IS480 Team wiki: 2015T2 REALIS Project Management - Metrics
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Overall Schedule Metrics Score = Actual Days / Planned Days
Bugs Index Per Iterations
Bugs Score
Overall Bug Score = 1 x Number of Low Impact Bugs + 5 x Number of High Impact Bugs + 10 x Number of Critical Impact Bugs
HOME | PROJECT OVERVIEW | PROJECT MANAGEMENT | DOCUMENTATION | THE TEAM |
MINUTES | METRICS | PROJECT SCOPE |
---|
Schedule Metrics
SM Score | Status | Action Plan |
---|---|---|
SM <= 0.50 | Significantly ahead of time | Reschedule |
0.50 < SM <= 0.80 | Moderately ahead of time | Start with next task. Excess time left to be used as buffer for the next iteration(s)/functionalities. |
0.80 < SM <= 1.10 | On track | Continue as planned |
1.10 < SM <= 1.30 | Slightly behind time | Use buffer time |
1.30 < SM <= 1.60 | Moderately behind time | Reschedule & reallocate task if necessary |
1.60 < SM | Significantly behind time | Work overtime or shelf/drop certain functions |
Schedule Lists
Overall | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Iterations | Planned | Actual | Days Changed | Remarks |
1 | 6 Oct 2014 – 15 Nov 2014 | 6 Oct 2014 – 31 Nov 2014 | +15 |
Review on feedback from acceptance. |
2 | 16 Nov 2014 – 31 Dec 2014 | 1 Dec 2014 – 31 Dec 2014 | -15 |
Research on new technologies. |
3 | 1 Jan 2015 – 21 Jan 2015 | 1 Jan 2015 – 31 Jan 2015 | +7 |
Increased scope in data visualization. Developed more charts than required for clients to choose from. |
4 | 22 Jan 2015 – 11 Feb 2015 | 1 Feb 2015 – 21 Feb 2015 | - |
On schedule |
5 | 12 Feb 2015 – 25 Feb 2015 | 22 Feb 2015 – 3 Mar 2015 | -8 |
Changed to preparation for and review after mid-term presentation. |
6 | 26 Feb 2015 – 11 Mar 2015 | 4 Mar 2015 – 21 Mar 2015 | +8 |
Required more time to develop Accessibility Module due to complexity in the algorithm used. |
7 | 12 Mar 2015 – 25 Mar 2015 | 22 Mar 2015 – 11 Apr 2015 | +7 |
Additional module (Project Comparison) requested by client. |
8 | 26 Mar 2015 – 8 Apr 2015 | 12 Apr 2015 – 22 Apr 2015 | - |
On schedule. |
9 | 9 Mar 2015 – 22 Apr 2015 | - | - |
Iteration removed. |
Bug Metrics
Severity | Action |
---|---|
Low Impact (1 point) |
|
High Impact (5 points) |
|
Critical Impact (10 points) |
|
Overall Bug Score | Action |
---|---|
Points < 20 |
|
Points >= 20 |
|
Risk Assessment
Impact / Probability | Low | Medium | High |
---|---|---|---|
Low | C | C | B |
Medium | C | B | A |
High | B | A | A |
Risk Level | Description |
---|---|
A | Strict adherence to mitigation plan is required. This should be constantly noted by the project manager and be reviewed during weekly meetings. |
B | Team's attention is required and be noted by the team in case it happens. |
C | To be observed by the team but no action is required as of yet. |
Risk Lists
Risk | Probability | Impact | Result | Mitigation |
---|---|---|---|---|
Unsuccessful deployment of application in URA. | High | High | A | Do early deployment in URA 3 weeks prior to product delivery. |
Underestimate the complexity of functions suggested by sponsors. | High | High | A | When developing functions: 1. Evaluate importance |
Processing massive data may lead to slow response time of the application. | High | High | A |
|
Bugs found in charting library. | High | High | A | Look for alternative charting libraries. |
Unsure how coordinated linked view works. | High | High | A | Work with alternative, use onclick to filter data for individual module. |
Using new technologies such as PostGIS database, D3 charts and leaflet can be challenging. | Moderate | Moderate | B | Do research on the various APIs for each technology before proceeding with coding tasks. |
Ensuring that all data can be filtered dynamically less than 1 second. | Moderate | Low | C | Look for an alternative way or change chart type to display data within the shortest time possible. |
Client is not used to the new idea of data visualization as they are used to using check-boxes and excel sheets. | Moderate | Low | C | Arrange more frequent meetings with them and allow them to have more time to explore the application. |