Percent Complete?

greenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

As a project management consultant for 30 years, I can tell you to IGNORE any claims of Percent Complete with regards to a Y2K remediation project.

Sorry, code remediation just doesn't lend itself to any true Earned Value Analysis.

The Criteria for Using Earned Value are:

1. Must be able to define the units being measured with precision. Like number of bricks laid. Sorry, lines of code just don't apply.

2. Must be able to produce an accurate plan of the output to be measured so that the SHAPE of the baseline curve will be accurate at all points in time. i.e. number of bricks laid=earned value layed by a certain date=project schedule with a planned cost=cost plan (resource consumption.

3. Must be able to collect actual output. Source code remediation just does not lends itself to precise data collection of actual output (i.e. lines of code repaired)

4. Must insure that the units being measured (i.e. feet of concrete poured) are not "beatable."

The four basic measurement parameters of any project are: Schedule Cost Earned Value Scope

How many Y2K projects have greatly underestimated the cost, the scope, and missed critical project schedule milestones (earned value doesn't apply).

Percent Complete for a Y2K project can only be applied in terms of the Project Time Line, not to actual lines of code repaired. Just because you are 93% percent done your project schedule, does not mean you have repaired 93% of your code and meet your project completion date. Past performance is no guarantee of future performance.

So, whenever you here someone claim they are XX% perecent complete, YOUR GUESS is as good as THIERS.

By the way, there is NO SUCH THING AS AVERAGE PERCENT COMPLETE!!! When I see this written in industry reports (i.e. NERC), I don't know whether to cry or laugh. The numbers are MEANINGLESS!

If I recall, on Westergard 2000 there was an excellent article titled, I believe, Meaningless Numbers. I will try to find it an repost it here.

-- MarktheFart (quke@ix.netcom.com), July 29, 1999

Answers

Mr. Fart:

Good post sir.

We'll be looking forward to your "Meaningless Numbers" post.

-- George (jvilches@sminter.com.ar), July 29, 1999.


Thanks for the info, Mark. It seems companies and governments are giving their best possible spin on this issue, as per usual.

A quick question to you certainly not posed to be a smart ass, but as someone who is ignorant to these things and as someone firmly on the fence:

being in the line of work you are, how privy are you to success rates--or failure rates---in remediation efforts across the vast programming landscape? I guess what i am asking--ye again--is it possible to survey that entire landscape to make a hypothesis about things?

-- Bad Company (johnny@shootingstar.com), July 29, 1999.


Here are the links, worthy of review as we move closer to the BIG DAY. I can see it now. Where just about there. Almost. Don't panic. Listen to Greenspan. Keep your money in your bank's computer. Its the safest place, trust me.

Sorry, haven't learned hot links yet.

Westergard Year 2000

www.y2ktimebomb.com/Techcorner/DE/de9916.htm

www.y2ktimebomb.com/Techcorner/DE/de9918.htm

www.y2ktimebomb.com/Techcorner/DE/de9915.htm

-- MarktheFart (quke@ix.netcom.com), July 29, 1999.


"Bogus Numbers"
www.y2ktimebomb.com/Techcorner/DE/de9915.htm

"Bogus Numbers II"
www.y2ktimebomb.com/Techcorner/DE/de9916.htm

"Hockey Stick Numbers"
www.y2ktimebomb.com/Techcorner/DE/de9918.htm

-- Linkmeister (link@librarian.edu), July 29, 1999.


Aww, shucks. Thanks for the info Mark.

-- Mark Twain (Rush@hard.rock), July 29, 1999.


Linkmiester,

You are the BEST!

-- MarktheFart (quke@ix.netcom.com), July 29, 1999.


Oops. Somebody was talking to me and I forgot about the http://

"Bogus Numbers"
http://www.y2ktimebomb.com/Techcorner/DE/de9915.htm

"Bogus Numbers II"
http://www.y2ktimebomb.com/Techcorner/DE/de9916.htm

"Hockey Stick Numbers"
http://www.y2ktimebomb.com/Techcorner/DE/de9918.htm

-- Linkapprentice (link@librarian.edu), July 29, 1999.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ