Dear friends, I gladly
Marco Lisi's invitation to share here some concepts (with no claim to completeness or order), concerning the Systems Engineering, intended as a comprehensive approach to the management of complex technological projects. Even in anticipation of the announced kick-off meeting where, given the chance, I could hold a small presentation on project lifecycle management tools and integrated supporto.Premetto that a few years ago I got to know the Capability Maturity Model Software Engineering Institute of Massachusetts, and, while not starting a certification path, I decided to follow this methodology, because I think a more practical and simple, or rather progressive, the methodological improvements in the management processes.
For those who were not familiar with the CMMi (although in this context it is perhaps easier to find someone to correct me :-) some inaccuracies, I summarize briefly the fundamentals of the model, which consists of five levels.
or FIRST LEVEL 1 - delsingolo everything is left to the professional designer, there is no established methodology Inaz.
or REPEATABLE LEVEL 2 - direquirements methodologies exist in company management, and / or test engineer, but not integrated nor sonogeneralizzate, are also administered on paper, ocomunque with static tools (word, excel).
3rd level or DEFINED - exists in a company projectlifecycle management methodology, such as ESA ECSS, or ISO12207 (formerly MIL498), or at least a methodology based on the classic model "V", the methodology is based on software tools and relational database, your company is also a system of economic management project (work in progress and monitoring of contract costs), the two systems, PM and PLM, are not integrated.
MANAGED Level 4 or - the PM and PLM systems are integrated, then there is a dashboard that allows you to correlate the overall contract costs, the management of work packages, with the requirements, testing activities, the management of problems , risk management, etc ..., the system allows make accurate and comparative analysis between diversiprogetti, other project teams at different times, etc. ...
level 5 or OPTIMIZED - the methodologies learned at level 4 are consolidated, and the management company has settled the ability of early identification of need for innovation technology and methodology, to make accurate and reliable estimates for future work based on past experience, well cataloged in the database business. The above is, of course, an elaboration of the CMMI model, in terms of software engineers - what are - producer of tools to support the methodologies. In particular, I have permission to link, any more than the text of the CMM itself, the methodology to the tool used, because I am convinced that this is the aspect of the growth in maturity. In fact, the drafters of the CMM are at least the only creators of the standard you are encouraged to openly affirm the importance of having the company of / procedures / software well understood and generalized. By reading any standard, it would seem that it is sufficient to acquire the methods, which are always very complex and heavy, and almost never articulated pathways progressivi.Mi would say that if the engineering have to take care of the quantitative aspects and planning processes, the Most standards are not designed for engineering, because they require an encyclopedic knowledge, to acquire "all or nothing", and then ends with the result that little or nothing / affordable / for those who need to balance quality with budget and scheduling of progetto.Chiuderò this short introductory note (hoping the speech can continue) with some practical considerations, useful perl'ingegneria project, in fact. Meanwhile, sad to say that our country is lagging behind with regard to the CMMi: there are only two companies certified at Level 3, and none at level 4 and 5. From the data in my possession (but may not-date), at level 5 certified companies in the world are about seventy, of which 50 in India! Play of course, we also lack knowledge of this method, and certainly there are companies which, if endorsed an audit, would be at least 2 alivello, but there is certainly no honor. Level 2 is, in fact - I say - where you bring the quality on my shoulders. In all my experience (working for 37 years now in the world of automation dell'informaticae!) I always have found that no one (repeat no one, even if it has an enviable budget and structure) fails to properly apply a template to a V average complex project. In fact, the documentation quickly becomes too heavy to follow the project at the necessary speed, and then from the model V inevitably falls back on a patched waterfall, memory-based designers and project managers. After the documentation, but cost much (because it developed according to standards), has not been regularly updated with the change which took part in the project, so it is useless. Latracciabilità is not reliable, then more money thrown away. At level 3 you start to think, because we have a system fully integrated project lifecycle management, which allows us to manage change quickly and efficiently, and to have an online tracking to date and therefore reliably. I find this aspect there is little clarity is now quite generally accepted the concept of requirements management, while my experience is that I still see quite misunderstood the importance of an engineering test properly documented and tracked (according to the dictates of the standard ESA and MIL). You must have a fully integrated system that manages requirements, tests, problems, risks, signs of i / o, and all objects in the methodology, it is worth drawing (there is only PTESY at the time, that I know, if I can spot the small pubbicitario). At this level we begin to put the quality to work for us instead of working us for quality. And here I stop, because at the moment, I have no experience of level 4 (or in my company or in others). With the products of my company, in fact, coming to serve the needs of level 3, as regards the project lifecycle management, fully integrated. I would be happy to have the opportunity to begin to integrate with our PLM tool of economic control contract, which, however, also know how to do, already oriented to the management of work packages, ESA / MIL style. I wonder if the idea of \u200b\u200bcreating a small consortium of three or four users, such as Andromeda and the supplier, which could eventually join some other supplier synergistic tool manufacturer, could have groped the climbing legs to level 4? An Italian product would certainly characteristics of simplicity and practicality to affect emerging markets, which as shown by India, forging ahead much faster than the post-industrial world!
Happy Birthday to a Great 2009! What is the Year of System Engineering in Italy! Adriano
Autino
Autino
