This document discusses project monitoring and control using earned value analysis (EVA) and burn graphs. It provides an overview of EVA, including its origins, explanations of key EVA concepts and metrics, examples of how to apply EVA, and potential shortcomings. It also covers burn graphs as a visual project monitoring tool, how they can be used in agile projects, and examples of burn graph types. Tools for implementing EVA and burn graphs are listed. The document concludes with potential discussion points about applying EVA and adopting burn graphs.
2. Agenda
Origins of EVA
EVA Explained
EVA Examples
Shortcomings of EVA
Agile side of EVA
Burn Graphs
Tools
Discussion
3. Overview of EVA
“The essence of [Earned Value Management
Systems] is that some level of detail
appropriate for the degree of technical,
schedule, and cost risk or uncertainty
associated with the program, a target value
….is established.” Paul Solomon 2002.
4. History of EVA
PERT/Cost (1963)
DoD Cost/Schedule Control Systems Criteria (C/
SCSC) (1967).
Government Performance and Results Act (1993),
Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act, Title V (1994),
Clinger-Cohen Act (1996)
EIA-748-1998 “Earned Value Management System”
Office of Management and Budget (Circular A-11, Part
7) (2003)
5. Motivation for EVA
Integrates work, cost, and schedule metrics.
Early warning signal.
Driving by looking in the front windshield
instead of the rear view mirror. Statistical
projection.
U.S. Government requirement.
6. EVA Explained 1/3
EVA concentrates on project
management and control
Requires a number of tasks to be
performed before utilizing EVA:
Work Breakdown Structure
Cost (WBS)
Creation of detailed plan (critical
path plan)
Includes all activities that have to
Earned be performed, their durations,
Value costs and relative contributions to
Schedule Technical the overall deliverable
Performance
8. EVA Explained 3/3
EVA is used to determine current project
performance and estimate/forecast future
project performance
Based on 3 data points:
Budgeted Cost of Work Performed (BCWP)
Actual Cost of Work Performed (ACWP)
Budgeted Cost of Work Scheduled (BCWS)
9. Budgeted Cost of Work Performed
Planned (budgeted/estimated) cost of work
that has been completed until this point
Answers: “How much was performed work
supposed to cost?”
Based on features/activities completed and
the budgeted amount for these features/
activities in the original project plan
10. Actual Cost of Work Performed
Actual cost of work that has been completed
until this point
Answers: “What was the actual cost of work
actually performed?”
Based on features/activities completed and
cost of these features/activities in real life
11. Budgeted Cost of Work Scheduled
Planned (budgeted/estimated) cost of work that was
supposed to be completed
Answers: “How much work should have been done
and how much was it meant to cost?”
Based on features/activities planned/scheduled and
the budgeted amount for these features/activities in the
original project plan
Budget at Completion (BAC) is the total funds allocated
(budgeted) for this project to complete
12. Derived Metrics
Schedule Variance (SV)
SV = BCWP – BCWS
Compares what is done with what was supposed to be
done
SV < 0 project is behind schedule
Cost Variance (CV)
CV = BCWP – ACWP
Compares actual project cost with budgeted project
costs
CV < 0 project is over budget
13. Schedule/Cost Performance Index
Schedule Performance Index (SPI)
SPI = BCWP/BCWS
SPI < 1 project is behind schedule
Cost Performance Index (CPI)
CPI = BCWP/ACWP
CPI < 1 project is over budget
Cost Schedule Index (CSI)
CSI = CPI * SPI
CSI < 1 project is not tracking to plan
The further away CSI is from 1, the less likely is
successful project recovery
14. Using EVA Metrics in Project
Control 1/2
Each individual EVA metric is not greatly
useful on its own
Metrics need to be considered as a group
Ex: Just because a project has a CSI of 1
does not imply that the project is doing well – it
may be well ahead of schedule while also
being well ahead of its budget
15. Using EVA Metrics in Project
Control 2/2
ACWP metric can be used to project future activity
costs/durations
This is called Estimate To Completion (ETC)
The end of the projected ETC curve is
the Estimate At Completion (EAC)
estimated schedule and cost required to complete the
project based on current productivity and spending
Comparison between EAC and BAC shows is the
project is likely to be on schedule and/or on budget
Variance at Completion (VAC) schedule difference
between BAC and EAC
17. EVA Task Types
Discrete Effort
Activities with start and end time that result in
deliverables
Apportioned Effort
Effort required to support discrete effort tasks (Ex:
inspections, quality control)
Proportional to the type/size of discrete effort tasks that
they support
Level of Effort
Overhead activities with no concrete deliverables (Ex:
management and administrative activities)
18. Crediting Earned Value
Discrete Effort
Credited upon completion with actual cost and duration
tracked
Apportioned Effort
Credited upon completion of related discrete effort
tasks
Level of Effort
Credited according to plan (regardless of actual cost
and duration)
19. Crediting Earned Value Methods
Milestone Events
Weighted Milestone Gates
Percentage Complete
Fixed Formula
Level of Effort
Percentage Complete and Milestone Gates
20. EVA Example 1/2
Planned/Scheduled Data:
Duration of 10 months
Includes 10 features with multiple tasks
Budget of $100 million
Actual After 6 Weeks:
55% of the work has been completed
$85 million has been spent
21. EVA Example 2/2
Earned Value Analysis
200
150
Cumulative Spending
100 BCWS
BCWP
ACWP
ETC
50
0
0 3.75 7.5 11.25 15
Time, Working Weeks
22. Success Factors for EVA
Quality of the baseline; need to include all
details.
Take action early based on performance
indicators.
“I hate everything that merely instructs me without
augmenting or directly invigorating my activity”
Goethe
23. Shortcomings of EVA
Based on past performance; assumes constant rate of
spend and value creation
Assumes a direct relationship between time and cost.
Value measured in technical components, not
expected business value.
Project must be fully defined at outset; the devil is in
the details.
Time required for measuring project’s progress
25. EVA compared to Agile
Full project view vs. Iterative view
Tasks fully defined vs. Changing requirements
Attempts to forecast future vs. Determination
of next iteration
EVA is not suitable for truly “Agile” projects
26. EVA in an Agile/Iterative Project
Approach 1:
Stories = BCWS
Tasks = BCWS in more detail
Assignments = ACWP
Velocity = BCWP
Testable requirements = 0% or 100% BCWP
27. EVA in an Agile/Iterative Project
Approach 2:
Do EVA on individual iterations
Approach 3:
Generate micro estimations for current iteration
and macro estimations for future iterations
28. Burn Graphs
Origins of Burn Graphs
Cumulative flow diagrams from lean production
Goal: to provide a succinct view of progress.
Allows project sponsors to steer the project.
Allows scrum master report visually to
stakeholders.
Allows the team to gain experience estimating
by getting direct feedback. (Empowering)
29. Burn-Down Graphs
Shows remaining estimated effort on item
Usually in ideal engineering time (IET hours)
Calculated for any level of task abstraction
30. Scrum Backlog Graphs
Product Backlog Graph
High-level view of overall project progress.
Completion date: work left versus resources
available.
Quantitative tool for making trade-offs.
Sprint Backlog Graph
Detailed view of a single sprint's progress.
Sprint signatures: compare current with past
results.
First notice of schedule slips seen here.
32. Burn-up Graphs
Shows progress on completion of item
Usually displays percentage complete
Just the inverse of a burn-down graph
33. Cumulative Flow Diagrams
Tracks number of features (and status) over time
Better for reporting than:
% complete graph of feature milestone percentages
Features completed over time
34. Overview of Burn Graphs
Drawbacks
Benefits
Metric choice is key
Easy to compile/track
Over-simplification?
Feedback to the team
and status to the Hides dependencies
customer Should be able to
Highlights: zoom to see levels
Schedule slips Traditionalists will resist
implementation?
Scope creep
35. Burn Graph Tools
Open-source
Outreach Project Tool (OPT)
XPlanner
Commercial
Version One
MS Excel
36. References
Anderson, David J. “Using Cumulative Flow Diagrams with FDD”. Feature Driven Development. 2003. http://
www.featuredrivendevelopment.com/node/view/515
Anderson, David J. Agile Management for Software Engineering. Prentice Hall. 2003
Alleman, Glen B., Henderson, Michael, “Making Agile Development Work in a Government Contracting
Environment” Proceedings of the Agile Development Conference, IEEE, 2003.
Fleming, Quentin W., Koppelman, Joel M., “Earned Value Project Management: A Powerful Tool for Software
Projects”, Crosstalk, July 1998.
Hayes, Heather, “Using Earned-Value Analysis to Better Manage Projects”, Pharmaceutical Technology,
February 2002.
Howes, Rodney “Improving the Performance of Earned Value Analysis as a Construction Project Management
Tool”, Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 2000.
Schwaber, Ken and Mike Beedle. Agile Software Development with Scrum. Prentice Hall. Upper Saddle River,
NJ. 2002
Solomon, Paul J., “Practical Software Measurement, Performance-Based Earned Value,” Crosstalk,
September, 2002.
37. Discussion Points
Can EVA be applied to agile projects?
What metrics would you use for burn graphs?
Would you adopt burn graphs at your
organization?
Notes de l'éditeur
Lean production is a manufacturing process developed at Toyota. Focuses on responding to change to minimize inefficiency. Does not center on long-term planning. (1970s and 1980s)
There is a “Lean Software Development” process
Used heavily in Scrum as the primary project progress metric.
Levels of abstraction:
Task
Request (user story, requirement, use case)
Milestone (sprint backlog)
Overall project (product backlog)
For higher levels, must take into account the project velocity (team member availability)
Product Backlog:
Tradeoffs between cost, time, functionality, and quality (four pillars)
Stress that by repeatedly updating and displaying the product backlog graph, management sees the effects of their choices.
They can alter priorities with some understanding of the impact.
Allows them to steer the project.
Sprint Backlog:
Allows team to see the impact of their estimates
Each team will develop a signature
Watch out for deviations from normal practice...
Just want to show that you don't always get a pretty sloped graph in the real world.
This is the burn-down graph of a request I was handling at work. It looked complete after iteration #1, but we found an ambiguity in the requirements that required we revisit it. That's why there are two tasks. Gantt chart is just to elaborate the progress changes.
Need to find some sources about these as I'm basically just making assumptions!
Just a burn-up graph...
Better than milestone % complete as this graph suffers from “false reporting” problem. People say they're 90% finished forever.
Better than features complete graph as this ignores work-in progress.
Note: I'd like to give a demonstration of OPT if we have time. I can have it on my laptop or off my server via an PC with a web-browser.