| MÄ phase: All done work and A.b/c Estimate At Complete | |
 |
|
|
|
|
| Dynamics | ||
| Progress Report of the MÄ phase | $Revision: 1.3 $ | State approved |
| Date 04-Nov-1998 | Author Tom Weckström | |
| Review date 04-Nov-1998 | Reviewed by Jouni Malinen | |
| Approval date 04-Nov-1998 | Approved by Jouni Malinen | |
$Id: progressreport2.html,v 1.3 1998/11/04 19:21:14 jkmaline Exp $
2. Completed Tasks
Table
5. All
bookings and hours in the MÄ phase per A.b/c code, week, day
and person.
2.1 Revised Documents
The text and especially the tables of this document include many terms and abbreviations. For help in terminology, please refer to the project terminology specification document.
The team started to use the PolyTime software to manage the working hours, project WBS, hour reporting, task state monitoring, efficient task assignments, and other project management related actions. The goal in effort reporting is to report the hours once a day. Hour reporting with PolyTime is easy and relatively fast. Reporting the hours used in a day takes less than five minutes. The reports shown in this document are generated with PolyTime. The report table generators of PolyTime have numerous parameters. Project manager Tom Weckström has designed the report generators for the Dynamics team.
There has been clear underestimation of the working hours, but the better we define the functionality the easier it is to start the design phase efficiently. Clearly, new tools like PolyTime have added some hours to the effort, but we believe that investing on such tools pays itself back during the project. It should also be pointed out that the project is quite challenging. To complete the project with minimal requirements could demand close to the same effort per credit as that of an average HUT course.
The highest contradiction between AEAC and ADT values is clearly in the documentation activity. On the other hand many of the other activity codes have much less hours reported than estimated. These variations are partly natural but also due to the fact that most of the team members are not used to book their working hours. This resulted in inappropriate bindings to A.b/c codes. Moving hours to other activities would not remove the extra effort done, but it would smooth the estimate exceedings.
The project team will discuss the possibilities of reducing the efforts radically without giving remarkably in on the quality issues. Project team organization may be improved. Division to smaller groups will boost our efficiency, since multiple activities may proceed in parallel.
| MÄ phase: All done work and A.b/c Estimate At Complete | |
|
|
|
|
|
Table 2 illustrates the conventional effort report. It shows the reported hours for each MÄ phase A.b/c codes. Hours are summed up at three levels: total, A code and A.b code levels.
| MÄ phase: Hours per A.b/c-code and person | |
|
|
|
|
|
| Team hours in MÄ phase per week and day | |
|
|
|
|
|
Table 4. The workload
calendar of the MÄ phase for each person.
[Source: JPT, MÄ: workload calendar]
Table
5 shows the reported tasks in the MÄ phase. The bookings are shown
per week, day of the week and person. For each booking, the associated
A.b/c code, booking text and reported hours are shown. The hours are summed
up by day of the week and week. Also the total sum of the reported hours
is shown. Because Table 5 is quite exhaustive, it is represented in a separate
document.
Table 5. All bookings
and hours in the MÄ phase per A.b/c code, week, day and person.
[Source: JPT, MÄ: Abc&bookins &h /
w,d,prs]