Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Se 3124: Se Project Management: W4 F W5 M - Project Planning and Scheduling
Se 3124: Se Project Management: W4 F W5 M - Project Planning and Scheduling
VERSION 1
SY 2021 - 2022
HOMEWORK
It's Bad
Not Healthy
Not Necessary
False
Not a Necessity
I Disagree
Not Really
When watching the video there were times when I struggled with differentiating
gluttony and lust - are they the same thing but with different scopes?
(Gluttony covers things like scope, resources, etc. while Lust tackles features)
When watching the video there were times when I struggled with differentiating
gluttony and lust - are they the same thing but with different scopes?
(Gluttony covers things like scope, resources, etc. while Lust tackles features)
Lust: “Did you see that iMac Pro the tester got, it’s not like he even does programming”
Greed: “Look, I’m the senior dev here. I’ll take all the kudos I can get. I made it happen, the
juniors do what I tell them to.”
Sloth: “I’ll commit it when I’m done.”
Envy: "Google has a 3-star chef at their workplace, why can’t we?
Pride: “We have a velocity of 354, that team does only 52 story points a sprint”
Wrath: “You absolute morons! How could you make such a mistake”
Gluttony: “Oh that looks interesting, let’s drag it in. That’s cool, let’s do that too. Oh, and
that!”
Are there cases where the waterfall approach is the most appropriate? If we cannot
communicate to our product owners effectively for Agile, in my current understanding, we can
just take the hybrid approach and do iterations for our development process instead of having
to drop the iterations process altogether.
Are there cases where the waterfall approach is the most appropriate? If we cannot
communicate to our product owners effectively for Agile, in my current understanding, we can
just take the hybrid approach and do iterations for our development process instead of having
to drop the iterations process altogether.
Are there cases where the waterfall approach is the most appropriate? If we cannot
communicate to our product owners effectively for Agile, in my current understanding, we can
just take the hybrid approach and do iterations for our development process instead of having
to drop the iterations process altogether.
Are there cases where the waterfall approach is the most appropriate? If we cannot
communicate to our product owners effectively for Agile, in my current understanding, we can
just take the hybrid approach and do iterations for our development process instead of having
to drop the iterations process altogether.
SUMMARY TASKS
• High level tasks in WBS
SCHEDULING SYSTEM
SCHEDULING SYSTEM
SIGNED CONTRACT
OBTAIN PROPOSAL
SELECT VENDOR
NEGOTIATE TERMS
SIGN CONTRACT
• BREAKDOWN IN EIGHT-
TO-EIGHTY HOUR TASKS
• MATCH TO FREQUENCY
OF STATUS REPORTS
Easy to update/revise
Parametric Model
The Delphi method was developed at the beginning of the Cold War to forecast the impact of
technology on warfare.
DELPHI TECHNIQUE
SCHEDULING SYSTEM
REGISTRATION MODULE
DESIGN
CODE
TEST
DEPLOY
3 3 3
8 8 8
1 1 1
4 4 4
7 7 7
3 3 3
Bottom Up TD then BU
Estimate phases or major components and then break those estimates into
smaller pieces until you get to individual tasks.
REGISTRATION MODULE
DESCRIPTION COST
DESIGN
CODE
TEST
DEPLOY
TOTAL $16000
Estimate phases or major components and then break those estimates into
smaller pieces until you get to individual tasks.
REGISTRATION MODULE
DESCRIPTION COST
DESIGN $3000
CODE $6000
TEST $1500
DEPLOY $500
TOTAL $16000
Bottom Up TD then BU
REGISTRATION MODULE
DESCRIPTION COST
DESIGN
CODE
TEST
DEPLOY
TOTAL
REGISTRATION MODULE
DESCRIPTION COST
DESIGN $3000
CODE $6000
TEST $1500
DEPLOY $500
TOTAL $16000
Bottom Up TD then BU
45 MINS TYPICAL
45 MINS TYPICAL
Material Ancillary
MONEY ALLOCATION –
IF ESTIMATE IS TOO HIGH
Be prepared for what might go wrong, since you can't be sure nothing will go wrong. Instead of
asking for an adrenaline rush why not identify what could go wrong, so you can plan ahead for
dealing with issues.
LACK OF REMOTE
KNOWN LIMITED UNKNOWN
TECHNOLOGY PROJECT
UNKNOWNS DETAIL OPTIONS UNKNOWNS
TEAMS
LACK OF REMOTE
KNOWN LIMITED UNKNOWN
TECHNOLOGY PROJECT
UNKNOWNS DETAIL OPTIONS UNKNOWNS
TEAMS
CONTINGENCY = 25%-30%
CONTINGENCY = 25%-30%
CONTINGENCY = 25%-30%
CONTINGENCY = 25%-30%
CONTINGENCY = 25%-30%
CONTINGENCY = 25%-30%
CONTINGENCY = 25%-30%