JP2012138010A - Evaluation apparatus, evaluation method and evaluation program for implementation degree of development process - Google Patents

Abstract

PROBLEM TO BE SOLVED: To improve evaluation accuracy of an implementation degree of development process.SOLUTION: To solve the problem, an evaluation apparatus for evaluating an implementation degree of development process by a development risk includes: risk influence degree determination means for determining a risk influence degree in the development process, based on risk data to an implementation degree of scheduled process and a risk influence degree for each preset development risk; risk man-hour conversion means for using one or more preset conversion equations to calculate a risk man-hour from a determination result obtained by the risk influence degree determination means; and evaluation means for evaluating whether or not the implementation degree of the development process is appropriate, by comparing the risk man-hour obtained by the risk man-hour conversion means with an additional man-hour which is added to the development process at the present moment.

Description

  The present invention relates to a development process performance evaluation apparatus, evaluation method, and evaluation program, and more particularly to a development process performance evaluation apparatus, evaluation method, and evaluation program for improving the development process performance evaluation accuracy. .

  Conventionally, development processes are defined in advance by international standards such as CMMI (Capability Maturity Model Integration; capability maturity model integration) and ISO12207 (Software Lifecycle Process) (for example, see Non-Patent Document 1). In addition, these standards are one index for carrying out the development process depending on the organization or project.

  Here, in the CMMI shown in Non-Patent Document 1, a development process is defined as a “process area”, a “goal” is set for each process area, and a more detailed “practice” is set. In ISO 12207, “activity” is set for each process, and further detailed “task” is set.

  Conventionally, a development risk evaluation method is also defined (for example, see Non-Patent Document 2). In PMBOK (registered trademark) (project management knowledge system) shown in Non-Patent Document 2, a method using the risk occurrence probability and the risk influence degree as parameters is shown, and a definition table of the risk influence degree is also shown.

  Conventionally, a tailoring system for customizing a development process as a practical project standard has been disclosed (for example, see Patent Document 1). In Patent Document 1, the risk development unit for determining the allowable risk rate based on the risk data for each activity of the standard development process and the input data as the risk basis, and the standard development process based on the allowable risk rate. A tailoring unit that determines whether or not to import into the project management process is provided for each activity to be configured.

JP 2003-296528 A

Carnegie Mellon, Software Engineering Institute, “CMMI 1.2 for Development”, CMU / SEI-2006-TR-008, August 2006 Institute, Four Campus Boulevand, New Square, “Project Management Knowledge System Guide (PMBOK Guide)”, PA19073-3299 USA

  By the way, when trying to improve the development process in an organization or project, if the required level of the standard development process is executed as it is depending on the situation of the organization or project, the development cost is expected to increase. There are many cases to do. In addition, once the development process is set, it is difficult to change because the organization and project work based on the contents. For this reason, the development process is often maintained as it is, and there is a state in which process improvements such as quality improvement, delivery time reduction, and productivity improvement cannot be performed. Therefore, in order to overcome these situations, it is necessary to promote the process improvement by defining the scheduled process execution degree with a balanced cost, and to improve the quality, shorten the delivery time, and improve the productivity.

  Here, in Patent Document 1 described above, whether to import into the project management process is determined based on risk data for each activity of ISO 12207 and input data that is a risk basis. However, since the allowable risk rate is calculated from the risk data based on the attribute values such as the project period and man-hours, and the data on the project members' skills and the strictness of the delivery date, which is the basis for the risk, it was fixed for the project. Result. In other words, since it is impossible to define and evaluate the scheduled process performance level at which the process is performed, the process application plan cannot be adjusted to balance costs. In addition, in other prior arts, no appropriate method has been proposed for improving the evaluation accuracy of the development process performance.

  The present invention has been made in view of the above-described problems, and an object thereof is to provide an evaluation apparatus, an evaluation method, and an evaluation program for a development process performance level for improving the evaluation accuracy of the development process performance level. To do.

  In order to solve the above-described problems, the present invention employs means for solving the problems having the following characteristics.

  The present invention provides an evaluation apparatus that evaluates the degree of execution of a development process based on a development risk, based on risk data for the scheduled process degree of execution and a risk influence degree for each development risk set in advance. A risk impact degree determining means for determining an impact degree; a risk manhour converting means for calculating a risk manhour from a determination result obtained by the risk impact degree determining means using one or more preset conversion formulas; Comparing the risk man-hour obtained by the risk man-hour converting means with the additional man-hour added to the development process at the present time, and having an evaluation means for evaluating whether the implementation degree of the development process is appropriate Features.

  Further, the present invention provides an evaluation method for evaluating an execution level of a development process based on a development risk, based on risk data for the scheduled process execution level and a risk influence level for each development risk set in advance. A risk impact level determining step for determining a risk impact level, and a risk man-hour conversion step for calculating a risk man-hour from a determination result obtained by the risk impact level determination step using one or more preset conversion formulas; Comparing the risk man-hour obtained by the risk man-hour converting step with the additional man-hour added to the development process at the present time, and having an evaluation step for evaluating whether the implementation degree of the development process is appropriate It is characterized by.

  According to another aspect of the present invention, there is provided an evaluation program for causing a computer to function as the evaluation apparatus according to any one of claims 1 to 5.

  In addition, what applied the component, expression, or arbitrary combination of the component of this invention to a method, an apparatus, a system, a computer program, a recording medium, a data structure, etc. is also effective as an aspect of this invention.

  According to the present invention, it is possible to improve the evaluation accuracy of the development process implementation degree.

It is a figure which shows an example of the block configuration of the evaluation apparatus in this embodiment. It is a figure which shows an example of the hardware constitutions which can implement | achieve the evaluation process in this embodiment. It is a flowchart which shows an example of the evaluation process procedure of a development process implementation degree. It is a figure for demonstrating the basic view of the evaluation method in this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the specific example of the additional man-hour estimation data file in this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the specific example of the risk data file in this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the specific example of the risk influence degree table in this embodiment. It is a figure which shows the specific example of the man-hour conversion table in this embodiment. It is a flowchart which shows an example of the risk influence degree determination processing procedure in this embodiment. It is a flowchart which shows an example of the risk man-hour conversion process procedure in this embodiment. It is a flowchart which shows an example of the evaluation process sequence in this embodiment. It is a figure which shows an example of the evaluation result in this embodiment.

<About the present invention>
The present invention defines the level at which practices (work items) are to be implemented when assessing whether a cost balance is achieved, for example, by defining the degree of execution of a scheduled process such as the degree of execution of a development process. The evaluation is based on the additional man-hours required to implement the practice and the risk of not implementing it. Further, in the present invention, the process application plan is adjusted from the result obtained by the above-described evaluation, and the development process is performed so as to achieve an optimum implementation level.

  Accordingly, it is possible to improve the evaluation accuracy of the development process execution level by evaluating the level (implementation level) to be executed, not just whether or not each practice is performed.

  DESCRIPTION OF EMBODIMENTS Hereinafter, embodiments in which an evaluation device, an evaluation method, and an evaluation program for a development process implementation degree according to the present invention are suitably implemented will be described using the drawings.

<Block configuration example of evaluation device for development process implementation>
First, a development process performance evaluation apparatus according to this embodiment will be described with reference to the drawings. FIG. 1 is a diagram illustrating an example of a block configuration of an evaluation apparatus according to the present embodiment. The evaluation apparatus 10 shown in FIG. 1 is configured to include an analysis unit 11, a risk impact determination unit 12, a risk man-hour conversion unit 13, and an evaluation unit 14. Further, the evaluation device 10 is configured to include an additional man-hour estimation data file 21, a risk data file 22, a risk influence degree table 23, and a man-hour conversion table 24.

  The analysis means 11 calculates the “risk occurrence probability”, “influence item”, “impact degree” in the scheduled process execution degree from the additional man-hour estimated for each practice (work item) included in the additional man-hour estimation data file 21. ”Etc. are analyzed. The result analyzed by the analysis unit 11 becomes the input of the risk data file 22. In addition, “risk occurrence probability”, “influence item”, “influence degree”, etc., parameters such as priority and weight can be added for each practice.

  In other words, the analysis unit 11 includes the practice definition of the scheduled process execution degree input from the user or the like to the additional man-hour estimation data file 21, the contents of the additional man-hours set based on the results evaluated by the evaluation unit 14 described later, and the like. Based on the above, the risk occurrence probability, the influence item, and the influence degree at the scheduled process execution degree are input to the risk data file 22.

  In this embodiment, the “risk occurrence probability”, “influence item”, “influence degree”, and the like that are input to the evaluation apparatus 10 are not limited to the analysis result from the analysis unit 11, but other As an input method, for example, a user or the like directly inputs a numerical value of a risk occurrence probability using an input unit provided in the evaluation apparatus 10, selects an influence item from a plurality of preset options, or sets an influence degree in advance. It is also possible to select from a plurality of options associated with the affected item.

  The risk impact determination means 12 determines the risk impact of each practice from the data in the risk data file 22 and the risk impact table 23. The specific processing contents of the risk impact determination means 12 will be described later. The risk impact degree determination means 12 outputs the risk impact degree determination result to the risk man-hour conversion means 13.

  The risk man-hour converting means 13 includes the determination result obtained by the risk influence degree judging means 12, the risk occurrence probability obtained from the risk data file 22, the project estimate information obtained from the man-hour conversion table 24, and the man-hour conversion table by risk influence degree. Based on such information, the risk man-hours of each practice are converted. The specific processing contents of the risk man-hour converting means 13 will be described later. Further, the risk man-hour conversion means 13 outputs the risk man-hour conversion result to the evaluation means 14.

  The evaluation unit 14 evaluates the scheduled process execution degree of each practice based on the result of the risk man-hour conversion unit 14 and the practice definition of the additional man-hour estimation data file 21. Further, the evaluation means 14 can output an evaluation result for each practice, or can integrate a plurality of practices and perform a medium-scale or large-scale evaluation (for example, the entire project level). The specific processing content of the evaluation means 14 will be described later.

  Further, the additional man-hour estimation data file 21 in the evaluation apparatus 10 stores a practice definition that defines the scheduled process execution degree and an estimated additional man-hour required for the definition. The additional man-hour estimation data file 21 stores the practice definition of the scheduled process performance to be input, the additional man-hours to be added to achieve the scheduled process performance with respect to the current process performance. As an input method, for example, the input means provided in the evaluation apparatus 10 allows the user to input each practice definition by characters, or to be added in order to achieve the scheduled process performance level relative to the current process performance level Enter the number of man-hours. The above information can also be obtained from an external device connected to the evaluation device 10 via a communication network such as the Internet.

  Further, the risk data file 22 stores the risk occurrence probability and the degree of influence at the scheduled process execution degree of each practice. The risk impact level table 23 is a table that defines the risk impact level. The man-hour conversion table 24 is a table for storing data for converting risk into man-hours.

  Note that the input of information in the risk data file 22, the risk impact table 23, and the man-hour conversion table 24 described above may be input directly by the user or may be acquired from an external device as described above. Further, each of the files and tables described above is stored in an accumulation unit or the like included in the evaluation apparatus 10 and can be read or written as necessary. Note that specific examples of the above-described files and tables will be described later.

<Hardware configuration example>
Here, in the evaluation apparatus 10 described above, an execution program (evaluation program) that can cause a computer to execute each function is generated, and the execution program is installed in, for example, a general-purpose personal computer, a server, etc. The evaluation process etc. in the invention can be realized.

  Here, an example of a hardware configuration of a computer capable of realizing the evaluation process according to the present embodiment will be described with reference to the drawings. FIG. 2 is a diagram illustrating an example of a hardware configuration capable of realizing the evaluation process according to the present embodiment.

  2 includes an input device 31, an output device 32, a drive device 33, an auxiliary storage device 34, a memory device 35, a CPU (Central Processing Unit) 36 that performs various controls, and a network connection device. 37, and these are connected to each other by a system bus B.

  The input device 31 has a pointing device such as a keyboard and a mouse operated by a user or the like, and inputs various operation signals such as execution of a program from the user or the like.

  The output device 32 has a display for displaying various windows and data necessary for operating the computer main body for performing the processing according to the present invention, and displays the program execution progress and results by the control program of the CPU 36. can do.

  Here, the execution program installed in the computer main body in the present invention is provided by, for example, a portable recording medium 38 such as a USB (Universal Serial Bus) memory or a CD-ROM. The recording medium 38 on which the program is recorded can be set in the drive device 33, and the execution program included in the recording medium 38 is installed in the auxiliary storage device 34 from the recording medium 38 via the drive device 33.

  The auxiliary storage device 34 is a storage means such as a hard disk, and is an execution program according to the present invention, a control program provided in a computer, and various data necessary for executing the evaluation processing according to the present invention (for example, an additional man-hour estimation data file). 21, risk data file 22, risk impact table 23, man-hour conversion table 24) and the like can be accumulated and input / output can be performed as necessary.

  The memory device 35 stores an execution program read from the auxiliary storage device 34 by the CPU 36. The memory device 35 includes a ROM (Read Only Memory), a RAM (Random Access Memory), and the like.

  The CPU 36 controls processing of the entire computer, such as various operations and input / output of data with each hardware component, based on a control program such as an OS (Operating System) and an execution program stored in the memory device 35. Thus, each process in the evaluation process can be realized. Various information necessary during the execution of the program can be acquired from the auxiliary storage device 34, and the execution result and the like can also be stored.

  The network connection device 37 acquires an execution program from another terminal connected to the communication network by connecting to a communication network or the like, or an execution result obtained by executing the program or an execution in the present invention The program itself can be provided to other terminals. Further, the network connection unit 37 can acquire various data necessary for performing the evaluation processing in the present invention from an external device via a communication network or the like.

  With the hardware configuration as described above, the evaluation process in the present invention can be executed. Further, by installing the program, the evaluation processing in the present invention can be easily realized by a general-purpose personal computer or the like.

  Next, the evaluation process in the evaluation apparatus 10 and the evaluation program described above will be specifically described.

<Evaluation processing procedure for development process implementation>
First, the outline of the evaluation process procedure of the development process implementation degree in this embodiment will be described using a flowchart. FIG. 3 is a flowchart showing an example of the evaluation process procedure of the development process execution degree. In FIG. 3, a risk data file is first input (S01). Specifically, the risk occurrence probability, the influence item, the influence degree, etc. at the scheduled process execution degree in each practice are input. The type of data input as the risk data file is not limited to this.

  Next, at least one development process to be evaluated is set (S02), and risk impact degree determination processing is performed for the set development process (S03). Further, the risk man-hour conversion process is performed based on the risk influence degree determination result in the process of S03 (S04), and the development process execution degree is determined based on the preset estimated man-hour and the risk man-hour obtained by the process of S04. An evaluation process is performed (S05). Moreover, the evaluation result obtained by the process of S05 is output (S06).

  Here, it is determined whether or not the evaluation processes for all the development processes (all processes) set in advance have ended (S07). If all the processes have not ended (NO in S07), the process returns to S02. Set other processes to perform subsequent processing. Further, in the process of S07, when all processes are completed (YES in S07), the evaluation process in the present embodiment is terminated. In the process of S07, for example, the evaluation process can be terminated by a forced termination instruction or the like from the user.

  With the processing described above, it is possible to improve the evaluation accuracy of the development process implementation degree. Further, by installing the program, the evaluation processing in the present invention can be easily realized by a general-purpose personal computer or the like.

<Specific example>
Here, a specific example to which the above-described embodiment is applied will be described. FIG. 4 is a diagram for explaining the basic concept of the evaluation method in the present embodiment. In FIG. 4, the vertical axis indicates a practice (work item) in a predetermined project, and the horizontal axis indicates a process level defined for each practice. In the example of FIG. 4, the standard development process requirement level in each practice is constant, but it may not necessarily be constant, and may be different for each practice.

  As shown in FIG. 4, the evaluation of whether each practice has reached the standard development process requirement level is performed at a specific timing, for example, every predetermined period during the development process or after the development process is planned. It has been broken. At this time, the standard development process requirement level is set for each practice, and evaluation results such as “Implementation level is appropriate” and “Implementation level is low” are obtained depending on whether or not the level is reached. The application process is adjusted (for example, tailoring, etc.), and the development process is carried out so as to achieve the optimum degree of implementation.

  Here, in the present embodiment, the development process is evaluated with the details up to the CMMI practice as an example. However, the present invention is not limited to this, and may be evaluated with, for example, a task of ISO12207.

  In CMMI, subpractices are set as a more detailed practice, but in the CMMI assessment, practices are evaluated. Therefore, in this embodiment, evaluation is performed in practice units corresponding to the above-described contents. In the present embodiment, the degree of detailed evaluation can be applied as a goal or process area of CMMI.

  Here, in the example of FIG. 4, the current process implementation degree for Practice 1.1.1 and Practice 1.1.2 has reached the required level of the standard development process, and the current process for Practice 1.1.3. The degree of implementation has not reached the standard development process requirements.

  At this time, in the present embodiment, the practice implementation degree (scheduled process implementation degree) that defines how much practice is performed within a certain period (time) is defined as the practice implementation degree. Moreover, when implementing based on the scheduled process implementation degree, since the additional man-hours which should be added in order to achieve a scheduled process implementation degree with respect to the present process implementation degree are required, the said additional man-hour is estimated. Note that the scheduled process performance is set according to the conditions set in the practice definition of the additional man-hour estimation data file 21, for example.

  In addition, when the development process is executed at the planned process implementation level, the deviation from the standard development process requirement level becomes a risk factor. Therefore, in this embodiment, the risk occurrence probability, the influence item, and the degree of influence due to deviation from the required level of the standard development process are estimated. Here, for the estimation, for example, a technique such as Delphi method can be used.

  Here, in this embodiment, as an example of the definition of the impact item and the impact level, for example, the risk impact level definition table of the PMBOK guide shown in Non-Patent Document 1 can be set as a reference. It is not limited to. Next, in this embodiment, the risk impact level is identified from the defined impact items, impact levels, and the like. Also in this case, as a definition example of the risk influence degree, the risk influence degree definition table of the PMBOK guide can be set as a reference in the same manner as described above, but the present invention is not limited to this.

  In this embodiment, since there may be a plurality of influence items, there are, for example, a method using the maximum one or a method using an average value as to which risk influence degree is used. In the embodiment, an example using the maximum one is shown, but the present invention is not limited to this.

  That is, in this embodiment, when the scheduled process execution degree is higher than the current process, that amount is set as the additional man-hour. In the present embodiment, the difference between the scheduled process execution level and the standard development process request is converted into a man-hour as a risk, and the execution degree of the development process is evaluated using the converted risk man-hour and the additional man-hour.

  If the current process implementation level is closer to the required level than the scheduled process execution level, additional man-hours will not occur, so it will be 0 man-days or according to the difference between the current process execution level and the scheduled process execution level. Evaluation can also be performed as a negative value (for example, −3 man-days).

<About each file and table in this embodiment>
Here, each file (additional man-hour estimation data file 21, risk data file 22) and table (risk influence degree table 23, man-hour conversion table 24) in the above-described embodiment will be specifically described.

<Additional man-hour estimation data file 21>
FIG. 5 is a diagram showing a specific example of the additional man-hour estimation data file in the present embodiment. The additional man-hour estimation data file 21 shown in FIG. 5 is configured to have “practice”, “practice name”, “practice definition”, “additional man-hour”, and the like as items.

  Practices are CMMI practices numbered. Here, in this embodiment, the practice is configured by concatenating three types of numerical values with “.”, And the first numerical value (leftmost) is a serial number assigned to the CMMI process. The second numerical value (center) and the third numerical value (rightmost) are numbers assigned to CMMI specific practices.

  The practices stored in the additional man-hour estimation data file 21 may be, for example, all CMMI practices, or may be practices that have been narrowed down in advance, such as practices up to CMMI maturity level 3. It can be arbitrarily set according to

  In the practice name, the name of the process area and the title of the practice are described. In addition, the practice definition shows how to implement each practice. In addition, additional man-hours are set according to the contents described in this practice definition. Specifically, as shown in Practice 1.1.1 and 1.1.2, when “implemented according to the standard process” is defined, there is no additional man-hours and 0 man-days. In addition, as shown in Practice 1.1.3, the case where “a third party does not participate in change management or change audits and requires new approval from the project leader” is set. In this case, the man-hour (for example, 12 man-days) set according to the defined contents is set to “addition man-hour”.

  That is, in the present embodiment, the additional man-hour is set based on the practice definition content.

<Risk data file 22>
Next, a specific example of the risk data file 22 in the present embodiment will be described with reference to the drawings. FIG. 6 is a diagram showing a specific example of the risk data file in the present embodiment. The risk data file 22 shown in FIG. 6 is configured to have “practice”, “practice name”, “influence item”, “risk occurrence probability”, “influence degree”, and the like as items.

  In “practice” and “practice name”, data similar to the above-described additional man-hour estimation data file 21 is stored. The influence item describes the content corresponding to each item set for the “influence degree” in the risk influence degree table 23 described later. The risk occurrence probability is set based on the degree of influence for each affected item. The risk occurrence probability may store a value directly input by a user or the like.

  Here, in the example of FIG. 6, the influence item is the cost, delivery date, range, and quality. However, in the present invention, at least one of them may be used, and other items may be used. As other examples, there are, for example, “engineering”, “development environment”, “project constraint”, etc., as risk categories corresponding to the affected items.

  Furthermore, the impact items under the conditions of “engineering” include requirements (stability, completeness, clarity, validity, feasibility, presence / absence of precedent, scale, requirement review), design (functionality / specifications, difficulty) , Interface, performance, testability, hardware constraints, diversion / modification / purchasing software, specification review), production and unit test (feasibility / specification, test, coding / implementation, code review), integration and test (environment, One or more can be selected from integration test, system test, experimental data evaluation, demo / PR), technical remarks (maintenability, reliability, safety, security, .MMI, specification), etc.

  In addition, the impact items under the conditions of the “development environment” include the development process (development plan, suitability, progress management, affinity, configuration management, development end / end), development system (capacity, adaptability / introduction, (Operability, performance, reliability, system support, delivery possibility), project organization system (management plan, project organization / system, management experience, project manager), management method (progress management / schedule, personnel management / education, quality assurance) -One or more can be selected from verification / validation check, configuration management, problem / risk management, subcontract management), work environment (attitude toward quality, joint work, communication, morale).

  In addition, impact items in “project constraints” include resources / estimates (processes, personnel, budget / work scope / change requests, equipment, scale), contracts (contract types, constraints, dependencies), project interface ( One or more can be selected from customers / business developments, business partners, subcontractors, suppliers / purchasing / free software, corporate management, vendors, political factors, etc.

  In addition, when there is a risk occurrence probability for each of a plurality of affected items in each practice, in the calculation of the risk man-hour in the risk man-hour conversion means 13, for example, the risk occurrence probability with the highest risk occurrence probability or the average for each practice Risk occurrence probabilities can be used. Moreover, you may set suitably for every practice about which risk occurrence probability is applied. Specifically, for example, in the case of practice 1.1.1, the risk occurrence probability of the cost is used as the influence item, and in the case of practice 1.1.2, the risk occurrence probability of quality is used.

<Risk impact table 23>
Next, a specific example of the risk impact table 23 in the present embodiment will be described with reference to the drawings. FIG. 7 is a diagram showing a specific example of the risk impact table in the present embodiment. The risk impact level table 23 shown in FIG. 7 is configured to include “impact level”, “cost”, “delivery date”, “range”, “quality”, and the like as items.

  In the example of FIG. 7, the risk influence degree is set in five stages, and the influence degree of each stage is defined for “cost”, “delivery date”, “range”, and “quality”. This can be defined, for example, corresponding to the risk impact degree definition table described in Non-Patent Document 1, but is not limited to this in the present invention, and other indicators are referred to. Alternatively, a customized definition may be made according to the organizational structure or the number of people who execute the project. In addition, the delivery date 0 of the influence degree 1 in FIG. 7 has shown that there is no period extension.

<Effect conversion table 24>
Next, a specific example of the manhour conversion table 24 in the present embodiment will be described with reference to the drawings. FIG. 8 is a diagram showing a specific example of the man-hour conversion table in the present embodiment. The man-hour conversion table 24 shown in FIG. 8 has a project estimation table shown in FIG. 8A and a man-hour conversion table classified by risk impact shown in FIG. 8B.

  The project estimation table shown in FIG. 8A is configured to have items such as “project man-hour”, “project period”, “monthly sales increase (man-hour conversion)”, and the like. The project man-hour stores the project man-hour of the project when applied to a predetermined project. Also, the project period corresponding to the project man-hour is stored. The monthly sales increase (in terms of man-hours) stores an estimated value of the man-hour converted value of the increase in sales per month. In other words, the increase in sales per month (in terms of man-hours) is the amount of increase in sales expected when a developed product is put on the market converted into the man-hours per month. The project estimate table described above may be set for each project. In this case, identification information for identifying each project is also stored in the project estimate table.

  Here, for example, when setting a planned process execution degree that balances costs for a plurality of projects in an organization or the like, a model project is set in advance and the model project data is stored.

  8B is a table for storing values for converting the risk impact into the man-hour and the period, and items “risk impact” and “conversion” are items. “Effect ratio”, “Conversion period ratio”, “Loss cost (converted to man-hour)”, and the like. Note that the “conversion man-hour ratio” and the “conversion period ratio” with respect to the “risk impact degree” shown in FIG. 8B are examples, and the present invention is not limited to this and can be arbitrarily set. .

  The conversion man-hour ratio stores the ratio of the increased number of processes due to the risk of the project man-hour with respect to the risk influence degree. The conversion period ratio stores the ratio of the extension period due to the risk of the project period with respect to the risk impact degree. The loss cost (in man-hour conversion) stores a value obtained by converting the loss cost due to the risk into man-hours with respect to the risk influence degree.

<Processing Procedure in Risk Impact Determination Unit 12>
Next, the risk influence degree determination processing procedure in the risk influence degree determination means 12 will be specifically described with reference to the drawings. FIG. 9 is a flowchart illustrating an example of a risk impact determination process procedure according to the present embodiment. In the process shown in FIG. 9, first, the risk data file 22 is read (S11), and the risk impact table 23 is read (S12).

  Next, the influence item and the degree of influence are associated with the risk influence degree table for each practice of the risk data file 22, and the influence degree regarding the cost, delivery date, range, and quality of the influence item is obtained (S13). Thereafter, the cost, delivery date, range, and quality are selected from those having the greatest impact (S14). Further, at least one of cost, delivery date, range, and quality is determined using the numerical value of the degree of influence, and the maximum risk occurrence probability is adopted (S15). Note that the method of adopting the risk occurrence probability is not limited to this, and, for example, an average value of the risk occurrence probabilities for each affected item may be taken. The risk occurrence probability obtained in this way is used for man-hour calculation in risk man-hour conversion processing described later.

  Thereafter, it is determined whether or not all the practices are completed (S16). If the practices are not completed (NO in S16), the process returns to S13 and the subsequent processes are performed for the other (next) practices. Further, when all the practices are completed in the process of S16 (YES in S16), the risk impact determination process is terminated.

<Risk Man-hour Conversion Processing Procedure in Risk Man-hour Conversion Unit 13>
Next, the risk man-hour conversion processing procedure in the risk man-hour converting means 13 will be specifically described with reference to the drawings. FIG. 10 is a flowchart showing an example of the risk man-hour conversion processing procedure in the present embodiment. In the process shown in FIG. 10, first, the risk data file 22 is read (S21), and the man-hour conversion table 24 is read (S22).

  Next, for example, for each practice of the risk data file 22, the risk is converted into man-hours (S23), and among all the man-hour calculations, for example, the largest value is set as the risk man-hour (S24). In the present embodiment, the present invention is not limited to this. For example, an average value of all man-hour calculations may be used as the risk man-hour.

  Thereafter, it is determined whether or not all the practices are completed (S25), and if not completed (NO in S25), the process returns to the process of S23, and the subsequent processes are performed for the other (next) practices. If all practices are completed in the process of S25 (YES in S25), the risk man-hour conversion process is terminated.

  Here, the calculation of the man-hours in the processing of S23 is, for example, “man-hour calculation 1 = risk occurrence probability × conversion man-hour ratio of risk impact degree × project man-hour”, “man-hour calculation 2 = risk occurrence probability × conversion period of risk influence degree” Ratio × sales increase per month (in man-hour conversion) × project period ”,“ man-hour calculation 3 = risk occurrence probability × loss cost (in man-hour conversion) ”, etc. can be used. Of the man-hour calculation 2 and the man-hour calculation 3, the largest one can be set as the risk man-hour.

<Risk man-hour calculation method>
Here, the calculation of the risk man-hour in the risk man-hour converting means 13 will be specifically described. The risk man-hour in the present embodiment is calculated by converting the risk value into man-hour. That is, the mathematical formula is “risk value = f (risk occurrence probability, risk influence degree)”. Here, f indicates addition, multiplication, a function based on an operation table, and the like. In the embodiment, the multiplication is shown.

  Here, as a method of converting the risk value into the man-hour in this embodiment, “the method of converting from the man-hour of the project by the man-hour conversion ratio corresponding to the risk influence degree (man-hour calculation 1)”, “the risk influence from the project period” One or a plurality of conversion methods are used among “a method of converting by a period conversion ratio corresponding to the degree (man-hour calculation 2)” and “a method of converting loss cost corresponding to the risk impact degree to man-hour (man-hour calculation 3)”. To calculate risk man-hours.

  Here, as a method of converting from the man-hours of the project, for example, a quantitative value (cost increase XX%) of the cost influence in the risk influence degree of the PMBOK guide can be used. In addition, the method of converting from the project period is based on the shipment of the developed product, for example, using the quantitative value (period extension XX%) of the impact on delivery date in the risk impact level of the PMBOK Guide and converting the period into man-hours. The amount of increase in sales per month (in terms of man-hours) can be used. For example, if the amount of increase in sales per month is 10 million yen, assuming that 1 million yen per person per month, the man-hour conversion value becomes 10 person months.

  In addition, as a method for converting the loss cost into the man-hour, for example, a method in which the cost due to remodeling after shipment or customer service due to the deterioration of the quality or the development range is converted into the man-hour can be used. For example, when the loss cost is 10 million yen, if the cost per person per month is 1 million yen, the man-hour converted value is 10 man-months. From the above, the following manhour calculation is shown in the examples.

The man-hour calculation 1 is a calculation formula that converts the risk occurrence probability and the risk influence degree into costs and converts them into man-hours.
Man-hour calculation 1 = Risk occurrence probability x Risk impact conversion man-hour ratio x Project man-hours Also, man-hour calculation 2 is a calculation that converts risk occurrence probability and risk impact into periods, converts them into monetary amounts, and converts them into man-hours Specifically, the following expression is obtained.
Man-hour calculation 2 = Risk occurrence probability × Risk impact conversion period ratio × Monthly sales increase (man-hour conversion) × Project period Furthermore, man-hour calculation 3 converts risk occurrence probability and risk impact into man-hours corresponding to loss costs. This is a calculation formula, specifically, the following formula.
Effort calculation 3 = Risk occurrence probability x Loss cost (Equipment conversion)
In addition, about the comparison by the said man-hour calculation result, in an Example, the result of man-hour calculation 1, man-hour calculation 2, and man-hour calculation 3 can be compared and a larger one can be employ | adopted. Further, in the embodiment, as the risk man-hour, man-hour calculation 1, man-hour calculation 2 and man-hour calculation 3 can be compared and the larger one can be adopted, but there are also a method of employing an average value or a method of comparing by weighting. .

  In other words, in the present embodiment, when the risk man-hour conversion means 13 converts the risk into man-hours to obtain the risk man-hour, the project man-hour and the project period, the expected increase in sales per month due to the shipment of the developed product, are assumed. Risk man-hours can be obtained by converting from the loss cost.

  Here, when the above-described data example is applied to the above-described man-hour conversion processing procedure, in the case of the practice 1.1.3 of the risk data file 22, the risk influence degree “quality” is the influence degree 4 from the risk influence degree table 23. Since it is the largest, the manhour calculation using the manhour conversion table 24 is as follows.

Man-hour calculation 1 = 60% × 30% × 40 man-days = 144 man-days (Note that one man-month = 20 man-days)
Man-hour calculation 2 = 60% × 15% × 4 man-months × 12 months = 86.4 man-days (1 man-month = 20 man-days)
Man-hour calculation 3 = 60% × 16 man-months = 192 man-days (1 man-month = 20 man-days)
Therefore, the maximum value of the results of the man-hour calculation 1, the man-hour calculation 2, and the man-hour calculation 3 is adopted, and the risk man-hour is 192 man-days.

<Evaluation processing procedure in evaluation means 14>
Next, an evaluation processing procedure in the evaluation unit 14 will be described with reference to the drawings. FIG. 11 is a flowchart illustrating an example of an evaluation processing procedure in the present embodiment. In the process shown in FIG. 11, first, the additional man-hour estimation data file 21 is read (S31), and the man-hour calculated by the risk man-hour conversion process for each practice is compared with the additional man-hour (S32).

  Next, it is determined whether or not the additional man-hour is equal to or greater than the risk man-hour (S33). If the additional man-hour is not equal to or greater than the risk man-hour (NO in S33), that is, if the additional man-hour is smaller than the risk man-hour, It is evaluated that the implementation level of the development process is low (S34).

  Moreover, in the process of S33, when the additional man-hour is more than the risk man-hour (YES in S33), for example, it is evaluated that the implementation degree of the development process is appropriate (S35).

  Thereafter, it is determined whether or not all the practices are completed (S36), and if not completed (NO in S36), the process returns to the process of S32, and the subsequent processes are performed for the other (next) practices. If all the practices are completed in the process of S36 (YES in S36), the evaluation process is terminated.

  In the evaluation processing procedure in the evaluation means 14 described above, the evaluation is performed by comparing the additional man-hours and the risk man-hours for each practice, and when the additional man-hours is equal to or higher than the risk man-hours, a method that makes the implementation degree of the development process appropriate is used. ing. This means that the cost / risk balance was assessed as appropriate. Note that the evaluation method in the present invention is not limited to this. For example, a method of evaluating by adding a coefficient or the like set in advance to risk man-hours (for example, “addition man-hour” and “risk man-hour × coefficient” And the like) can also be used.

<Example of evaluation results>
Next, an example of evaluation results in this embodiment will be described. FIG. 12 is a diagram illustrating an example of an evaluation result in the present embodiment. The evaluation results shown in FIG. 12 are configured to include “practice”, “practice name”, “practice definition”, “addition man-hour”, “risk man-hour”, “evaluation result”, and the like as items.

  The practices are arranged in the same order as the risk data file 22 and the like. The practice name, the practice definition, and the additional man-hour are the same as the practice name of the additional man-hour estimation data file 21. The risk man-hour stores the risk man-hour that is the result of the risk man-hour conversion process described above.

  The evaluation result stores the processing result of the above-described evaluation processing procedure. In the example of FIG. 12, the evaluation result for each practice is shown. However, the present invention is not limited to this, and the overall evaluation may be stored using the evaluation results of a plurality of practices. .

  Specifically, in the evaluation means 14, for example, when there are three or more practices that are evaluated to have a low implementation level among all practices, the evaluation unit 14 evaluates that the implementation level is low as a comprehensive evaluation, Make the worst evaluation as a comprehensive evaluation, and if the practice evaluated as low implementation is more than 20% of the total, make an evaluation such as forcing redesign or tailoring Can do.

  In the present embodiment, the evaluation result shown in FIG. 12 can be output to an output means such as a display of the evaluation apparatus 10 and presented to the user. In this case, as shown in FIG. 12, a highlighted portion by a red letter, a fluorescent marker, blinking, or the like can be performed for a portion having a problem in the evaluation result (for example, “low implementation”).

  In this embodiment, when it is evaluated that the implementation level is low, along with the evaluation result, the corresponding additional man-hours and risk man-hours may be presented to the user, and further advice information for improving the implementation level. Or the like may be stored in advance in the storage means of the evaluation device 10 and the user may be presented with advice information corresponding to the values of the additional man-hours and risk man-hours.

  As described above, according to the present invention, it is possible to improve the evaluation accuracy of the development process execution degree. Specifically, in the present invention, the item to be applied in actual development is defined as the scheduled process performance level with respect to the item that details the standard development process, and the cost balance is achieved using the defined scheduled process performance level. Evaluate whether it is removed. Thereby, the scheduled process performance is adjusted for each practice based on the obtained evaluation result, and the process with the optimal performance can be performed. Therefore, according to the present invention, appropriate process improvement can be carried out, which can contribute to quality improvement, delivery time reduction, and productivity improvement.

  In addition, according to the present invention, when converting risk into risk man-hours, the development man-hours and the project period are converted into risk man-hours, thereby providing not only the increased development cost risk but also the developed ones to the market. It is possible to appropriately evaluate the risk due to the postponement of the time, and the loss cost after shipment caused by the deterioration of quality and the reduction of the development range, and the accuracy of the evaluation can be improved.

  The present invention can be widely applied not only to the field of, for example, power electronics products but also to other product development process technologies for other developed products.

  The preferred embodiments of the present invention have been described in detail above, but the present invention is not limited to such specific embodiments, and various modifications, within the scope of the gist of the present invention described in the claims, It can be changed.

DESCRIPTION OF SYMBOLS 10 Evaluation apparatus 11 Analysis means 12 Risk influence degree determination means 13 Risk man-hour conversion means 14 Evaluation means 21 Additional man-hour estimation data file 22 Risk data file 23 Risk influence degree table 24 Man-hour conversion table 31 Input device 32 Output device 33 Drive device 34 Auxiliary Storage device 35 Memory device 36 CPU (Central Processing Unit)
37 Network connection device 38 Recording medium

Claims (11)

In an evaluation device that evaluates the implementation level of development processes based on development risks,
A risk impact degree judging means for judging a risk impact degree in the development process based on risk data for the scheduled process execution degree and a risk impact degree for each development risk set in advance;
From the determination result obtained by the risk impact determination means, risk man-hour conversion means for calculating the risk man-hour using one or more preset conversion formulas;
Comparing a risk man-hour obtained by the risk man-hour converting means with an additional man-hour added to the development process at the present time, and having an evaluation means for evaluating whether the implementation degree of the development process is appropriate An evaluation apparatus characterized by. The development process consists of multiple practices,
The risk man-hour conversion means calculates a risk man-hour for each practice,
The evaluation means compares the risk man-hour for each practice obtained by the risk man-hour conversion means with an additional man-hour for each practice in the development process set in advance, and evaluates for each practice. The evaluation apparatus according to claim 1. The evaluation means includes
The evaluation apparatus according to claim 2, wherein comprehensive evaluation is performed using a plurality of evaluation results for each practice. The risk man-hour conversion means is:
A conversion formula for converting from the man-hour of the target project by a man-hour conversion ratio corresponding to the risk impact level, a conversion formula for converting from the project period by a period conversion ratio corresponding to the risk impact level, and the risk impact level The evaluation apparatus according to any one of claims 1 to 3, wherein conversion to the risk man-hour is performed using one or a plurality of conversion expressions among conversion expressions for converting corresponding loss costs into man-hours. . The risk man-hour conversion means is:
The conversion of the man-hour of the target project, the duration of the project, the estimated increase in sales per month due to the shipment of the developed product, and the assumed loss cost into the risk man-hour is performed. The evaluation apparatus according to any one of the above. In the evaluation method for evaluating the implementation level of the development process based on development risk,
A risk impact determination step for determining a risk impact in the development process based on risk data for the scheduled process execution level and a risk impact for each development risk set in advance;
From the determination result obtained by the risk impact determination step, a risk man-hour conversion step of calculating a risk man-hour using one or more preset conversion formulas;
Comparing the risk man-hour obtained by the risk man-hour converting step with the additional man-hour added to the development process at the present time, and having an evaluation step for evaluating whether the implementation degree of the development process is appropriate Evaluation method characterized by The development process consists of multiple practices,
The risk man-hour conversion step calculates a risk man-hour for each practice,
The evaluation step compares the risk man-hour for each practice obtained by the risk man-hour conversion step with the additional man-hour for each practice in the development process set in advance, and performs the evaluation for each practice. The evaluation method according to claim 6. The evaluation step includes
The evaluation method according to claim 7, wherein comprehensive evaluation is performed using a plurality of evaluation results for each practice. The risk man-hour conversion step includes
A conversion formula for converting from the man-hour of the target project by a man-hour conversion ratio corresponding to the risk impact level, a conversion formula for converting from the project period by a period conversion ratio corresponding to the risk impact level, and the risk impact level The evaluation method according to any one of claims 6 to 8, wherein conversion to the risk man-hour is performed using one or a plurality of conversion equations among conversion equations for converting corresponding loss costs into man-hours. . The risk man-hour conversion step includes
The conversion of the man-hour of the target project, the period of the project, the estimated increase in sales per month due to the shipment of the developed product, and the assumed loss cost into the risk man-hour is performed. The evaluation method according to any one of the above items. Computer
An evaluation program that causes the evaluation apparatus according to any one of claims 1 to 5 to function.

Images