工程系统:同类最佳/同类最差

Donald M. Beckett
{"title":"工程系统:同类最佳/同类最差","authors":"Donald M. Beckett","doi":"10.1080/1941658X.2014.922905","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Measurement’s goal is to help assess performance—to determine which methods are productive or counterproductive. Metrics are tools used to identify and implement practices that lower costs, reduce time to market, and improve product quality. But process improvement is not accomplished through measurement or metrics alone. Rather, one must use the data to make conscious decisions that change the way business is done. In fact, one of best ways to make those decisions is by studying the characteristics of best- and worst-in-class software projects. Referencing Quantitative Software Management’s database of 10,000+ completed software projects, this article evaluates the common factors that define the most and least successful engineering projects—drawn from the database’s System Software, Scientific, Telecom, and Command and Control application domains. Presenting a thorough analysis of project staffing, effort, duration, cost, and quality data, this article gives project managers a solid, scientific framework for evaluating potential projects and identifying winning strategies.","PeriodicalId":390877,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cost Analysis and Parametrics","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Engineering Systems: Best-in-Class/Worst-in-Class\",\"authors\":\"Donald M. Beckett\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/1941658X.2014.922905\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Measurement’s goal is to help assess performance—to determine which methods are productive or counterproductive. Metrics are tools used to identify and implement practices that lower costs, reduce time to market, and improve product quality. But process improvement is not accomplished through measurement or metrics alone. Rather, one must use the data to make conscious decisions that change the way business is done. In fact, one of best ways to make those decisions is by studying the characteristics of best- and worst-in-class software projects. Referencing Quantitative Software Management’s database of 10,000+ completed software projects, this article evaluates the common factors that define the most and least successful engineering projects—drawn from the database’s System Software, Scientific, Telecom, and Command and Control application domains. Presenting a thorough analysis of project staffing, effort, duration, cost, and quality data, this article gives project managers a solid, scientific framework for evaluating potential projects and identifying winning strategies.\",\"PeriodicalId\":390877,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Cost Analysis and Parametrics\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2014-05-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Cost Analysis and Parametrics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/1941658X.2014.922905\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cost Analysis and Parametrics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1941658X.2014.922905","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

度量的目标是帮助评估性能——确定哪些方法是有效的或适得其反的。量度是用来识别和实现降低成本、缩短上市时间和提高产品质量的实践的工具。但是过程改进不能仅仅通过度量或度量来完成。相反,人们必须利用这些数据做出有意识的决定,从而改变商业运作的方式。事实上,做出这些决定的最好方法之一就是研究同类中最好和最差的软件项目的特征。参考定量软件管理的10000多个已完成的软件项目的数据库,本文评估了定义最成功和最不成功的工程项目的共同因素,这些因素来自数据库的系统软件、科学、电信和命令与控制应用领域。通过对项目人员配置、工作量、持续时间、成本和质量数据的全面分析,本文为项目经理提供了一个可靠、科学的框架,用于评估潜在项目和确定制胜策略。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Engineering Systems: Best-in-Class/Worst-in-Class
Measurement’s goal is to help assess performance—to determine which methods are productive or counterproductive. Metrics are tools used to identify and implement practices that lower costs, reduce time to market, and improve product quality. But process improvement is not accomplished through measurement or metrics alone. Rather, one must use the data to make conscious decisions that change the way business is done. In fact, one of best ways to make those decisions is by studying the characteristics of best- and worst-in-class software projects. Referencing Quantitative Software Management’s database of 10,000+ completed software projects, this article evaluates the common factors that define the most and least successful engineering projects—drawn from the database’s System Software, Scientific, Telecom, and Command and Control application domains. Presenting a thorough analysis of project staffing, effort, duration, cost, and quality data, this article gives project managers a solid, scientific framework for evaluating potential projects and identifying winning strategies.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Editorial Board EOV Multiproduct Cost-Volume-Profit Model: A Resource Reallocation Approach for Decision Making Dynamics of New Building Construction Costs: Implications for Forecasting Escalation Allowances Balancing Expert Opinion and Historical Data: The Case of Baseball Umpires Using Robust Statistical Methodology to Evaluate the Cost Performance of Project Delivery Systems: A Case Study of Horizontal Construction
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1