HeaderSIS.jpg

Difference between revisions of "IS480 Team wiki: 2012T2 box.us Final"

From IS480
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 275: Line 275:
  
 
==== User Acceptance Test ====
 
==== User Acceptance Test ====
 +
We conducted our User Acceptance Test on <b>05/04/2013</b> at the Empact office. A final verification was made concerning all the issues and defects that were being raised during the UAT. on the following week at the <b>12/04/2013</b>.<br/>
 +
 +
<b>Managing Defects</b>
 
[[Image:Boxus_UAT_Defect_Lifecycle.png | 400px]]
 
[[Image:Boxus_UAT_Defect_Lifecycle.png | 400px]]
 
*Note: BA refers to the facilitators in the UAT test
 
*Note: BA refers to the facilitators in the UAT test
 
+
* All defects are highlighted onto a separate issue list.
We conducted our User Acceptance Test on <b>05/04/2013</b> at the Empact office. A final verification was made concerning all the issues and defects that were being raised during the UAT. on the following week at the <b>12/04/2013</b>.
+
* The list is collated and sent to Empact to prioritise based on issues.
 +
* Bugs are fixed immediately
  
 
=== User Testing 2 ===
 
=== User Testing 2 ===

Revision as of 08:29, 21 April 2013

degree=90
HOME   PROJECT OVERVIEW     PROJECT MANAGEMENT   DOCUMENTATION  
         


What Is This Project About?

TopPartForWiki.png

Check out our 1 min ++ video pitch to find out what this project is about at Youtube

Final Presentation Slides: coming soon

Deployed Site: Empact ACT

Demonstration Site: Empact ACT(Staging)

Initial Proposal: Proposal



Project Highlights:

Managing the Great Amount of Issues being Highlighted during Deployment

  • Ranked the Issues based on their Priority
    • Low Priority: Minor UI suggestions and issues
    • Medium Priority: UI suggestions that changes the understanding of the system
    • High Priority: Usability Catastrophe or Software Bugs
  • Discussed with client what were the focuses

Volunteers did not find language in the system friendly

  • Re-worded the language to make it more volunteer friendly, together with the client
  • Re-worked the design of the dashboard and menu bar
    • Adjusting language to make it more suitable for volunteers
    • Added a background
  • Changes were only limited to volunteer view as Empact preferred the more operational terms

Addition of 2 functionalities

  • 2 functionalities were: Exporting of Task and Volunteer information & Question Notification Turn On/Off Option
  • Exporting of Task and Volunteer Information: Iteration 11
  • Notification Turn On/Off: Iteration 12

Project Challenges:

Gathering Requirements from Empact

  • No defined business processes: New company that did not have a formal set of business process
  • No IT expert: Did not have an IT expert to help them identify the needs in the system

How we Managed

  • Paper prototyping: Initial paper prototyping
  • Showing the developed functionalities at every client meeting
  • Gathering volunteer feedback through User Testings
  • Deployment Testing

Dealing with Changes
The risk of gathering feedback after the system has been developed is running the risk of it being entirely misaligned with Empact's business model. Cost of changing at the later part becomes higher also. However, it was necessary for the team to be able to accommodate to changes to build a system that Empact would really find value in.
How we Managed

  • Decision Factors: Change Management Plan
  • Issue Tracking List helped us to track smaller issues and changes that were raised along the way
  • Prioritizing the Issues raised
  • Discussion based on how much value and how important would it be for Empact


Project Scope:

Boxus FinalsScope.png

Change Change Description
1

Export Task

  • Export Volunteer Information
  • Export Task Information
2

Notification

  • Notification Turn On/Off


Project Schedule (Plan Vs Actual):

Boxus PlanVsActual.png

Project Metrics:

BUG METRICS

Boxus BugMetricsFinals.png

Iteration Bug Score Any Actions Taken
11 31

Increase in Bug Score due to bugs that were recorded from User Testing 2

  • 2 days allocated to fix bugs from User Testing 2
12 16

New features of the system(Statistics, Dashboard and Notifications) were being released

  • Allow Empact to have a full picture of the entire system for testing
  • Resulted in an overall increase in bugs being reported
  • Scheduled additional time during bug fixing to fix up bugs within the system
  • All bugs were fixed by the end of the iteration
13 58

More thorough testing was being performed for the UAT

  • Resulted in an overall increase in bugs being reported
  • Scheduled additional time during bug fixing to fix up bugs within the system
  • All bugs were fixed by the end of the iteration

SCHEDULE METRICS

Boxus Schedulemetricsfinals.png

Handing Over

Deployment Testing

We release 4 versions of the system on the live environment before going entering the User Acceptance Test. Our purpose for deployment testing was to determine what are the issues that would arise from using the application in the actual conditions in varied browsers and system settings. Additionally, we also collected suggestions from the users in order to make further improvements to the application. In deploying the application, we followed the following process:

Boxus Deployment Plan.png

Date Description Features Released

11/03/2013

Release 0.1

  • Task Management
  • User Management
  • Questions
  • Feedback Form
  • Dashboard(NPO)

18/03/2013

Release 0.2

  • Task Management
  • User Management(partial)
  • Questions
  • Dashboard
  • Statistics
  • Improvements from Release 0.1

25/03/2013

Release 0.3

  • Task Management
  • User Management(partial)
  • Questions
  • Notifications
  • Improvements from Release 0.2

04/04/2013

Release 0.4

  • All features released
  • Improvements from Release 0.3

04/04/2013

Release 0.5

  • Final version for Final Verification
  • Improvements from Release 0.4

User Acceptance Test

We conducted our User Acceptance Test on 05/04/2013 at the Empact office. A final verification was made concerning all the issues and defects that were being raised during the UAT. on the following week at the 12/04/2013.

Managing Defects Boxus UAT Defect Lifecycle.png

  • Note: BA refers to the facilitators in the UAT test
  • All defects are highlighted onto a separate issue list.
  • The list is collated and sent to Empact to prioritise based on issues.
  • Bugs are fixed immediately

User Testing 2

Provide more details about the quality of your work. For example, you designed a flexible configurable system using XML.config files, uses Strategy Design Pattern to allow plugging in different strategy, implement a regular expression parser to map a flexible formula editor, etc.

Project Deliverables:

List the artifacts produced for this project. The entire deliverable can be submitted in a separate thumb drive, web repository or place in the IS480 team wiki.

Stage Specification Modules
Project Management Minutes Meeting Minutes
Metrics Bug metrics
Requirements Story cards CRUD Customer, Trend Analytic
Analysis Use case Use Case Diagram
System Sequence Diagram client, server
Business Process Diagram Process Diagrams
Screen Shots CRUD Customer, Trend Analysis
Design ERD Diagrams V1,V2,V3,V4,V5
Class Diagram 1, 2, 3
Testing User Testing 1 Test Plans Test Plans used
User Testing 2 Test Plans Test Plans used
Heuristic Evaluation User Scenarios User Scenarios used
Integration Testings Integration Testings
Handover Manuals User tutorial, Developer manual, Setup manual
Code client server
Deployment Diagram instructions

Not all parts of the deliverables are necessary but the evidence should be convincing of the scope.

Quality:

Explain the quality attributes (non functional) of your project deliverables. Have you designed the architecture, use a design pattern, etc? Does your architecture address scalability, performance, reliability, availability, fault tolerance, usability, etc. Does your design address maintainability, flexibility, configurability, etc. Be brief here but you can link to diagrams or code detail pages. Do not repeat the technical complexity part, link to it if necessary.

Deployment Testing:

Release 0.1
Key Changes


Feedback Collected


Release 0.2
Key Changes


Feedback Collected


Release 0.3
Key Changes


Feedback Collected


Release 0.4
Key Changes


Feedback Collected


Release 0.5
Key Changes


Feedback Collected


Testing:

User Testing Integration Testing Deployment Testing
Objective: To collect feedback concerning usability of our application Objective: To test the quality of our application Objective: To collect feedback when application is being used in live environments
When: When: When:
How: How: How:
Findings: Findings: Findings:

Compile common lessons and reflection for the team and for each team member. Be brief.

Team Reflection:

  • Managing client expectations
  • Learning to collaborate more effectively in a team
  • Leveraging one another's strength and weaknesses
  • Being a good team player within the team
  • Learning to have fun as a team!
  • Our IS modules have helped to prepare us for the demands of an IT project

Individual Reflection:

Kevin
As I review through my initial learning outcomes that I set out to learn, I felt that I have managed to meet these outcomes in the following way:

  • Motivating IT Project teams: Bringing together people from different walks of life together to work on an IT project has sharpened my skills in handling with people and being more cognisant of people management issues and how to deal with group cultures and team norms
  • Evaluating IT project ideas: FYP has taught me how to be aware of what are the current issues facing IT projects. It has taught me how to evaluate these and adopt a T-model by being able to think about what are the broad issues that are going to affect IT decisions and what are the deep issues that are specific to the issue being raised.
  • Time Management Skills: FYP has taught me to be aware of the time that I spend managing the team, managing my own workload within the team and juggling my workload with my other modules that I was taking in school.
  • Client Negotiation skills: I was able to apply the negotiation skills that I learnt from a module to achieve integrative outcomes for the client and the team, and what are the tactics that are readily available to deal with such situations.
  • Applied Project Management Skills: The FYP experience has been an extension of what I have learnt in Software Engineering and I was able to refine my skills in scope management, schedule management and further extend the practicality of metrics being used within a project.

Sometimes, the client writes a report to feedback on the system; this sponsor report can be included or linked from here.