The presentation introduced a panel organized at IWSM-MENSURA 2014 by MAIN (Metrics Associations' International Network - www.mai-net.org) about the value and way to deal with NFRs in a software project, using a series of PIF (Productivity Impact Factors) for calibrating your project effort or a specific sizing unit? That's the (discussed) question!

1. 24°International Workshop on Software Measurement
(IWSM) and 9th International Conference on Software
PIF or SNAP? That's the Question! Panel
www.gufpi-isma.org
Or maybe it's not?
Process and Product Measurement (MENSURA)
Rotterdam (Netherlands) - October 6-8, 2014
Productivity Impact Factors for
Projects
(PIFPro’14)
Luigi Buglione
GGUUFFPPII--IISSMMAA

2. PIF or SNAP? Goals of the Presentation
G1. Introduce the NFR-issue
G2. Present the two different approaches, with
pros cons
G3. …Debate!
2 PIFPro’14,- Rotterdam, 07/10/2014 © 2014 L.Buglione www.gufpi-isma.org

3. PIF or SNAP? Some tags...just for starting
3 PIFPro’14,- Rotterdam, 07/10/2014 © 2014 L.Buglione www.gufpi-isma.org

4. PIF or SNAP? FSM-History NFR-Approaches
http://www.semq.eu/leng/sizestfsm.htm
...which IT in late
’’80s? Why VAF?
4 PIFPro’14,- Rotterdam, 07/10/2014 © 2014 L.Buglione www.gufpi-isma.org

5. Mixing FSM Methods Quality Models (QMs)
FCM
COCOMO-I
ISO
9126:1991
ISO 9126-
1:2001
5 PIFPro’14,- Rotterdam, 07/10/2014 © 2014 L.Buglione www.gufpi-isma.org
IFPUG
SNAP
COCOMO-II
PIF or SNAP?

6. PIF or SNAP? Adjustment vs Sizing: different views
Adjustment/Parametric
• COCOMO, SLIM, VAF, PIF
(Productivity Impact Factors),
...
NFR Sizings
• IFPUG SNAP, other
frameworks based on a QM
(ISO/IEC 25010:2011), ...
6 PIFPro’14,- Rotterdam, 07/10/2014 © 2014 L.Buglione www.gufpi-isma.org

7. PIF or SNAP? COCOMO (Cost Construction Model) [1979-95]
7 PIFPro’14,- Rotterdam, 07/10/2014 © 2014 L.Buglione www.gufpi-isma.org

8. PIF or SNAP? Albrecht IFPUG FPA
• ISO/IEC 14143-1:1998 (R2007) canceled any
‘adjustment factor’ because NFR-related (out of
scope)
• CPM v4.3.x moved VAF into an appendix (out
of the process, historical reason)
8 PIFPro’14,- Rotterdam, 07/10/2014 © 2014 L.Buglione www.gufpi-isma.org

9. PIF or SNAP? FCM... ISO/IEC 9126 25010 Quality Model
9 PIFPro’14,- Rotterdam, 07/10/2014 © 2014 L.Buglione www.gufpi-isma.org

10. PIF or SNAP? NFR: An inner difficulty for being evaluated
•Entity •Product
• Project
•Attribute •Maintainability
• ...
•Measure • nfsu
•...
• Product
•Functionality
• fsu
• Product
• Reliability
• nfsu
• Product
• Security
• nfsu
• FUR • NFR • NFR • NFR •(NFR)
EAM Analysis as a starting point (Buglione-Ebert, 2012)
Functionality is represented by a single attribute in a taxonomy
–ilties are ‘n’ ones, evolving and typically growing over time, following
new IT advancements
Thus, each –ilty could be dealt separately and not as a unique issue
10 PIFPro’14,- Rotterdam, 07/10/2014 © 2014 L.Buglione www.gufpi-isma.org

11. PIF or SNAP? PIF (Productivity Impact Factors), 2012
• 4 categories, 27 PIFs
• Translated in: IT, EN,
ES, BR, ...
11 PIFPro’14,- Rotterdam, 07/10/2014 © 2014 L.Buglione www.gufpi-isma.org

12. PIF or SNAP? IFPUG SNAP – APM v2.2
Categories (4) Sub-Categories (14):
Data Operations
• Data Entry Validation
• Logical Mathematical Operations
• Data Formatting
• Internal Data Movements
• Delivering Added Value to Users by Data Configuration
Interface Design
• UI Changes
• Help Methods
• Multiple Input Methods
• Multiple Output Methods
Technical Environment
• Multiple Platform
• Database Technology
• Batch Processing System
Architecture
• Component Based Sw Dev (CBSD)
• Design Complexity
• Same calculation as FPA
• Complementary to FPA
• Usable alone, without FPA (just for NFR)
• IFPUG CSP (CSS)
• New NF-baseline!
• Better SP per (sub)category
12 PIFPro’14,- Rotterdam, 07/10/2014 © 2014 L.Buglione www.gufpi-isma.org

13. PIF or SNAP? IFPUG SNAP – APM v2.2
13 PIFPro’14,- Rotterdam, 07/10/2014 © 2014 L.Buglione www.gufpi-isma.org

14. PIF or SNAP? The ‘ABC’ Schema (Buglione, 2012)
fffsssuuu m/d(f-prod)
FFUURR
prod
A
Q T C
(ED)
(p)
CCoossttttoott
EEffffttoott UURR
nnnfffsssuuu m/d(nf-prod)
NNFFRR
Q T C
(ED)
(p)
m/d(org-prj)
prod
prj
B
Q T C C
(ED)
(p)
AAllttrroo
XXXYYYZZZ
URL: IFPUG MetricViews, Vol 6, No.2, Aug 2012 –.
http://goo.gl/hgrJt
14 PIFPro’14,- Rotterdam, 07/10/2014 © 2014 L.Buglione www.gufpi-isma.org

15. PIF or SNAP? Adjustment vs Sizing: Two different views
Strengths Weaknesses
• Not NFR sizing, but adjustment
• Reduced value recognized to NFR
• Costly to (re)calibrate over time
• No standard taxonomy
• ...
• Not covering anyway the whole
project
• Early stages, as FPA 40yrs ago
• Many chars, not a single one as
functionality
• Not a recognized standard,
variable scope
• Easy to apply
• Applied by calibrated models
• (Quite) diffused in Industry
• ...
• NFR sizing, not adjustment
• ISO 25010 as a starting point
• Certification schema yet active
• ...
15 PIFPro’14,- Rotterdam, 07/10/2014 © 2014 L.Buglione www.gufpi-isma.org

16. Q A
PIF or SNAP?
BBeeddaannkktt vvoooorr uuww aaaannddaacchhtt!!
TThhaannkkss ffoorr yyoouurr aatttteennttiioonn!!
16 PIFPro’14,- Rotterdam, 07/10/2014 © 2014 L.Buglione www.gufpi-isma.org

17. Contact Data
Luigi
Buglione
GUFPI-ISMA
Italy
luigi.buglione@gufpi-isma.org
PIF or SNAP?
17 PIFPro’14,- Rotterdam, 07/10/2014 © 2014 L.Buglione www.gufpi-isma.org