1 / 5

Size and Cost Drivers for System Development: Round 2 Results

This report presents the results of the second round of the COSYSMO Delphi survey, focusing on size and cost drivers for system development. The study examines four drivers that help determine the size of a system, and also highlights the influence of cost drivers in the development process. The findings provide valuable insights for comparing and estimating system requirements and associated costs.

stephanieoliver
Télécharger la présentation

Size and Cost Drivers for System Development: Round 2 Results

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Compiled by:Ricardo Valerdirvalerdi@sunset.usc.eduDecember 2003 (updated Jan 2, 2004) COSYSMO Delphi Round 2 Results

  2. Size Driver Results These four drivers help us determine how “big” a system is. The effort required for “nominal” # of system requirements serves as a basis for comparison to the other three size drivers. For example, the systems engineering effort required for difficult algorithms is 16.64 times greater than for nominal requirements.

  3. Cost Driver Results Note 1: The Effort Multiplier Ratio (EMR) is the ratio of the large value over the small one (i.e., Requirements Understanding EMR is 1.71/.65 = 2.63) Note 2: Cost drivers are listed in order of appearance on the Delphi survey Note 3: Intermediate values (Low, High, and Very High) were updated as geometric ratios rather than arithmetic differences. EMRs did not change.

  4. Note: Cost drivers are listed in order of EMR value (or influence)

  5. Profile of respondents (n=40) • Average years of SW/SE experience: 18 • Average years of cost modeling experience: 6 Application domains (most respondents selected more than one category): • Other highlights: • 22% of respondents also participated in Round 1 of the Delphi in January 2002 • 55% of the respondents were from Raytheon, Lockheed Martin, and Northrop Grumman

More Related