I just read this recent article from McKinsey and Company
that extols the virtues of software productivity metrics, compares several
alternative methods, and offers their recommendation.
I find it amazing that in the several years I have been
publishing this blog, I have never discussed software productivity metrics –
but after a review today, that is exactly what I found. As an avid advocate and proponent of metrics,
the topic has certainly been on the list for discussion.
Had I written the article before today, I would’ve advocated
Function Points. Function Points have
several advantages, including being the most consistent, accurate and reliable
of the various methods and the one most appropriate for evaluating and
measuring vendor software. In
particular, if you are comparing building a package versus buying a commercial
(COTS) package for the same capability, then FPs offer an objective measure for
comparing both features and cost to determine the appropriate path. Likewise, it is similarly appropriate when
comparing products from multiple vendors.
As the McKinsey article explains, though, FPs are expensive
and challenging to introduce. For
organizations that rely primarily on software development (rather than
purchasing vendor offerings), the McKinsey authors introduce a new (to me)
method called Use Case Points, compare this to Lines of Code, Story Points, and
FPs, and describe how to introduce UCPs into the organization. Further, the article notes that UCPs are
comparable across applications and teams.
And UCPs can be used with both agile and waterfall development
methodologies.
I encourage you to take a look at this article for your
application development environment.
Metrics add a valuable tool to your toolbox. And metrics are an absolute, foundational
necessity for continuous improvement.
Have you worked in an organization that uses software
productivity metrics? What benefits did
you find? What problems did you encounter?
© 2013 Chuck
Morton. All Rights Reserved.
No comments:
Post a Comment