lean re pres rudorfer vector forum v1

Lean Requirements Engineering:Lean Requirements Engineering:ExperiencespVector Industry Forum 2011June 30, 2011

© Siemens AG 2011. All rights reserved.

Contents

Goals Goals

Brief look on Siemens

Project syngo.via

Business challengesBusiness challenges

Lean Requirements Engineering

Results and Summary

Further Information

Arnold Rudorfer, Siemens AG Healthcare Sector I&T SY© Siemens AG 2011. All rights reserved.

G lGoals

Provide an overview of Provide an overview of requirements engineering challenges in a medical platform projectproject

Apply lean approaches to requirements engineering and project management

Introduce lean requirements engineering to cope with theengineering to cope with the challenges

Show lessons learned and achieved benefitsachieved benefits


Contents

Goals Goals

Brief look on Siemens Healthcare

Project syngo.via



Results and Summary

Further Information


Siemens HealthcareTHE I t t d H lth CTHE Integrated Healthcare Company

in-vivo diagnostics (imaging)

X-Ray ComputedTomography

MagneticResonance

MolecularImaging

Ultrasound Oncology

in vitro diagnostics (laboratory systems)

Tomography Resonance Imaging

syngo.via

in-vitro diagnostics (laboratory systems)

Immunodiagnostics Clinical ChemistryNucleid AcidTesting

Hematology Lab AutomationUrinAnalysis

Near PatientTesting


Siemens HealthcareD l t f S l d E l N b

Sales according to region1)

Development of Sales and Employee Numbers

Germany9%

Sales according to region1)

0 7 0.9

Europe (without Germany)

31%

Asia & Australia17%

0.9 1.0 1.10.7

A i

Employees according to region2)

Germany

0.9 1.0 1.1

Americas43%

Asia & Australia17%

Europe(without Germany)

19%

Germany23%

Americas%

11.49.7 11.3


1) Basis: FY 2009 acc. To customer locations. 2) Figures worldwide as of Sept. 30, 2009 41%

Contents

Goals

Contents

Goals Goals

Brief look on Siemens and Vector

Goals


Project syngo.via

Business challenges

Project syngo.via



Business challenges


Results and Summary

Further Information

Results and Summary

Further Information


Disclaimer:Disclaimer:

The content discussed in this presentation needs

to be considered as work in progressto be considered as work in progress.


P j t i P d tProject: syngo.via Product

Project Overview

syngo.via: Next generation imaging soft are for the entireimaging software for the entire reading process

Project data: > 5,000 single product requirements Several millions lines of code

C++/C#

Project data:

Several hundred developers in many locations

Clinical applications for Radiology, PACS X Ray CT PET/SPECTPACS, X-Ray, CT, PET/SPECT, Oncology, Particle Therapy and MR can be developed


Example: syngo.mCT OncologyWh l O l W kflWhole Oncology Workflow

Automated Case Preparation Multi-Modality AccessDisease-Oriented ReadingAutomated Case Preparation Multi Modality AccessDisease Oriented Reading

Automated bone and bloodpool removal

Automated sorting of images, etc.

Image fusion for CT, PET, and MR images, etc.

Preferred layout applied Automated lesion segmentation Automatic loading of prior exams, etc.

Arnold Rudorfer, Siemens AG Healthcare Sector I&T SY© Siemens AG 2011. All rights reserved.Courtesy of University Hospital of Munich-Grosshadern/ Munich, Germany

H IM SY© Siemens AG 2011. All rights reserved.

syngo.mCT Oncology is cleared in the U.S. with syngo.PET&CT Oncology.

Contents

Goals

Contents

Goals Goals


Goals


Project syngo.via

Business challenges

Project syngo.via



Business challenges


Results and Summary

Further Information

Results and Summary

Further Information


B i Ch llBusiness Challenges

Industry regulations

Cycle time down

Industry regulations

Cycle time down

ComplexityComplexity

Need to industrialize

product

Costs down Complexity growth

Need to industrialize

product

Costs down Complexity growth

product development

product development

Focus of this talk

Application Life-cycleManagement Tools

Model-basedEngineering

PlatformsApplication Life-cycle

Management ToolsLean Requirements

EngineeringGlobally Integrated

Platforms


Globally IntegratedClinical Workflows

Contents

Goals

Contents

Goals Goals


Goals


Project syngo.via

Business challenges

Project syngo.via



Business challenges


Results and Summary

Further Information

Results and Summary

Further Information


RE Issues in the ProjectF i i i t t l k tFour pressing pain-points to look at …

3.V-model style life-cycle does not allow for flexible adaptations

1.Engineering artifact structure does not facilitate market valuation

4.High manual effort for traceability and auditability

2.Complex architecture cannot be controlled by product management


Pain point 1: Engineering artifact structure does t f ilit t k t l tinot facilitate market valuation

S Solutions:

A. Feature Model

Selected issues: Domain model for imaging

platform partially completeS f l l i B. Value-based Ranking of

Features Scope for release planning

difficult to define Need to short development

lifecycle outdated requirements


lifecycle – outdated requirements

S l ti A F t M d lSolution A: Feature Model

Highest Level B fiHighest Level Benefits: Higher level abstraction of grouping of

requirements into sellable units: From 5,000

product requirements to 800+ features

(factor ~ 6)

Visual domain model for healthcare

Graphical View

workflows (tree & graphical)

Reduction of (de-) scoping effort by ~ 30% (*)

Reduction in time to understand aspects ofReduction in time to understand aspects of

the system

Hierarchical relationships enable mapping of

stakeholder requests and visualize

Hi hi l Vi

stakeholder requests and visualize

dependencies

Basis for introducing variability management

F d th d t b kl


Hierarchical View Feeds the product backlog(*) Source: Estimates from product managers

S l ti B V l b d R ki f F tSolution B: Value-based Ranking of Features

Characteristics:Characteristics: Ranking is used to determine the release

backlog Main criteria for ranking are business value,Main criteria for ranking are business value,

technical risk and effort

Benefits: Only features with the highest business

value (and feasibility) are implemented Feature independence assures

parallelization of development Simulation of optimal release plan (what-

if analysis)if analysis)


Pain point 2: Complex architecture cannot be t ll d b d t tcontrolled by product management

Selected issues:Solutions:

C. Architecture Model Mapping

Selected issues: Business needs not consistently linked to

features/ requirements; dependencies between features not easily visible

D. Graphical Modeling of Clinical Workflows

y Too much variability in software

architecture Lack of a clear ranking of requirements

according to business value


according to business value

S l ti C A hit t M d l M iSolution C: Architecture Model Mapping

Characteristics:F Feature Model Characteristics: Identifies links between features and their

implementation Explicit modeling of variability in the

F

F F F

Feature Model

Explicit modeling of variability in the architecture

Benefits:

SWF SWF SWF SWF SWF SWF SWF

S Architecture Model

Benefits: Architectural decisions motivated by features

and product-line variability

Enable reduction of architectural complexity

SS SS SS

C C C C C C

Enable reduction of architectural complexity

Support impact analysis for (de-) scoping sessions

Early identification of architectural risks

Improved accuracy of early effort estimates

Reduction of number of scoping sessions


Reduction of number of scoping sessions

Solution D: Graphical Modeling of Clinical W kfl

Characteristics:

Workflows

Characteristics: Used to describe clinical workflows that

consist of a collection of steps in a defined sequence together withdefined sequence together with accompanying specification of pre-/post-conditions, business rules, performance aspects, etc.

Benefits:

Increase expressiveness of clinical kfl t d ib d i b h iworkflows to describe dynamic behaviors

Early analysis of stakeholder requests from customers; joint modeling sessions to d ib th d f th t ‘describe the needs from the customer‘s point of view Reduction of review times due to visual

approach (~ 40%) (*)


approach (~ -40%) (*)

(*) Source: Estimates from product managers

Pain point 3: V-model style life-cycle does not ll f fl ibl d t tiallow for flexible adaptations

S l tiSelected issues to deal with: Solutions

E. Incremental Requirements Engineering and Project

Selected issues to deal with: V-model life-cycle provides visibility

on milestones but does not allow for stepwise refinement g g j

Managementfor stepwise refinement Late changes of features due to

customer and market inputs create high rework


high rework

Solution E: Incremental Requirements Engineering d P j t M tand Project Management

From Feature ModelFrom Feature Model

Characteristics:Hi h l l f t l b t d

Benefits:

Mi 25% d ti f f t High-level features are elaborated when needed – just enough specification before implementation

Min. 25% reduction of upfront requirement engineering work, just-in-time (*) Elimination of unnecessary hand offsimplementation

Top-ranked features will be refined & assigned for implementation

Elimination of unnecessary hand-offs between development roles ~ 20% reduction of life-cycle time

through concurrent engineering (**)


through concurrent engineering ( )(**) Source: Experience of agile clinical/ financial information systems projects(*) Source: MS Team Foundation Server Business Case, May 2010

Lean Requirements Engineering and Project M tManagement


Process-Adaption: F V M d l t A il D l tFrom V-Model to Agile Development

Old“ V Model Process„Old V-Model Process

I l t ti

D2 D3 D4

S ifi ti T t S tImplementation

N “ A il P

Specification+ Plan

DesignInput

Test+ Repair

System-test

ITStart Commit Accept

ITEndD2 D3 D4

„New“ Agile Process

Commit AcceptD2 D3 D4

Plan Implementation+ Test + Repair

Test+ Repair

System-test

DesignInput

Feasibility

D

p Repair test


DonenessReadiness

Pain point 4: High manual effort for traceability d dit bilitand auditability

Selected solution(s):

F. Structure-based tracing of

Selected issues to deal with: Key-based tracing creates a high

manual effort Not all traces relate to requirements F. Structure based tracing of

features and requirements Not all traces relate to requirements

content Many trace errors are induced after

change requests


g q

Solution F: Structure-based tracing of featuresd i tand requirements

Characteristics:Characteristics:

Features group one or more requirements in a meaningful waySolution based tracing = Mapping betweenSolution-based tracing = Mapping between features or parent-child relationshipsTracing efforts are combined with reviews and tooling

For feature-oriented RE Benefits:

Effort reduction for tracing

RE:Structure-based tracing, i.e. Mapping between Features and SW Features

Reduction of tracing error rateFor feature-oriented RE:Structure-based tracing, i.e. Parent-child relationship (1:m)


p ( )

Major Changes: RecapL R i t E i iLean Requirements Engineering

Feature Model Feature Model

Value-based Ranking of Features

Graphical Modeling of Clinical Graphical Modeling of Clinical Workflows

Architecture Model Mapping

Incremental Requirements Engineering and Project ManagementManagement


Contents

Goals

Contents

Goals Goals


Goals


Project syngo.via

Business challenges

Project syngo.via



Business challenges


Results and Summary

Further Information

Results and Summary

Further Information


ResultsB i C C t ib ti f LBusiness Case – Contribution of Levers

Description of Benefit Distribution ofDescription of Benefit Distribution of Benefits

uct

ion Tracing with less effort (based on

feature model‘s nature no verticals)25%

Prod

uD

efni

ti feature model s nature, no verticals)More effective stakeholder management (less scoping

sessions, reduction in review times and effort)

g T d i d t f ti lit 23%

Proj

ect

Plan

ning Transparency and easy overview on product functionality 23%

Des

ign Reduction of product complexity (transparent modeling

of product lines and product variability)7%

Test

More effective Testing 45%

Easier bug-fixing


Source: OREA Business Case, February 2011

ResultsB i C NPV P j tiBusiness Case – NPV Projection

Benefits are realized across NPV Projection Benefits are realized across engineering workflows: Product Definition, Project Planning, Design and Testand Test

Break-even reached in 2nd year

Hints for other RE practitioners:Hints for other RE practitioners:

Business case can only be carried out with a complete technical

tconcept

Sensitivity analysis done on risks shows that the effort is worthwhile even when everything goes wrong.


Source: OREA Business Case, February 2011

K T k AKey Take-Aways

S ccessf l platform de elopment req ires a b siness oriented Successful platform development requires a business-oriented Requirements Engineering approach

The introduction of lean Requirements Engineering is a hugeThe introduction of lean Requirements Engineering is a huge organizational change management endeavor

A feature perspective both for organizing requirements facilitates tracing business and market needs to implementation details

Introducing a platform concept means to restructure requirements d li k th t hit t tand link them to architecture components

Continuous assessment and verification of business benefits is necessary to judge what is working and what notnecessary to judge what is working and what not


Contents

Goals

Contents

Goals Goals


Goals


Project syngo.via

Business challenges

Project syngo.via



Business challenges


Results and Summary

Further Information

Results and Summary

Further Information


Documented Experiences and Best Practices f i I d t P j tfrom various Industry Projects

English language:English language:

Software & Systems Requirements E i i I P tiEngineering: In Practice

2009

McGrawHillMcGrawHill

Link to web site McGrawHill


Arnold RudorferDirector Software Initiative and Process ImprovementProcess ImprovementSiemens AG Healthcare Sector

Hartmannstrasse 16D-91052 Erlangen

Phone: +49 9131 – 84 2299Fax: +49 9131 – 84 8691Mobile: +49 174 1537825

E-Mail:[email protected]


[email protected]

lean re pres rudorfer vector forum v1

Documents