
cide
ntal
and
inte
ntio
nal)
on it
s at
tack
s (b
oth
acci
dent
al a
nd in
tent
iona
l) on
its
secu
rity
secu
rity
Usa
bilit
y U
sabi
lity
--an
att
empt
to
quan
tify
“use
r an
att
empt
to
quan
tify
“use
r fr
iend
lines
s” p
hysi
cal/i
ntel
lect
ual r
equi
rem
ent
to
frie
ndlin
ess”
phy
sica
l/int
elle
ctua
l req
uire
men
t to
le
arn
...le
arn
...tim
e re
quire
d to
bec
ome
mod
erat
ely
effic
ient
time
requ
ired
to b
ecom
e m
oder
atel
y ef
ficie
ntth
e ne
t in
crea
se in
pro
duct
ivity
the
net
incr
ease
in p
rodu
ctiv
ityus
er a
ttitu
des
tow
ard
syst
emus
er a
ttitu
des
tow
ard
syst
em
52
Sum
mar
ySu
mm
ary
Met
rics
are
a to
ol w
hich
can
be
used
to
impr
ove
Met
rics
are
a to
ol w
hich
can
be
used
to
impr
ove
the
prod
uctiv
ity a
nd q
ualit
y of
the
sof
twar
e th
e pr
oduc
tivity
and
qua
lity
of t
he s
oftw
are
syst
emsy
stem
Proc
ess
met
rics
take
s a
stra
tegi
c vi
ew t
o th
e Pr
oces
s m
etric
s ta
kes
a st
rate
gic
view
to
the
effe
ctiv
enes
s of
a s
oftw
are
proc
ess
effe
ctiv
enes
s of
a s
oftw
are
proc
ess
Proj
ect
met
rics
are
tact
ical
tha
t fo
cus
on p
roje
ct
Proj
ect
met
rics
are
tact
ical
tha
t fo
cus
on p
roje
ct
wor
k flo
w a
nd t
echn
ical
app
roac
hw
ork
flow
and
tec
hnic
al a
ppro
ach
Size
Size
-- orie
nted
met
rics
use
the
line
of c
ode
as a
or
ient
ed m
etric
s us
e th
e lin
e of
cod
e as
a
norm
aliz
ing
fact
orno
rmal
izin
g fa
ctor
Func
tion
Func
tion --
orie
nted
met
rics
use
func
tion
poin
tsor
ient
ed m
etric
s us
e fu
nctio
n po
ints
Qua
lity
met
rics
are
corr
ectn
ess,
inte
grity
, Q
ualit
y m
etric
s ar
e co
rrec
tnes
s, in
tegr
ity,
mai
ntai
nabi
lity,
an
d us
abili
ty.
mai
ntai
nabi
lity,
an
d us
abili
ty.
53
Soft
war
e P
roje
ct P
lann
ing
Soft
war
e P
roje
ct P
lann
ing
Step
s to
Sof
twar
e Pl
anni
ng:
Step
s to
Sof
twar
e Pl
anni
ng:
Def
ine
Soft
war
e Sc
ope
Def
ine
Soft
war
e Sc
ope
Det
erm
ine
Reso
urce
sD
eter
min
e Re
sour
ces
Crea
te P
roje
ct E
stim
ates
Crea
te P
roje
ct E
stim
ates
Mak
e or
buy
dec
isio
nM
ake
or b
uy d
ecis
ion
54
Soft
war
e Sc
ope
Soft
war
e Sc
ope
Wha
t sc
ope
mea
ns:
Wha
t sc
ope
mea
ns:
Func
tions
Func
tions
Lite
rally
ref
ers
to a
ll fu
nctio
ns p
erfo
rmed
by
a sy
stem
Lite
rally
ref
ers
to a
ll fu
nctio
ns p
erfo
rmed
by
a sy
stem
Perf
orm
ance
Perf
orm
ance
Refe
rs t
o pr
oces
sing
and
res
pons
e tim
e re
quire
men
tsRe
fers
to
proc
essi
ng a
nd r
espo
nse
time
requ
irem
ents
Cons
trai
nts
Cons
trai
nts
Lim
its p
lace
d on
the
sof
twar
e by
ext
erna
l har
dwar
e,
Lim
its p
lace
d on
the
sof
twar
e by
ext
erna
l har
dwar
e,
avai
labl
e m
emor
y or
exi
stin
g sy
stem
sav
aila
ble
mem
ory
or e
xist
ing
syst
ems
Inte
rfac
esIn
terf
aces
Relia
bilit
yRe
liabi
lity
55
Scop
eSc
ope
Obt
aini
ng t
he in
form
atio
nO
btai
ning
the
info
rmat
ion
Com
mun
icat
ion,
com
mun
icat
ion,
com
mun
icat
ion!
!!Co
mm
unic
atio
n, c
omm
unic
atio
n, c
omm
unic
atio
n!!!
Mee
t w
ith c
usto
mer
as
ofte
n as
nee
ded.
Mee
t w
ith c
usto
mer
as
ofte
n as
nee
ded.
Hav
e fr
ee f
orm
dis
cuss
ion
Hav
e fr
ee f
orm
dis
cuss
ion
Try
to u
nder
stan
d hi
s/he
r go
als/
cons
trai
nts,
Tr
y to
und
erst
and
his/
her
goal
s/co
nstr
aint
s, n
otn
otju
st
just
w
hat
she/
he t
hink
s th
ey w
ant.
w
hat
she/
he t
hink
s th
ey w
ant.
Bew
are
if on
es p
rovi
des
deta
iled
writ
ten
Bew
are
if on
es p
rovi
des
deta
iled
writ
ten
spec
ifica
tions
on
wha
t th
ey w
ant.
sp
ecifi
catio
ns o
n w
hat
they
wan
t.
The
prob
lem
is t
hat
thos
e w
ritin
g th
em p
roba
bly
The
prob
lem
is t
hat
thos
e w
ritin
g th
em p
roba
bly
didn
’t fu
lly u
nder
stan
d, a
nd t
hey
will
cha
nge.
didn
’t fu
lly u
nder
stan
d, a
nd t
hey
will
cha
nge.
56
Scop
e In
form
atio
nSc
ope
Info
rmat
ion
Som
e ty
pica
l que
stio
nsSo
me
typi
cal q
uest
ions
Ove
rall
Goa
lsO
vera
ll G
oals
Who
’s r
eque
stW
ho’s
req
uest
Wha
t be
nefit
Wha
t be
nefit
Who
els
e ha
s so
lutio
nW
ho e
lse
has
solu
tion
Und
erst
andi
ng T
he P
robl
emU
nder
stan
ding
The
Pro
blem
Wha
t ou
tput
Wha
t ou
tput
Wha
t Pr
oble
mW
hat
Prob
lem
Wha
t Is
sues
Wha
t Is
sues
Wha
t Co
nstr
aint
sW
hat
Cons
trai
nts
Effe
ctiv
enes
s of
Mee
ting
Effe
ctiv
enes
s of
Mee
ting
Are
answ
ers
offic
ial
Are
answ
ers
offic
ial
Are
my
ques
tions
rel
evan
tAr
e m
y qu
estio
ns r
elev
ant
Oth
er s
ourc
es o
f In
fo.
Oth
er s
ourc
es o
f In
fo.
57
Scop
ing
-Su
bseq
uent
Mee
ting
sSc
opin
g-
Subs
eque
nt M
eeti
ngs
Begi
n hi
gh le
vel p
lann
ing
Begi
n hi
gh le
vel p
lann
ing
Know
the
cap
abili
ties
of e
xist
ing
soft
war
e an
d st
aff
Know
the
cap
abili
ties
of e
xist
ing
soft
war
e an
d st
aff
Join
t te
ams
of c
usto
mer
and
dev
elop
ers/
anal
ysts
Join
t te
ams
of c
usto
mer
and
dev
elop
ers/
anal
ysts
Chec
klis
t of
item
s to
cov
erCh
eckl
ist
of it
ems
to c
over
Org
aniz
atio
n of
Inf
orm
atio
nO
rgan
izat
ion
of I
nfor
mat
ion
Get
eve
ryth
ing
dow
n w
ith d
iagr
ams
Get
eve
ryth
ing
dow
n w
ith d
iagr
ams
Crea
te a
nd s
ave
tran
scrip
ts o
f M
eetin
gsCr
eate
and
sav
e tr
ansc
ripts
of
Mee
tings
Poss
ibly
use
Web
.Po
ssib
ly u
se W
eb.
58
Hum
an R
esou
rces
Hum
an R
esou
rces
Scop
e an
d sk
ills
requ
ired
Scop
e an
d sk
ills
requ
ired
Org
aniz
atio
nal p
ositi
on a
nd s
peci
alty
mus
t bo
th
Org
aniz
atio
nal p
ositi
on a
nd s
peci
alty
mus
t bo
th
be c
onsi
dere
dbe
con
side
red
As e
stim
ate
of d
evel
opm
ent
effo
rt is
ess
entia
l to
As e
stim
ate
of d
evel
opm
ent
effo
rt is
ess
entia
l to
dete
rmin
e th
e nu
mbe
r of
peo
ple
requ
ired
for
the
dete
rmin
e th
e nu
mbe
r of
peo
ple
requ
ired
for
the
proj
ect.
proj
ect.
59
Reu
sabl
e So
ftw
are
Res
ourc
esR
eusa
ble
Soft
war
e R
esou
rces
Off
Off
-- thethe --
shel
f co
mpo
nent
ssh
elf
com
pone
nts
The
valid
ity p
edig
ree
is c
ritic
alTh
e va
lidity
ped
igre
e is
crit
ical
Full
expe
rienc
e co
mpo
nent
sFu
ll ex
perie
nce
com
pone
nts
Part
ial e
xper
ienc
e co
mpo
nent
s Pa
rtia
l exp
erie
nce
com
pone
nts
New
val
idat
ion
will
hav
e to
be
perf
orm
edN
ew v
alid
atio
n w
ill h
ave
to b
e pe
rfor
med
60
Soft
war
e E
ngin
eeri
ng
Env
iron
men
tal R
esou
rces
Soft
war
e E
ngin
eeri
ng
Env
iron
men
tal R
esou
rces
Com
pile
rsCo
mpi
lers
Edito
rsEd
itors
Des
ign
tool
sD
esig
n to
ols
Conf
igur
atio
n m
anag
emen
t to
ols
Conf
igur
atio
n m
anag
emen
t to
ols
Man
agem
ent
trac
king
too
lsM
anag
emen
t tr
acki
ng t
ools
Prob
lem
Rep
ortin
g An
d Co
rrec
tive
Actio
n Pr
oble
m R
epor
ting
And
Corr
ectiv
e Ac
tion
(PRA
CA)
tool
s(P
RACA
) to
ols
Doc
umen
tatio
n to
ols
Doc
umen
tatio
n to
ols
Har
dwar
e re
sour
ces
Har
dwar
e re
sour
ces
Net
wor
k su
ppor
tN
etw
ork
supp
ort
61
Soft
war
e P
roje
ct E
stim
atio
nSo
ftw
are
Pro
ject
Est
imat
ion
Estim
atio
n cr
itica
l Es
timat
ion
criti
cal -
---so
ftw
are
cost
s us
ually
so
ftw
are
cost
s us
ually
do
min
ate
proj
ect.
dom
inat
e pr
ojec
t.Ca
tego
ries
of e
stim
atio
n te
chni
ques
Cate
gorie
s of
est
imat
ion
tech
niqu
esBa
se e
stim
ates
on
sim
ilar
proj
ects
Base
est
imat
es o
n si
mila
r pr
ojec
tsU
se s
impl
e de
com
posi
tion
(pos
sibl
y in
com
bina
tion
Use
sim
ple
deco
mpo
sitio
n (p
ossi
bly
in c
ombi
natio
n w
ith o
ther
met
hods
with
oth
er m
etho
dsU
se o
ne o
r m
ore
empi
rical
mod
els,
I.e
., U
se o
ne o
r m
ore
empi
rical
mod
els,
I.e
., ••
For
exam
ple
# o
f pe
ople
= L
OC
÷(D
urat
ion*
(LO
C/PM
))Fo
r ex
ampl
e #
of
peop
le =
LO
C ÷
(Dur
atio
n*(L
OC/
PM))
LOC
= li
ne o
f co
deLO
C =
line
of
code
PM =
per
son
mon
thPM
= p
erso
n m
onth
62
Soft
war
e P
roje
ct E
stim
atio
nSo
ftw
are
Pro
ject
Est
imat
ion
Prec
ise
estim
atio
n is
diff
icul
t. So
, mak
e th
ree
Prec
ise
estim
atio
n is
diff
icul
t. So
, mak
e th
ree
estim
ates
:es
timat
es:
optim
istic
optim
istic
mos
t lik
ely
mos
t lik
ely
pess
imis
ticpe
ssim
istic
Then
com
bine
as:
Then
com
bine
as:
EV =
(EV
= (
SS optopt+
4*
+ 4
* SSmm
++SS p
ess
pess
)/6
)/6
63
Est
imat
ion
Tab
leE
stim
atio
n T
able
Supp
ose:
Supp
ose:
620
LOC/
PM62
0 LO
C/PM
$8,0
00/P
M$8
,000
/PM
base
d up
on h
isto
rical
dat
a.
Then
,ba
sed
upon
his
toric
al d
ata.
Th
en,
Est.
Cos
t =
33,
200*
$8,0
00/6
20 =
$42
1,00
0Es
t. C
ost
= 3
3,20
0*$8
,000
/620
= $
421,
000
64
Pro
cess
Bas
ed E
stim
atio
nP
roce
ss B
ased
Est
imat
ion
Dec
ompo
se t
he p
roce
ss in
to a
set
of
activ
ities
or
task
sD
ecom
pose
the
pro
cess
into
a s
et o
f ac
tiviti
es o
r ta
sks
Estim
ate
effo
rt o
r co
st t
o pe
rfor
m e
ach
task
Estim
ate
effo
rt o
r co
st t
o pe
rfor
m e
ach
task
Estim
ate
cost
cos
t of
eac
h fu
nctio
nEs
timat
e co
st c
ost
of e
ach
func
tion
May
be
done
usi
ngM
ay b
e do
ne u
sing
LOC
and
LOC
and
FP e
stim
atio
n FP
est
imat
ion
or s
epar
atel
y or
sep
arat
ely
If e
stim
ated
sep
arat
ely,
the
n th
ere
are
two
or t
hree
If
est
imat
ed s
epar
atel
y, t
hen
ther
e ar
e tw
o or
thr
ee
dist
inct
cos
t es
timat
esdi
stin
ct c
ost
estim
ates
Reco
ncile
diff
eren
ces
Reco
ncile
diff
eren
ces
If r
adic
ally
diff
eren
t, p
erha
ps
If r
adic
ally
diff
eren
t, p
erha
ps
••pr
oble
m is
not
wel
l und
erst
ood,
or
prob
lem
is n
ot w
ell u
nder
stoo
d, o
r ••
prod
uctiv
ity d
ata
is o
bsol
ete,
or
prod
uctiv
ity d
ata
is o
bsol
ete,
or
••th
e m
odel
s ha
ve n
ot b
een
used
cor
rect
ly.
the
mod
els
have
not
bee
n us
ed c
orre
ctl y
.
65
Sum
mar
ySu
mm
ary
Proj
ect
plan
ner
mus
t es
timat
e th
ree
thin
gs:
Proj
ect
plan
ner
mus
t es
timat
e th
ree
thin
gs:
how
long
pro
ject
will
tak
eho
w lo
ng p
roje
ct w
ill t
ake
how
muc
h ef
fort
will
be
requ
ired
how
muc
h ef
fort
will
be
requ
ired
how
man
y pe
ople
will
be
req
uire
dho
w m
any
peop
le w
ill
be r
equi
red
Mus
t us
e de
com
posi
tion
and
empi
rical
mod
elin
gM
ust
use
deco
mpo
sitio
n an
d em
piric
al m
odel
ing
Mos
t em
piric
al t
echn
ique
s ne
ed t
o be
cal
ibra
ted
to
Mos
t em
piric
al t
echn
ique
s ne
ed t
o be
cal
ibra
ted
to
indi
vidu
al s
ituat
ions
.in
divi
dual
situ
atio
ns.
Use
mul
tiple
tec
hniq
ues
to g
ain
conf
iden
ce in
res
ult
Use
mul
tiple
tec
hniq
ues
to g
ain
conf
iden
ce in
res
ult
66
Ris
k M
anag
emen
tR
isk
Man
agem
ent
Intr
oduc
tion
Intr
oduc
tion
Risk
Ide
ntifi
catio
nRi
sk I
dent
ifica
tion
Risk
Pro
ject
ion
Risk
Pro
ject
ion
Risk
Miti
gatio
n, M
onito
ring,
and
Ri
sk M
itiga
tion,
Mon
itorin
g, a
nd
Man
agem
ent
Man
agem
ent
Safe
ty R
isks
and
Haz
ards
Safe
ty R
isks
and
Haz
ards
The
RMM
M p
lan
The
RMM
M p
lan
SEI
Tech
nica
l Rev
iew
sSE
I Te
chni
cal R
evie
ws
Sum
mar
ySu
mm
ary
67
Intr
oduc
tion
Intr
oduc
tion
Risk
man
agem
ent
is a
pro
cess
tha
t is
use
d Ri
sk m
anag
emen
t is
a p
roce
ss t
hat
is u
sed
exte
nsiv
ely
for
vario
us p
urpo
ses
exte
nsiv
ely
for
vario
us p
urpo
ses
Reca
ll ea
rlier
que
stio
ns r
aise
d ab
out
safe
ty, c
osts
, Re
call
earli
er q
uest
ions
rai
sed
abou
t sa
fety
, cos
ts,
etc.
etc.
Acco
rdin
g to
“W
ebst
er’s
Sev
enth
New
Col
legi
ate
Acco
rdin
g to
“W
ebst
er’s
Sev
enth
New
Col
legi
ate
Dic
tiona
ry”,
ris
k is
def
ined
as
a:D
ictio
nary
”, r
isk
is d
efin
ed a
s a:
“pos
sibi
lity
of lo
ss o
r in
jury
”“p
ossi
bilit
y of
loss
or
inju
ry”
“the
cha
nce
of lo
ss o
r th
e pe
rils
to t
he s
ubje
ct m
atte
r “t
he c
hanc
e of
loss
or
the
peril
s to
the
sub
ject
mat
ter
of a
n in
sura
nce
cont
ract
” an
dof
an
insu
ranc
e co
ntra
ct”
and
“the
deg
ree
of p
roba
bilit
y of
suc
h lo
ss.”
“the
deg
ree
of p
roba
bilit
y of
suc
h lo
ss.”
68
Intr
oduc
tion
Intr
oduc
tion
Robe
rt
Robe
rt C
hare
tte
Char
ette
pres
ente
d th
e fo
llow
ing
pres
ente
d th
e fo
llow
ing
conc
eptu
al d
efin
ition
s of
ris
k:co
ncep
tual
def
initi
ons
of r
isk:
Risk
con
cern
s fu
ture
hap
peni
ngs
Risk
con
cern
s fu
ture
hap
peni
ngs
Risk
invo
lves
cha
nge,
suc
h as
cha
nges
of
min
d,
Risk
invo
lves
cha
nge,
suc
h as
cha
nges
of
min
d,
opin
ion,
act
ion
or p
lace
sop
inio
n, a
ctio
n or
pla
ces
Risk
invo
lves
cho
ice,
and
the
unc
erta
inty
tha
t ch
oice
Ri
sk in
volv
es c
hoic
e, a
nd t
he u
ncer
tain
ty t
hat
choi
ce
itsel
f en
tails
its
elf
enta
ils
Risk
Cha
ract
eris
tics
: Ri
sk C
hara
cter
istic
s :
unce
rtai
nty:
may
or
may
not
hap
pen
unce
rtai
nty:
may
or
may
not
hap
pen
loss
: un
wan
ted
cons
eque
nces
loss
: un
wan
ted
cons
eque
nces
69
Intr
oduc
tion
Intr
oduc
tion
Man
agem
ent
is
Man
agem
ent
is
“the
act
or
art
of m
anag
ing”
and
“the
act
or
art
of m
anag
ing”
and
“jud
icio
us u
se o
f m
eans
to
acco
mpl
ish
an e
nd”(
1)“j
udic
ious
use
of
mea
ns t
o ac
com
plis
h an
end
”(1)
RISK
MAN
AGEM
ENT
can
be d
efin
ed a
s:RI
SK M
ANAG
EMEN
T ca
n be
def
ined
as:
“A lo
gica
l pro
cess
for
iden
tifyi
ng a
nd a
naly
zing
“A
logi
cal p
roce
ss f
or id
entif
ying
and
ana
lyzi
ng
lead
ing
to a
ppro
pria
te m
etho
ds f
or h
andl
ing
and
lead
ing
to a
ppro
pria
te m
etho
ds f
or h
andl
ing
and
mon
itorin
g ex
posu
res
to lo
ss”
mon
itorin
g ex
posu
res
to lo
ss”
Risk
man
agem
ent
deal
s w
ith:
Risk
man
agem
ent
deal
s w
ith:
Syst
emat
ic id
entif
icat
ion
of a
n ex
posu
re t
o th
e ris
k of
Sy
stem
atic
iden
tific
atio
n of
an
expo
sure
to
the
risk
of
loss
, &
loss
, &
Mak
ing
deci
sion
s on
the
bes
t m
etho
ds f
or h
andl
ing
Mak
ing
deci
sion
s on
the
bes
t m
etho
ds f
or h
andl
ing
thes
e ex
posu
res
to m
inim
ize
loss
esth
ese
expo
sure
s to
min
imiz
e lo
sses
70
Typ
es o
f ris
k st
rate
gies
Typ
es o
f ris
k st
rate
gies
Reac
tive
Reac
tive
Soft
war
e te
am d
oes
Soft
war
e te
am d
oes
noth
ing
abou
t ris
ks u
ntil
noth
ing
abou
t ris
ks u
ntil
som
ethi
ng g
oes
wro
ngso
met
hing
goe
s w
rong
“fire
fig
htin
g m
ode”
“f
ire f
ight
ing
mod
e”
At b
est,
mon
itors
the
At
bes
t, m
onito
rs t
he
proj
ects
for
like
ly r
isks
proj
ects
for
like
ly r
isks
Proa
ctiv
ePr
oact
ive
Begi
ns lo
ng b
efor
e Be
gins
long
bef
ore
tech
nica
l wor
k is
initi
ated
tech
nica
l wor
k is
initi
ated
Iden
tific
atio
n of
pot
entia
l Id
entif
icat
ion
of p
oten
tial
risks
(st
udie
s of
pro
babi
lity,
ris
ks (
stud
ies
of p
roba
bilit
y,
impa
ct a
nd p
riorit
ies)
impa
ct a
nd p
riorit
ies)
Obj
ectiv
e: A
VOID
RIS
KO
bjec
tive:
AVO
ID R
ISK
Resp
onds
are
in a
Re
spon
ds a
re in
a
cont
rolle
d an
d ef
fect
ive
cont
rolle
d an
d ef
fect
ive
man
ner
man
ner
71
Kin
ds o
f ris
ksK
inds
of r
isks
Proj
ect
Risk
sPr
ojec
t Ri
sks
budg
etar
y, s
ched
ule,
per
sonn
el, r
esou
rce,
cus
tom
erbu
dget
ary,
sch
edul
e, p
erso
nnel
, res
ourc
e, c
usto
mer
Tech
nica
l Ris
ksTe
chni
cal R
isks
desi
gn, i
mpl
emen
tatio
n, in
terf
acin
g, v
erifi
catio
nde
sign
, im
plem
enta
tion,
inte
rfac
ing,
ver
ifica
tion
Busi
ness
Ris
ksBu
sine
ss R
isks
mar
ket,
str
ateg
ic, m
anag
emen
t,bu
dget
mar
ket,
str
ateg
ic, m
anag
emen
t,bu
dget
Risk
s m
ay b
e:
Risk
s m
ay b
e:
Know
nKn
own
Pred
icta
ble
Pred
icta
ble
Unp
redi
ctab
leU
npre
dict
able
72
Ris
k Id
enti
fica
tion
Ris
k Id
enti
fica
tion
Risk
iden
tific
atio
nRi
sk id
entif
icat
ion
is a
sys
tem
atic
att
empt
to
is a
sys
tem
atic
att
empt
to
spec
ify t
hrea
ts t
o th
e pr
ojec
t pl
ansp
ecify
thr
eats
to
the
proj
ect
plan
Gen
eric
G
ener
ic
Prod
uct
Prod
uct --
spec
ific
spec
ific
Wha
t ch
arac
teris
tics
of
Wha
t ch
arac
teris
tics
of
this
pro
duct
may
thr
eate
n th
is p
rodu
ct m
ay t
hrea
ten
our
proj
ect
plan
?ou
r pr
ojec
t pl
an?
Risk
Ite
m L
ist
Risk
Ite
m L
ist
Iden
tify
know
n an
d pr
edic
tabl
e ris
ks
Prod
uct s
ize
Bus
ines
s im
pact
Cus
tom
er c
hara
cter
istic
sPr
oces
s def
initi
onD
evel
opm
ent e
nviro
nmen
tTe
chno
logy
to b
e bu
ilt
Staf
f siz
e an
d ex
perie
nce
73
Ris
k Id
enti
fica
tion
Ris
k Id
enti
fica
tion
prod
uct
prod
uct
busi
ness
busi
ness
cust
omer
cust
omer
tech
nlog
yte
chnl
ogy
74
Pro
duct
Siz
e R
isk
: P
rodu
ct S
ize
Ris
k :
Estim
ated
siz
e of
the
pro
duct
in L
OC
or F
P?Es
timat
ed s
ize
of t
he p
rodu
ct in
LO
C or
FP?
Perc
enta
ge d
evia
tion
in s
ize
of p
rodu
ct f
rom
ave
rage
for
Pe
rcen
tage
dev
iatio
n in
siz
e of
pro
duct
fro
m a
vera
ge f
or
prev
ious
pro
duct
s?pr
evio
us p
rodu
cts?
Num
ber
of u
sers
/pro
ject
ed c
hang
es t
o th
e re
quire
men
ts
Num
ber
of u
sers
/pro
ject
ed c
hang
es t
o th
e re
quire
men
ts
for
the
prod
uct?
for
the
prod
uct?
Amou
nt o
f re
used
sof
twar
e?Am
ount
of
reus
ed s
oftw
are?
75
Bus
ines
s Im
pact
ris
ks:
Bus
ines
s Im
pact
ris
ks:
Effe
ct o
f th
is p
rodu
ct o
n th
e co
mpa
ny r
even
ue?
Effe
ct o
f th
is p
rodu
ct o
n th
e co
mpa
ny r
even
ue?
Visi
bilit
y of
thi
s pr
oduc
t to
sen
ior
man
agem
ent?
Visi
bilit
y of
thi
s pr
oduc
t to
sen
ior
man
agem
ent?
Amou
nt &
qua
lity
of p
rodu
ct d
ocum
enta
tion
to b
e Am
ount
& q
ualit
y of
pro
duct
doc
umen
tatio
n to
be
prod
uced
?pr
oduc
ed?
Gov
ernm
enta
l con
stra
ints
on
the
cons
truc
tion
of t
he
Gov
ernm
enta
l con
stra
ints
on
the
cons
truc
tion
of t
he
prod
uct?
prod
uct?
76
Cus
tom
er r
elat
ed r
isks
:C
usto
mer
rel
ated
ris
ks:
Hav
e yo
u w
orke
d w
ith t
he c
usto
mer
in t
he p
ast?
Hav
e yo
u w
orke
d w
ith t
he c
usto
mer
in t
he p
ast?
Doe
s th
e cu
stom
er h
ave
a so
lid id
ea o
f w
hat
is
Doe
s th
e cu
stom
er h
ave
a so
lid id
ea o
f w
hat
is
requ
ired?
requ
ired?
Will
the
cus
tom
er a
gree
to
have
mee
tings
?W
ill t
he c
usto
mer
agr
ee t
o ha
ve m
eetin
gs?
Is t
he c
usto
mer
tec
hnic
ally
sop
hist
icat
ed in
the
Is
the
cus
tom
er t
echn
ical
ly s
ophi
stic
ated
in t
he
prod
uct
area
?pr
oduc
t ar
ea?
Doe
s th
e cu
stom
er u
nder
stan
d th
e so
ftw
are
Doe
s th
e cu
stom
er u
nder
stan
d th
e so
ftw
are
proc
ess?
proc
ess?
77
Tec
hnol
ogy
Ris
ks:
Tec
hnol
ogy
Ris
ks:
Is t
he t
echn
olog
y to
be
built
new
to
your
Is
the
tec
hnol
ogy
to b
e bu
ilt n
ew t
o yo
ur
orga
niza
tion?
orga
niza
tion?
Doe
s th
e SW
inte
rfac
e w
ith n
ew o
r un
prov
en
Doe
s th
e SW
inte
rfac
e w
ith n
ew o
r un
prov
en
HW
/SW
?H
W/S
W?
Do
requ
irem
ents
dem
and
crea
tion
of
new
D
o re
quire
men
ts d
eman
d cr
eatio
n of
ne
w
com
pone
nts
?co
mpo
nent
s ?
Do
requ
irem
ents
impo
se e
xces
sive
per
form
ance
D
o re
quire
men
ts im
pose
exc
essi
ve p
erfo
rman
ce
cons
trai
nts
?co
nstr
aint
s ?
78
Pro
cess
Ris
ksP
roce
ss R
isks
Doe
s se
nior
man
agem
ent
supp
ort
a w
ritte
n po
licy
stat
emen
t th
at
Doe
s se
nior
man
agem
ent
supp
ort
a w
ritte
n po
licy
stat
emen
t th
at
emph
asiz
es a
sta
ndar
d pr
oces
s fo
r so
ftw
are
deve
lopm
ent
?em
phas
izes
a s
tand
ard
proc
ess
for
soft
war
e de
velo
pmen
t ?
Is t
here
a w
ritte
n de
scrip
tion
of t
he s
oftw
are
proc
ess
to b
e us
eIs
the
re a
writ
ten
desc
riptio
n of
the
sof
twar
e pr
oces
s to
be
use d
?d?Is
the
sof
twar
e pr
oces
s us
ed f
or o
ther
pro
ject
s ?
Is t
he s
oftw
are
proc
ess
used
for
oth
er p
roje
cts
?Is
con
figur
atio
n m
anag
emen
t us
ed t
o m
aint
ain
con
sist
ency
am
ong
Is c
onfig
urat
ion
man
agem
ent
used
to
mai
ntai
n c
onsi
sten
cy a
mon
g sy
stem
/sof
twar
e re
quire
men
ts, d
esig
n, c
ode
and
test
?sy
stem
/sof
twar
e re
quire
men
ts, d
esig
n, c
ode
and
test
?Is
a p
roce
dure
fol
low
ed f
or t
rack
ing
subc
ontr
acto
r pe
rfor
man
ce?
Is a
pro
cedu
re f
ollo
wed
for
tra
ckin
g su
bcon
trac
tor
perf
orm
ance
? Ar
e fa
cilit
ated
app
licat
ion
spec
ifica
tion
tech
niqu
es u
sed
to a
idAr
e fa
cilit
ated
app
licat
ion
spec
ifica
tion
tech
niqu
es u
sed
to a
idin
in
co
mm
unic
atio
n be
twee
n th
e cu
stom
er a
nd d
evel
oper
?co
mm
unic
atio
n be
twee
n th
e cu
stom
er a
nd d
evel
oper
?Ar
e sp
ecifi
c m
etho
ds u
sed
for
soft
war
e an
alys
is?
Are
spec
ific
met
hods
use
d fo
r so
ftw
are
anal
ysis
?D
o yo
u us
e sp
ecifi
c m
etho
d fo
r da
ta a
nd a
rchi
tect
ural
des
ign?
Do
you
use
spec
ific
met
hod
for
data
and
arc
hite
ctur
al d
esig
n?Ar
e so
ftw
are
tool
s us
ed t
o su
ppor
t th
e so
ftw
are
anal
ysis
and
Ar
e so
ftw
are
tool
s us
ed t
o su
ppor
t th
e so
ftw
are
anal
ysis
and
de
sign
?de
sign
?Ar
e to
ols
used
to
crea
te s
oftw
are
prot
otyp
es?
Are
tool
s us
ed t
o cr
eate
sof
twar
e pr
otot
ypes
?Ar
e qu
ality
/pro
duct
ivity
met
rics
colle
cted
for
all
soft
war
e pr
ojAr
e qu
ality
/pro
duct
ivity
met
rics
colle
cted
for
all
soft
war
e pr
ojec
ts?
ects
?
79
Dev
elop
men
t Env
iron
men
t Ris
ks:
Dev
elop
men
t Env
iron
men
t Ris
ks:
Is a
sof
twar
e pr
ojec
t/pr
oces
s m
anag
emen
t to
ol
Is a
sof
twar
e pr
ojec
t/pr
oces
s m
anag
emen
t to
ol
avai
labl
e?av
aila
ble?
Are
tool
s fo
r an
alys
is a
nd d
esig
n av
aila
ble?
?Ar
e to
ols
for
anal
ysis
and
des
ign
avai
labl
e??
Are
test
ing
tool
s av
aila
ble
and
appr
opria
te f
or
Are
test
ing
tool
s av
aila
ble
and
appr
opria
te f
or
the
prod
uct?
the
prod
uct?
Are
all
SW t
ools
inte
grat
ed w
ith o
ne a
noth
er?
Are
all
SW t
ools
inte
grat
ed w
ith o
ne a
noth
er?
Hav
e m
embe
rs o
f th
e pr
ojec
t te
am r
ecei
ved
Hav
e m
embe
rs o
f th
e pr
ojec
t te
am r
ecei
ved
trai
ning
in e
ach
of t
he t
ools
?tr
aini
ng in
eac
h of
the
too
ls?
80
Ris
k A
ssoc
iate
d w
ith
Staf
f Siz
e an
d E
xper
ienc
e:R
isk
Ass
ocia
ted
wit
h St
aff S
ize
and
Exp
erie
nce:
Are
the
best
peo
ple
avai
labl
e?Ar
e th
e be
st p
eopl
e av
aila
ble?
Do
the
peop
le h
ave
the
right
com
bina
tion
of
Do
the
peop
le h
ave
the
right
com
bina
tion
of
skill
s?sk
ills?
Are
staf
f co
mm
itted
for
ent
ire d
urat
ion
of t
he
Are
staf
f co
mm
itted
for
ent
ire d
urat
ion
of t
he
proj
ect?
proj
ect?
Do
staf
f ha
ve t
he r
ight
exp
ecta
tions
abo
ut t
he
Do
staf
f ha
ve t
he r
ight
exp
ecta
tions
abo
ut t
he
job
at h
and?
job
at h
and?
Will
tur
nove
r am
ong
staf
f be
low
eno
ugh
to
Will
tur
nove
r am
ong
staf
f be
low
eno
ugh
to
allo
w c
ontin
uity
?al
low
con
tinui
ty?
81
Ris
k C
ompo
nent
s an
d D
rive
rs
(U.S
. Air
For
ce g
uide
lines
)R
isk
Com
pone
nts
and
Dri
vers
(U
.S. A
ir F
orce
gui
delin
es)
Perf
orm
ance
ris
kPe
rfor
man
ce r
isk ::
the
degr
ee o
f un
cert
aint
y th
at
the
degr
ee o
f un
cert
aint
y th
at
the
prod
uct
will
mee
t its
req
uire
men
ts a
nd b
e fit
th
e pr
oduc
t w
ill m
eet
its r
equi
rem
ents
and
be
fit
for
its in
tend
ed u
sefo
r its
inte
nded
use
Cost
ris
kCo
st r
isk :
: th
e de
gree
of
unce
rtai
nty
that
the
th
e de
gree
of
unce
rtai
nty
that
the
pr
ojec
t bu
dget
will
be
mai
ntai
ned
proj
ect
budg
et w
ill b
e m
aint
aine
dSu
ppor
t ris
kSu
ppor
t ris
k ::th
e de
gree
of
unce
rtai
nty
that
the
th
e de
gree
of
unce
rtai
nty
that
the
so
ftw
are
will
be
easy
to
corr
ect,
ada
pt, a
nd
soft
war
e w
ill b
e ea
sy t
o co
rrec
t, a
dapt
, and
en
hanc
een
hanc
eSc
hedu
le r
isk
Sche
dule
ris
k : : th
e de
gree
of
unce
rtai
nty
that
the
th
e de
gree
of
unce
rtai
nty
that
the
pr
ojec
t sc
hedu
le w
ill b
e m
aint
aine
dpr
ojec
t sc
hedu
le w
ill b
e m
aint
aine
d
82
Ris
k Id
enti
fica
tion
Tab
leR
isk
Iden
tifi
cati
on T
able
1 2
Sig
nific
ant
degra
dation t
o
nonachie
vem
ent
of
technic
al perform
ance
Nonre
sponsiv
e o
r
unsupport
able
softw
are
Sig
nific
ant
financia
l
short
ages,
budget
ove
rrun lik
ely
Unachie
vable
delive
ry d
ate
1 2
Som
e r
eduction in
technic
al perform
ance
Min
or
dela
ys in
softw
are
modific
ations
Som
e s
hort
age o
f
financia
l re
sourc
es,
possib
le o
verr
uns
Possib
le s
lippage in
delive
ry d
ate
1 2M
inim
al to
sm
all
reduction in t
echnic
al
perform
ance
Responsiv
e
softw
are
support
Suffic
ient
financia
l
resourc
es
Realistic,
achie
vable
schedule
1 2N
o r
eduction in
technic
al perform
ance
Easily s
upport
able
softw
are
Possib
le b
udget
underr
un
Early a
chie
vable
delive
ry d
ate
NE
GL
IGIB
LE
MA
RG
INA
L
CR
ITIC
AL
CA
TA
ST
RO
PH
IC
Failure
to m
eet
the r
equirem
ents
would
degra
de s
yste
m p
erform
ance t
o a
poin
t
where
mis
ssio
n s
uccess is q
uestionable
Failure
to m
eet
the r
equirem
ents
would
result in d
egra
dation o
f secondary
mis
ssio
n
Failure
results in o
pera
tional dela
ys
and/o
r in
cre
ased c
osts
with e
xpecte
d
valu
es o
f $100k t
o $
500k
Cost,
im
pacts
, and/o
r re
cove
rable
schedule
slips w
ith e
xpecte
d v
alu
e o
f $1
to $
100K
CO
MP
ON
EN
TS
CA
TE
GO
RY
Failure
to m
eet
the r
equirem
ents
would
cre
ate
inconve
nie
nce o
r nonopera
tional
impact
Err
or
in m
inor
cost
and/o
r schedule
impact
with e
xpecte
d v
alu
e o
f le
ss t
han
$1k
PE
RF
OR
MA
NC
ES
UP
PO
RT
CO
ST
SC
HE
DU
LE
Failure
to m
eet
the r
equirem
ents
would
result in m
issio
n failure
Failure
results in incre
ased c
osts
and
schedule
dela
ys w
ith e
xpecte
d v
alu
es in
excesss o
f $500k
83
Ris
k P
roje
ctio
nR
isk
Pro
ject
ion
Also
cal
led
risk
estim
atio
n, a
ttem
pts
to r
ate
each
ris
k in
Al
so c
alle
d ris
k es
timat
ion,
att
empt
s to
rat
e ea
ch r
isk
in
two
way
s:tw
o w
ays:
Like
lihoo
d (p
roba
bilit
y)
Like
lihoo
d (p
roba
bilit
y)
Cons
eque
nces
Cons
eque
nces
Dev
elop
a r
isk
tabl
eD
evel
op a
ris
k ta
ble
A ris
k ta
ble
prov
ides
a p
roje
ct m
anag
er w
ith a
sim
ple
tech
niqu
e A
risk
tabl
e pr
ovid
es a
pro
ject
man
ager
with
a s
impl
e te
chni
que
for
risk
proj
ectio
nfo
r ris
k pr
ojec
tion
For
each
iden
tifie
d ris
k, li
st li
kelih
ood,
con
sequ
ence
and
impa
cFo
r ea
ch id
entif
ied
risk,
list
like
lihoo
d, c
onse
quen
ce a
nd im
pac tt
Risk
Ass
essm
ent:
Exa
min
e th
e ac
cura
cy o
f th
e es
timat
es
Risk
Ass
essm
ent:
Exa
min
e th
e ac
cura
cy o
f th
e es
timat
es
that
wer
e m
ade
durin
g ris
k pr
ojec
tion.
A r
isk
refe
rent
th
at w
ere
mad
e du
ring
risk
proj
ectio
n. A
ris
k re
fere
nt
leve
l mus
t be
def
ined
and
the
ref
eren
t po
int
or b
reak
le
vel m
ust
be d
efin
ed a
nd t
he r
efer
ent
poin
t or
bre
ak
poin
t sh
ould
be
esta
blis
hed
poin
t sh
ould
be
esta
blis
hed
84
Ris
k P
roje
ctio
nR
isk
Pro
ject
ion
Ris
ks
Cat
egor
yPr
obab
ility
Impa
ctR
MM
MSi
ze e
stim
ate
may
be
sign
ifica
ntly
low
PS60
%2
Larg
er n
umbe
r of u
sers
than
pla
nned
PS30
%3
Less
reus
e th
an p
lann
edPS
70%
2En
d us
ers
resi
st s
yste
mBU
40%
3D
elive
ry d
eadl
ine
will
be ti
ghte
ned
BU50
%2
Fund
ing
will
be lo
stC
U40
%1
Cus
tom
er w
ill ch
ange
requ
irem
ents
PS80
%2
Tech
nolo
gy w
ill no
t mee
t exp
ecta
tions
TE30
%1
Lack
of t
rain
ing
on to
ols
DE
80%
2St
aff i
nexp
erie
nced
ST30
%2
Staf
f tur
nove
r will
be h
igh
ST60
%2
. . .
85
Ris
k M
atri
xR
isk
Mat
rix
Con
sequ
ence
s1
23
45
L I k e l I h o o d
5 4 3 2 1
86
Ris
k M
itig
atio
n, M
onit
orin
g, a
nd
Man
agem
ent
Ris
k M
itig
atio
n, M
onit
orin
g, a
nd
Man
agem
ent
An e
ffec
tive
stra
tegy
mus
t co
nsid
er t
hree
issu
es:
An e
ffec
tive
stra
tegy
mus
t co
nsid
er t
hree
issu
es:
risk
avoi
danc
e,ris
k av
oida
nce,
risk
mon
itorin
g, a
ndris
k m
onito
ring,
and
risk
man
agem
ent
and
cont
inge
ncy
plan
ning
. A p
roac
tive
appr
oach
ris
k m
anag
emen
t an
d co
ntin
genc
y pl
anni
ng. A
pro
activ
e ap
proa
ch
to r
isk
avoi
danc
e is
the
bes
t st
rate
gy.
to r
isk
avoi
danc
e is
the
bes
t st
rate
gy.
Dev
elop
a p
lan
for
risk
miti
gatio
n. F
or e
xam
ple:
ass
ume
Dev
elop
a p
lan
for
risk
miti
gatio
n. F
or e
xam
ple:
ass
ume
that
hig
h st
aff
turn
over
is n
oted
as
a pr
ojec
t ris
k r
that
hig
h st
aff
turn
over
is n
oted
as
a pr
ojec
t ris
k r 11
, som
e , s
ome
of t
he p
ossi
ble
step
s to
be
take
n ar
e th
ese:
of t
he p
ossi
ble
step
s to
be
take
n ar
e th
ese:
mee
t w
ith c
urre
nt s
taff
to
dete
rmin
e ca
uses
for
tur
nove
rm
eet
with
cur
rent
sta
ff t
o de
term
ine
caus
es f
or t
urno
ver
assu
me
turn
over
will
occ
ur a
nd d
evel
op t
echn
ique
s to
ens
ure
assu
me
turn
over
will
occ
ur a
nd d
evel
op t
echn
ique
s to
ens
ure
cont
inui
ty w
hen
peop
le le
ave.
cont
inui
ty w
hen
peop
le le
ave.
defin
e a
back
up s
taff
mem
ber
for
ever
y cr
itica
l tec
hnol
ogie
s.de
fine
a ba
ckup
sta
ff m
embe
r fo
r ev
ery
criti
cal t
echn
olog
ies.
87
Ris
k M
itig
atio
n, M
onit
orin
g, a
nd
Man
agem
ent
Ris
k M
itig
atio
n, M
onit
orin
g, a
nd
Man
agem
ent
As t
he p
roje
ct p
roce
eds,
the
fol
low
ing
fact
ors
can
be
As t
he p
roje
ct p
roce
eds,
the
fol
low
ing
fact
ors
can
be
mon
itore
d:m
onito
red:
gene
ral a
ttitu
de o
f te
am m
embe
rs b
ased
on
proj
ect
pres
sure
s,ge
nera
l att
itude
of
team
mem
bers
bas
ed o
n pr
ojec
t pr
essu
res,
the
degr
ee t
o w
hich
the
tea
m h
as je
lled,
the
degr
ee t
o w
hich
the
tea
m h
as je
lled,
inte
rper
sona
l rel
atio
nshi
p am
ong
team
mem
bers
,in
terp
erso
nal r
elat
ions
hip
amon
g te
am m
embe
rs,
avai
labi
lity
of jo
bs w
ithin
the
com
pany
and
out
side
itav
aila
bilit
y of
jobs
with
in t
he c
ompa
ny a
nd o
utsi
de it
In a
dditi
on o
f th
ese
fact
ors,
the
pro
ject
man
ager
sho
uld
mon
itor
In a
dditi
on o
f th
ese
fact
ors,
the
pro
ject
man
ager
sho
uld
mon
itor
the
effe
ctiv
enes
s of
ris
k m
itiga
tion
step
s. R
isk
man
agem
ent
and
the
effe
ctiv
enes
s of
ris
k m
itiga
tion
step
s. R
isk
man
agem
ent
and
cont
inge
ncy
plan
ning
ass
umes
tha
t m
itiga
tion
effo
rts
have
fai
led
cont
inge
ncy
plan
ning
ass
umes
tha
t m
itiga
tion
effo
rts
have
fai
led
and
that
the
ris
k ha
s be
com
e re
ality
. an
d th
at t
he r
isk
has
beco
me
real
ity.
88
Safe
ty R
isks
and
Haz
ards
Safe
ty R
isks
and
Haz
ards
Soft
war
e sa
fety
and
haz
ard
anal
ysis
are
So
ftw
are
safe
ty a
nd h
azar
d an
alys
is a
re
soft
war
e qu
ality
ass
uran
ce a
ctiv
ities
tha
t fo
cus
soft
war
e qu
ality
ass
uran
ce a
ctiv
ities
tha
t fo
cus
on t
he id
entif
icat
ion
and
asse
ssm
ent
of p
oten
tial
on t
he id
entif
icat
ion
and
asse
ssm
ent
of p
oten
tial
haza
rd t
hat
may
impa
ct s
oftw
are
nega
tivel
y an
d ha
zard
tha
t m
ay im
pact
sof
twar
e ne
gativ
ely
and
caus
e an
ent
ire s
yste
m t
o fa
il.ca
use
an e
ntire
sys
tem
to
fail.
If h
azar
ds c
an b
e id
entif
ied
early
in t
he s
oftw
are
If h
azar
ds c
an b
e id
entif
ied
early
in t
he s
oftw
are
engi
neer
ing
proc
ess,
sof
twar
e de
sign
fea
ture
s en
gine
erin
g pr
oces
s, s
oftw
are
desi
gn f
eatu
res
can
be s
peci
fied
that
will
eith
er e
limin
ate
or
can
be s
peci
fied
that
will
eith
er e
limin
ate
or
cont
rol p
oten
tial h
azar
ds.
cont
rol p
oten
tial h
azar
ds.
89
SEI
Ris
k M
anag
emen
t Par
adig
mSE
I R
isk
Man
agem
ent P
arad
igm
a) Id
entif
yb)
Ana
lyze
c) P
lan
d) T
rack
e) C
ontro
lf)
Com
mun
icat
e
90
Sum
mar
y
Ris
k an
alys
is is
an
impo
rtant
par
t of m
ost s
oftw
are
proj
ects
.
Ris
k an
alys
is re
quire
s a si
gnifi
cant
am
ount
of p
roje
ct
plan
ning
eff
ort.
Und
erst
andi
ng ri
sk h
elps
you
kno
w w
here
to c
omm
it yo
ur
reso
urce
s.If
you
don
’t ac
tivel
y at
tack
the
risks
, the
y w
ill a
ctiv
ely
atta
ck y
ou.
Maj
or p
roje
cts s
houl
d al
l hav
e a
risk
man
agem
ent p
lan.
.