Process improvement models and programs offer a roadmap for developing and delivering better software. With the right development models in combination with the right people, your software projects will be more efficient and deliver applications to satisfy your users and customers.

W7	Wednesday, September 29, 2004, 11:30 AM

Experience demonstrates that no matter the end product — financial services, insurance, beer, construction, etc. — the foundation for and focus on implementing process improvement remains consistent. Using models as the basis for improving processes makes success more likely; however, no single model has all the right answers. In this presentation, Barbara Ainsworth provides an overview and comparison of popular software process models: Software Engineering Institute’s Software CMM® and CMMI®; Project Management Institute’s PMI Common Body of Knowledge; and Quality Assurance Institute’s Bodies of Knowledge for Quality Assurance and Testing. See the influence of both the old and new quality masters — Juran, Crosby, Humphrey, and others — and learn from them how to get your process improvement initiative on the right track.

• An overview of popular software process models
• What aspects of the available models are right for you
• Examples of starting and reinvigorating process improvement initiatives

W8	Wednesday, September 29, 2004, 1:45 PM

Whether you are using the Rational Unified Process (RUP), agile methods, spiral development, or a home grown iterative approach, there are some fundamental practices that can make a big difference. Esther Derby looks at ways to manage schedules and resources, keep progress visible, mitigate risk, and dynamically improve estimates throughout the project. After comparing and contrasting popular iterative process models, Esther offers practical, easy to implement practices to enhance your current process. You will take away some process “gems” that she has collected in her consulting practice, including: use of product backlogs for driving ownership and priorities, burn down charts, ROI measures of requirements, and ways to obtain vital feedback at every iteration.

• The advantages and disadvantages of different iterative development models
• A return on investment (ROI) measure for more detailed requirements
• “Burn down” charts to show progress and make decisions

W9	Wednesday, September 29, 2004, 3:00 PM

If your organization aspires to higher maturity, such as CMMI® Level 4 or 5, your Quality Assurances process capability must measure up. As process action team leader, group process assessor, and trainer, Steven Thompson has developed, deployed, and maintained systems for quantitatively managing and continuously improving QA activities in his organization. These systems were formally assessed as satisfying CMMI® Capability Level 5 for the Process and Product Quality Assurance process area, and his organization has been formally assessed at CMM®/CMMI® Level 5 Maturity. Join Steven as he describes his journey growing a QA process capability to Level 5 in a Level 5 company. Learn about their quality management system, encompassing planning and reporting, and find out more about their QA Quantitative Management Model and QA Continuous Improvement Model.

• Mechanisms to quantitatively manage and improve QA
• The scope of a robust quality management system
• Sample quantitative management and continuous process improvement action plans

T9	Thursday, September 30, 2004, 10:15 AM

A large development organization was challenged to decrease production defects by at least 70%. Without extra money or time to install major process changes, what should be done? For a baseline, there was a production defect database that had been running at a steady state for over a year, but no way to size the many different projects and no appetite for either function points or measuring lines of code. In this interesting case study, Betsy Radley reports how they used approximations and sometimes crude assumptions to develop measurements from the defect data. These measurements identified applications that had the fewest product defects. Find out how they used that information to look for processes and tools used in these “good” applications and then applied them to the “bad” applications. That process, along with an open mind and a measured approach to the many “reasons” for defects, had the magical effect they were looking for, all done with very little money and no new resources. Come and see if you can experience the same results in your organization.

• Measures of defects in production systems drive process improvement
• A low-cost approach to significantly reduce production defects
• Raise the quality level of all the project teams with an enterprise approach

T10	Thursday, September 30, 2004, 11:30 AM

In this presentation Terrence Craft, a Certified Six Sigma Black Belt, provides an experience-based look at how to make the capability maturity model (CMM®/CMMI®) work most effectively with Six Sigma. While CMM®/CMMI® give us the ''what'' should be done for software development, Six Sigma gives the tools to answer the ''how.'' The overlap of the two approaches provides an opportunity to leverage the best from each. And, there's a synergistic effect that happens when you apply the benefits of the CMM®/CMMI® models with the tools and techniques from Six Sigma. Whether or not you are using CMM®/CMMI®, find out what the Six Sigma approach is all about and what it can do for your company.

• The Six Sigma DMAIC (Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve, Control) process and how it applies to software development
• An understanding of Six Sigma used with CMM® or CMMI®
• A disciplined approach to objectively collecting and reviewing data, determining priorities, and developing alternatives

T11	Thursday, September 30, 2004, 1:30 PM

Does your team want to take a stab at agile development without making a full commitment? Or, are you a manager who has read or heard about agile development and want to experiment with it before making a large upfront investment? Then, this session is for you. Projects without the authority, time, or inclination to cast aside traditional development processes still can improve code quality, respond to change quickly, and deliver more valuable functionality by adopting one or more agile practices. Learn how to embed agile practices like automated testing, continuous integration, short iterations, and small releases into environments with heavy process, fixed schedules, and traditional waterfall methods. Here is an opportunity to discuss your development problems within the context of the presentation and walk away with valuable agile techniques you can implement one at a time.

• Seven agile practices that can be adopted in non-agile development lifecycles
• Pragmatic implementation tips and tricks specific to each practice
• Where to get more information on each practices

T12	Thursday, September 30, 2004, 3:00 PM

Return on investment (ROI) is a widely used approach for measuring the value of new or improved technology and business processes. Rather than limiting the discussion on ROI calculations to cost cutting measures, the most significant opportunities often come from addressing the overall business objectives. You need to step outside the focus of the IT department and relate improvements to opportunities for increased business revenue and customer value. The resulting impact on revenues makes the ROI argument for process improvement a compelling one. Discover the myths and realties of software process improvement and how to build a business case for improvement initiatives. By aligning business goals with areas of leverage and improvement plans, you will find both business and IT management more receptive to software process improvement programs and initiatives.

• The real ROI from software process improvement
• Prerequisites for using ROI calculations for process improvement
• Examples of ROI from high-impact software process improvement efforts

Software Quality Engineering Home       Conference Home       To Exhibit       Get a Brochure       Register for Better Software Conference & EXPO 2004

feedback  © 2004