Solving the size estimation problem in ERP project context: the eepc- COSMIC approach Francisco Martín Téllez Master Thesis Presentation March 20 th, 2009 University of Twente, Faculty of EEMCS Information Systems Department Supervisors: Dr. Maya Daneva Dr. Nelly Condori-Fernandez 1 / 60
Contents 1. Introduction 2. Problem statement 2.1 Observations from state-of-the art research and practice 2.2 Observations regarding the possible existing solutions 3. Research method 4. The solution approach 4.1 Design Choices 4.2 Proof on concept 5. Empirical study 5.1 Model Adoption Method 5.2 The perception evaluation study 6. Conclusions 7. Future work 2 / 60
1. Introduction Motivation Master Thesis Framework - Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) - Software Engineering (Measurement Phase) - Requirement Engineering for ERP Objectives of the research 3 / 60
Introduction Motivation To reduce the gap of Quantifying functional size in ERP projects Stages in the cycle-of life 4 / 60
Introduction Motivation To reduce the gap of Quantifying functional size in ERP projects No good methods Stages in the cycle-of lyfe Gap in the sizing stage 5 / 60
1. Introduction - Master Thesis Framework Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) Definition Enterprise-wide information system designed to coordinate all the resources, information, and activities needed to complete business processes. ERP overview - Manufacturing - Supply Chain Management - Financials - Human Resources - Customer Relationship Management 6 / 60
1. Introduction - Master Thesis Framework ERP features - Database centralized Systems - Breaking the traditional barriers of communication in I. Systems - Cross-organizational context - Integration with suppliers, customers and partners 7 / 60
1. Introduction - Master Thesis Framework ERP Increasing Top IT spending priorities for 2008 8 / 60
1. Introduction - Master Thesis Framework Measurement in Software Engineering Definition Software Engineering (SE) is the application of a systematic, disciplined, quantifiable approach to the development, operation and maintenance of software Why is necessary the SE 9 / 60
1. Introduction - Master Thesis Framework Measurement in Software Engineering Software Metrics i. Single Size Measure i. Size-related metrics. ii. Function-related metrics. ii. Multidimensional-size i. Metric for ERP solutions. Functional Size Measurement Methods (FSMM) - COSMIC (International Standard ISO/IEC 19761) - IFPUG-FPA, standardized in 2003 (ISO/IEC 20926:2003) - FISMA (ISO/IEC 29881:2008) - MK II FPA (the ISO/IEC 20968:2002) - NESMA (ISO/IEC 24570) - PSU (Project size units, newly technique, no standard) 10 / 60
1. Introduction - Master Thesis Framework Requirements Engineering for ERP The requirement process in ERPs The estimation phase in ERPs 11 / 60
1. Introduction - Master Thesis Framework Requirements Engineering for ERP The Business Blueprint - In ERP, 1 Business Proccess 1 Functional Requirement - Business Proccess are represented by EPC diagrams Views in the Business Blueprint - The Organization View: who does what? - The Function View: what happens? - The Data View: what is needed? - The Iteration model: how the company interacts? - The Control View: central view EPC 12 / 60
1. Introduction - Master Thesis Framework Requirements Engineering for ERP The Business Blueprint - The control View Event-driven proccess chain (EPC) Example of EPC Processing an order EPC notation 13 / 60
1. Introduction Objectives of the research Central research question Which requirements-based way can the size of ERP projects be estimated at the very early ERP implementation stage? Goals 1) To understand the differences between ERP projects and tailored-project. 2) To know the current practice of how the ERP projects are sized. 3) To understand why is so difficult to apply measurement size models to ERP projects and why they typically lack credibility in this context. 4) To adapt an existing sizing technique to the ERP context from the requirements stage. 5) To demonstrate by using experts the perception of use and possible adoption of the proposal as a future method. 14 / 60
2. Problem statement Current practice 2.1. Observations from state-of-the art research and practice What do ERP companies understand by SIZE? What techniques do the use to measure? Other observations about how is current ERP sizing? 2.2 Observations regarding the possible existing solutions Difficulties sizing ERP? Reasons for why the existing size measurement metrics are not valid for ERP project 15 / 60
2. Problem statement Current practice What do ERP companies understand by SIZE? ERP Companies - From a Multi-site Empirical Study on Cross-organizational ERP Size and Effort Estimation carried out by Maya Daneva (14 members related with the ERP world) Members Size Cost 7 Project Tasks Numbers of hours 5 Number of workers Number of users $ value per user 2 ERP functionality Size is a driver in cost estimation form We consider size as ERP functionality - ERP functionality To use function Point Analyst (FPA) method Problems of defining SIZE as project tasks or number of workers - Estimation cost problems - No credibility - Problems if the requirements change 16 / 60
2. Problem statement Current practice What techniques do the use to measure? ERP Companies Members Effort Estimation Estimation based on 4 Staff-hours per module in the client 2 Size as a driver - FPA method - Skills of specific consultant - Experience implementing the module - (Depends on the own factors of the ERP organizations) We consider an FPA method as the appropriate technique Problems not estimating by FPA method - There is not any consensual method for the organization - Measurer leaving - Non-empirical results and evidences for new projects 17 / 60
2. Problem statement Observations looking solutions Difficulties sizing ERPs Project estimations cannot always be meaningfully understood by stakeholders of the software Lack of consensus on the objectives of the estimates Neither non-historical data nor specific metrics. Where is the counting boundary on cross-organization ERP? The customization options Continue changes 18 / 60
2. Problem statement Observations looking solutions Reasons why the existing size estimation techniques do not work well considering ERPs? Existing size estimation techniques were created for traditional software Relationships between variables do not match the ERP project context Existing metrics are focused only on the functional part of software Difficulty of applying the existing sizing estimation methods in the stage of ERP early requirements The cross-organizational context and the need to address a set of inter-dependent projects 19 / 60
3. The research method Literature survey Proof-of-Concept Perception-based evaluation 20 / 60
3. The research method Goal 4 (proposal) Literature survey 120 sources (academic, research, companies, international groups, public institutions) Goal 1 (bakground) Goal 2 (problems-looking for solutions) Goal 3 (problems-current) Goal 4 (solution-proposal) Proof-ofconcept Perceptionbased evaluation Goal 5 (empirical study) 21 / 60
4. The solution approach 4.1. Design Choices Finding the solution Why COSMIC? Why EPC? Other proposals using COSMIC The eepc-cosmic approach 4.2.Proof on concept Applying the proposal on previously published model 22 / 60
4. The solution approach Design choices Finding the solution Own conclusions about the size estimation problem in ERP 23 / 60
4. The solution approach Design choices Finding the solution Main conclusion Toward a final solution 1 st step toward a solution to solve the ERP project cost estimations problem Counting the SIZE (ERP functionality) from the functional requirements document applying a FSM method or a Multidimensional metric. 2 nd step Size Counting fromthe first SIZE stage (ERP functionality) from the functional requirements document applying a FSM method. Early functional requirements 3 rd step Counting the SIZE Only(ERP deliverables functionality) from the functional requirements document applying a the COSMIC method. Requirements documents (ERP functionality) Final solution Counting the SIZE (ERP functionality) FSMM or Multidimensional from the set of all Business metric Process diagram of an ERP (EPC-Methodology) applying the COSMIC method. 24 / 60
4. The solution approach Design choices Finding the solution Toward a final solution 1 st step toward a solution to solve the ERP project cost estimations problem Counting the SIZE (ERP functionality) from the functional requirements document applying a FSM method or a Multidimensional metric. 2 nd step Counting the SIZE (ERP functionality) from the functional requirements document applying a FSM method. 3 rd step Counting the SIZE (ERP functionality) from the functional requirements document applying a the COSMIC method. Why FSM method? Final solution There Countingare thenot SIZE any (ERP standard functionality) Multidimensional-size from the set of all Business measures Process diagram of an ERP (EPC-Methodology) applying the COSMIC method. Approaches of FSM models to ERP projects have still not been put in a mainstream practice There is not published publicly available of Multidimensional-size measure Simplicity is another quality of the FSM method FSMM can be applied at the early stage of a project because Functional Requirements 25 / 60
4. The solution approach Design choices Finding the solution Why COSMIC? Reasons to refuse the other FSMM PSU FISMA Experimental technical 2 nd step Counting the SIZE (ERP functionality) from the functional requirements document applying a FSM method. MK II New Standard (not information avaliable) Not applicable 3 rd step in the early stage Not fit very suitably for the ERP environment Counting the SIZE (ERP functionality) from the functional requirements document applying a the COSMIC method. IFPUG NESMA Lack of applicability to new software implementations Hard to apply on new forms of FUR documentation Same reasons than IFPUG 26 / 60
4. The solution approach Design choices Finding the solution Why COSMIC? Applicable to many software domains Independent structure of the data model Capability to specify different measurement viewpoints More flexible responding changes and different ways of FUR representation COSMIC allows to size an ERP project in an early stage. Several COSMIC approaches in the literature. 27 / 60
4. The solution approach Design choices Finding the solution Why COSMIC? - Similar proposals 28 / 60
4. The solution approach Design choices Finding the solution Main conclusion Toward a final solution 1 st step toward a solution to solve the ERP project cost estimations problem Counting the SIZE (ERP functionality) from the functional requirements document applying a FSM method or a Multi- dimensional metric. 2 nd step Counting the SIZE (ERP functionality) from the functional requirements document applying a FSM method. 3 rd step Counting the SIZE (ERP functionality) from the functional requirements document applying a the COSMIC method. Final solution Counting the SIZE (ERP functionality) from the set of all Business Process diagram of an ERP (EPC-Methodology) applying the COSMIC method. 29 / 60
4. The solution approach Design choices Finding the solution Why the set of all business diagrams of an ERP (EPC-Methodlogy) as requirement document? The business requirements document captures the functionality One EPC (control view) diagram per functional requirement 30 / 60
4. The solution approach Design choices Finding the solution Solution Requirement Document Functional Size Measurement Method Output 31 / 60
4. The solution approach How it works? eepc-cosmic design of the measurement procedure COSMIC Measurement model Abstract artefact EPC Data Group Data movements Functional process Boundary Layer To obtain functional size 32 / 60
4. The solution approach How it works? eepc-cosmic design of the measurement procedure Principles of the method To define For the purpose of With respect to From the viewpoint of In the context of a measurement procedure measuring the functional size of ERP systems the requirements specification the analyst The Business process diagram (eepc Model) Attribute to be measured Functional size is directly proportional to the number of data movements. COSMIC v3.0 33 / 60
4. The solution approach How it works? eepc-cosmic design of the measurement procedure Measurement process (COSMIC v3.0) 5 Principles 4 Mapping rules 7 Measurement rules 2 Re-duplication rules 4 Measurement counting rules 34 / 60
4. The solution approach How it works? eepc-cosmic design of the measurement procedure Measurement Context Mapping Phase Measurement Phase Identify measurement purpose Identify measurement viewpoint Identify measurement boundary Applying a set of mapping rules software model Identify users MaR 1 MaR 2 Identify software boundary Need sub-unit of measure [YES] MaR 3 Identify functional process MaR 4 Identify data groups [NO] Identify data attributes MeR 1, MeR 2 Identify Entry data movement type MeR 5, MeR 6 Identify Read data movement type MeR 7 Identify Write data movement type Apply aggregation functions Are all functional processes measured? [YES] [NO] Apply measurement function Eliminate duplicated data movements MeR 3, MeR 4 Identify Exit data movement type 35 / 60
4. The solution approach How it works? eepc-cosmic design of the measurement procedure Measurement Context Mapping Phase Measurement Phase Identify measurement purpose Identify measurement viewpoint Applying a set of measurement rules functional size Identify measurement boundary Identify users MaR 1 MaR 2 Need sub-unit of measure Identify software boundary [YES] MaR 3 Identify functional process MaR 4 Identify data groups [NO] Identify data attributes MeR 1, MeR 2 Identify Entry data movement type MeR 5, MeR 6 Identify Read data movement type MeR 7 Identify Write data movement type Apply aggregation functions Are all functional processes measured? [YES] [NO] Apply measurement function Eliminate duplicated data movements MeR 3, MeR 4 MeR 8, MeR 9 MeFR 1, MeFR 4 Identify Exit data movement type 36 / 60
4. The solution approach Proof of concept Applying the eepc-cosmic proposal Mapping Rules Summarized º Number Concept Automatic Rule description MaR-01 Functional a) Each external system Yes User b) Each organization unit The border between the functional users and the rest of the MaR-02 Boundary Yes EPC excepting the process paths. MaR-03 a) Each business process Functional Yes b) Each process path process c) Each sub-business process of a business-scenario MaR-04 Data group Yes Each information object that appears in the data model MeR-01 Entry Yes Input event which does not come from any function MeR-02 Entry Semi Each input event with an information object which has arrived, is reached, etc. MeR-03 Exit Yes For each output event which is not used like input in any function of the rest of the diagram. MeR-04 Exit Semi Each output event that have an information object with a status like: is sent, to be returned, delivered, etc. MeR-05 Read Yes Each data group that is read for by a function. MeR-06 Read Yes Each data group of input events which participate in a precondition. MeR-07 Write Yes Accept each data group that is written for a function. 37 / 60
4. The solution approach Proof of concept Applying the eepc-cosmic proposal Measurement Rules Number Concept Automatic Rule description MeFR-01 - Yes The functional size of a business process represented by an eepc diagram is equal to the sum of all data movements identified. MeFR-02 - Yes The functional size of a base business scenario is equal to the sum of the business process that makes up it. MeFR-03 - Yes The functional size of a main business process extended by another secondary business processes is equal to the sum of the size of these subbusiness processes plus of the size of the main business process. MeFR-04 - Yes The functional size of a software layer is equal to the sum of the functional sizes of all the Business Scenarios. Measurement function MeFR-01 { entry, exit, read write} f ( x) = 1cfsu x P P =, MeFR-02 MeFR-03 MeFR-04 38 / 60
4. The solution approach Proof of concept Applying the eepc-cosmic proposal Example eepc for the example online shop Function 1 2 Information object Boundary 3a 3b 4a 4b 5a 5b 1c 6b Event Functional user 8 9 10 7b 11 39 / 60
4. The solution approach Proof of concept Applying the eepc-cosmic proposal Identifying data groups - Objects that represent the real Information - Represented in the data model Data group E X R W Total Costumer order Payment Stock Article Customer Data Sales Orders Outgoing Goods Invoice Accounts Total 40 / 60
4. The solution approach Proof of concept Applying the eepc-cosmic proposal COUNTING the size Identifying ENTRYs Rule MeF 01 41 / 60
4. The solution approach Proof of concept Applying the eepc-cosmic proposal Updating the table Data group E X R W Total Costumer order 1 Payment 1 Stock Article Customer Data Sales Orders Outgoing Goods Invoice Accounts Total Total size of the Business Process 42 / 60
4. The solution approach Proof of concept Applying the eepc-cosmic proposal Identifying EXITs Rule MeF 03 Rule MeF 04 43 / 60
4. The solution approach Proof of concept Applying the eepc-cosmic proposal Updating the table Data group E X R W Total Costumer order 1 Payment 1 Stock Article Customer Data Sales Orders Invoicing request Delivering request Outgoing Goods 1 Invoice 1 Accounts Total 44 / 60
4. The solution approach Proof of concept Applying the eepc-cosmic proposal Total size of the eepc Data group E X R W Total Costumer order 1 1 Payment 1 1 2 Stock 1 1 1 3 Article 1 1 1 3 Customer Data 1 1 2 Sales Orders 1 1 Outgoing Goods 1 1 2 Invoice 1 1 2 Accounts 1 1 Total 2 2 7 6 17 17 CFP (cosmic function point): 2 ENTRYs, 2 EXITs, 7 READs, 6 WRITEs 45 / 60
4. The solution approach Proof of concept Applying the eepc-cosmic proposal Assuming that we have the following functionality to size Updating the total count Functional process E X R W Total Customer Registration Scenario Business Process 1 Business Process 2 Sub-Business Process 2.A Sub-Business Process 2.B Customer Order Scenario Customer order goods 2 2 7 6 17 Total Total functional size of the ERP 46 / 60
5. Empirical study 5.1.The Model Adoption Method (MAM) 5.2 The perception evaluation study The evaluation process Results 47 / 60
5. Empirical study - The perception evaluation study Model Adoption Method (MAM, Moody 2002) Measurement quality eepc-cosmic size obtained Empirical study reflected much closer Perceptions and intentions Actual size of final software product 48 / 60
5. Empirical study Model Adoption Method Model Adoption Method (MAM, Moody 2002) A widely used theoretical and perception-based model to evaluate and adopt the methods of the Information Technology by a user in base a set of constructs. 49 / 60
5. Empirical study - The perception evaluation study The evaluation process Discusion topic The expert group will check the performance and acceptance of the newly proposed eepc-cosmic according to the principles of COSMIC - ISO/IEC 19761 version 3.0. Online focus group of experts Evaluator Expert Background 1 Luigi Buglione (Italy) Atos Origin consultant 2 Nelly Condori-Fernandez (Spain) Research Fellow at Universidad Politécnica de Valencia. 3 Juan R. Cuadrado-Roura (Spain) Professor at University of Alcala de Henares (Madrid). 4 Olga Ormandjieva (Canada) Associate Professor at Concordia at Concordia University of Canada. 50 / 60
5. Empirical study - The perception evaluation study The evaluation process Inputs to the assessment process - A guide with the rules of the eepc-cosmic - Chapter 6, Adaptation of COSMIC to the ERP functional requirements - Chapter 7, The proof of the method Evaluating instrument to use - A questionnaire15 questions (see Appendix B) of the type closed-valued - Likert scale of 5 values Question Negative Affirmation 1 2 3 4 5 Positive Affirmation 1 The eepc-cosmic proposal is incomplete. O O O O O The eepc-cosmic proposal is complete. 51 / 60
5. Empirical study - The perception evaluation study The evaluation process Reliability of the questionnaire Describes the consistency of the evaluation result 52 / 60
5. Empirical study - The perception evaluation study Results Method Adoption Model for the eepc-cosmic proposal 5 Grade of perception 4,5 4 3,5 3 2,5 2 1,5 1 0,5 3,84 4,08 0,57 0,51 3,81 0,75 Mean SD 0 Perceived ease of use (1,2,3,4,6,9,12,14) Perceived usefulness (5,8,11) Intention of use (7,10,13,15) Variable 53 / 60
6. Conclusions 54 / 60
6. Conclusions eepc-cosmic proposal Developed a proposal Empirically evaluated it We know it is promising Ease of use Usefullness Intention of use The proposal is easy to use (for trained measurers) High consensous among the experts Measuring procedure and the rules very ease of use The most of the rules are automated Proposal is very useful (variable with highest mean value) It could be applied in the ERP projects in the earlyrequirements Would improve the accuracy of the measurements in the ERP systems The proposal could have be serious possibilities to be used Needs a better explanation about which advantages it can provide to project managers 55 / 60
6. Conclusions The eepc-proposal can be used in the early stage of the requirements using the EPC diagrams what would help to reduce the gap SIZING ERP systems and to decrease the problems derived from this gap in the estimation of the cost and effort 56 / 60
7. Future works Further validation of the proposal Improving the proposal 57 / 60
7. Future works Extending the empirical validation The MAM could be developed with more individuals Research about the application of counting rules To study the impact of the eepc-cosmic Proposal in companies Theoretical validation Of the design to confirm that the proposal measures what really must measure Evaluation of the conformity according the COSMIC method Applied the DISTANCE method: measurements obtained with the proceeding measurement eepc- COSMIC 58 / 60
7. Future works Improving the proposal Repeating the perception-based study with trained individuals Adding new counting rules Using Business Process notations (e.g. BPMN) with provides more information than EPC Study about how the method can be integrated in the requirements and planning phase 59 / 60
QUESTIONS? 60 / 60
Solving the size estimation problem in ERP project context: the eepc- COSMIC approach - THE END - Francisco Martín Téllez Thank you very much! Master Thesis Presentation March 20 th, 2009 Dank U well! University of Twente, Faculty of EEMCS Information Systems Department Supervisors: Dr. Maya Daneva Dr. Nelly Condori-Fernandez Gracias! 61 / 60