Software factory readiness review

• US 8,296,719 B2
• Filed: 04/13/2007
• Issued: 10/23/2012
• Est. Priority Date: 04/13/2007
• Status: Active Grant

• Current Assignee: GlobalFoundries, Inc.
• Original Assignee: International Business Machines Corporation
• Inventors: Chaar, Jarir K., Finlayson, Ronald D., Jobson, Thomas A. Jr., Mitsumori, Naomi M., Reddington, Francis X.
• Primary Examiner(s): Dao, Thuy
• Assistant Examiner(s): ST LEGER, GEOFFREY R
• Application Number:
  US11/735,152
• Publication Number:
  US 20080255693A1
• Time in Patent Office: 2,020 Days
• Field of Search: None
• US Class Current: 717/103
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 10/00 Administration; Management

Abstract

A computer-implemented method, system, and computer-readable medium for determining if a software factory is ready to take on a software project is presented. In a preferred embodiment, the computer-implemented method includes the steps of: receiving a software project proposal including a custom software description describing a specific project type of the software project; determining, by a computer processor, that the software project proposal is qualified for acceptance by a software factory, utilizing a scorecard for the specific project type, wherein the scorecard provides a maturity assessment of resources required and identifies any potential choke-points for the specific project type; and in response to a determination that the software project proposal is qualified for acceptance by the software factory, the software factory undertaking the software project proposal.

Claims

1. A computer-implemented method for delivering custom software, comprising:

receiving a software project proposal including a custom software description describing a specific project type of the software project;

determining, by a computer processor, that the software project proposal is qualified for acceptance by a software factory, utilizing a scorecard for the specific project type, wherein the scorecard provides a maturity assessment of resources required and identifies any potential choke-points for the specific project type; and

in response to a determination that the software project proposal is qualified for acceptance by the software factory, the software factory undertaking the software project proposal by;

obtaining a plurality of work packets for the software project, wherein each of the plurality of work packets is associated with a functional area of the custom software and comprises software code and operating instructions,

assembling, by the computer processor, the plurality of work packets to obtain deliverable software, and

delivering the deliverable software to a customer,

wherein the software project proposal is determined to be qualified for acceptance by the software factory in response to a determination that the resources required are available and a determination that no potential choke-points are found,

wherein the software factory comprises;

a software factory governance section that evaluates the software project proposal for acceptance by the software factory,

a design center composed of a requirements analysis team and an architecture team, wherein the design center sections the software project proposal into major functional areas that are to be handled by the requirements analysis team and the architecture team, and wherein the design center creates the work packets, and

an assembly line that receives and executes the work packets to create the deliverable software.

2. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the assembly line further comprises:

a published set of services and a published set of requirements for the assembly line, wherein the published set of services and the published set of requirements for the assembly line are published to the design center, and wherein the published set of services describes what assembly services for assembling work packets are offered by the assembly line, and wherein the published set of requirements describes what execution environment must be used by work packets that are provided by the design center for assembly in the assembly line.

3. The computer-implemented method of claim 2, wherein the work packets include governance procedures, standards, reused assets, work packet instructions, integration strategy, schedules, exit criteria and artifact checklist templates for Input/Output routines.

4. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the assembly line includes software that automatically recognizes a project type for the software project proposal, and wherein the assembly line assembles the work packets into the deliverable software in accordance with the project type that is recognized by the assembly line.

5. The computer-implemented method of claim 1, wherein the assembly line conducts an integration test, a system test, a system integration test and a performance test of the deliverable software, wherein the integration test tests the deliverable software for compatibility with a client'"'"'s system, the system test checks the client'"'"'s system to ensure that the client'"'"'s system is operating properly, the system integration test tests for bugs that may arise when the deliverable software is integrated into the client'"'"'s system, and the performance test tests the deliverable software for defects as it is executing in the client'"'"'s system.

6. A system, comprising:

a processor;

a data bus coupled to the processor;

a memory coupled to the data bus; and

a tangible computer-readable medium embodying computer program code therein, comprising instructions executable by the processor and configured for delivering custom software by causing the processor to;

receive a software project proposal including a custom software description describing a specific project type of the software project;

determine that the software project proposal is qualified for acceptance by a software factory, utilizing a scorecard for the specific project type, wherein the scorecard provides a maturity assessment of resources required and identifies any potential choke-points for the specific project type; and

in response to a determination that the software project proposal is qualified for acceptance by the software factory, undertake the software project proposal by;

obtaining a plurality of work packets for the software project, wherein each of the plurality of work packets is associated with a functional area of the custom software and comprises software code and operating instructions,

assembling the plurality of work packets to obtain deliverable software, and

delivering the deliverable software to a customer,

wherein the software project proposal is determined to be qualified for acceptance by the software factory in response to a determination that the resources required are available, and a determination that no potential choke-points are found,

wherein the software factory comprises;

a software factory governance section that evaluates the software project proposal for acceptance by the software factory,

a design center composed of a requirements analysis team and an architecture team, wherein the design center sections the software project proposal into major functional areas that are to be handled by the requirements analysis team and the architecture team, and wherein the design center creates the work packets, and

an assembly line that receives and executes the work packets to create the deliverable software.

7. The system of claim 6, wherein the design center further comprises:

a requirements analysis team, wherein the requirements analysis team is responsible for determining system requirements for executing the deliverable software on a customer'"'"'s system; and

an architectural team, wherein the architectural team models the software project proposal in accordance with customer constraints, and wherein the architectural team bundles the customer constraints together with the work packets for execution in the assembly line.

8. The system of claim 7, wherein the work packets include governance procedures, standards, reused assets, work packet instructions, integration strategy, schedules, exit criteria and artifact checklist templates for Input/Output routines.

9. The system of claim 6, wherein the assembly line includes software that automatically recognizes a project type for the software project proposal, and wherein the assembly line assembles the work packets into the deliverable software in accordance with the project type that is recognized by the assembly line.

10. The system of claim 6, wherein the assembly line conducts an integration test, a system test, a system integration test and a performance test of the deliverable software, wherein the integration test tests the deliverable software for compatibility with a client'"'"'s system, the system test checks the client'"'"'s system to ensure that the client'"'"'s system is operating properly, the system integration test tests for bugs that may arise when the deliverable software is integrated into the client'"'"'s system, and the performance test tests the deliverable software for defects as it is executing in the client'"'"'s system.

11. A tangible non-transitory computer-readable medium comprising computer readable code therein, comprising instructions executable by a processor and configured to:

receive a software project proposal including a custom software description describing a specific project type of the software project;

determine that the software project proposal is qualified for acceptance by a software factory, utilizing a scorecard for the specific project type, wherein the scorecard provides a maturity assessment of resources required and identifies any potential choke-points for the specific project type; and

in response to a determination that the software project proposal is qualified for acceptance by the software factory, the software factory undertaking the software project proposal by the instructions causing the processor to;

obtain a plurality of work packets for the software project, wherein each of the plurality of work packets is associated with a functional area of the custom software and comprises software code and operating instructions,

assemble, by the computer processor, the plurality of work packets to obtain deliverable software, and

deliver the deliverable software to a customer,

wherein the software project proposal is determined to be qualified for acceptance by the software factory in response to a determination that the resources required are available, and a determination that no potential choke-points are found,

wherein the software factory comprises;

a software factory governance section that evaluates the software project proposal for acceptance by the software factory,

a design center composed of a requirements analysis team and an architecture team, wherein the design center sections the software project proposal into major functional areas that are to be handled by the requirements analysis team and the architecture team, and wherein the design center creates the work packets, and

an assembly line that receives and executes the work packets to create the deliverable software.

12. The tangible non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 11, wherein the design center further comprises:

a requirements analysis team, wherein the requirements analysis team is responsible for determining system requirements for executing the deliverable software on a customer'"'"'s system; and

an architectural team, wherein the architectural team models the software project proposal in accordance with customer constraints, and wherein the architectural team bundles the customer constraints together with the work packets for execution in the assembly line.

13. The tangible non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 12, wherein the work packets include governance procedures, standards, reused assets, work packet instructions, integration strategy, schedules, exit criteria and artifact checklist templates for Input/Output routines.

14. The tangible non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 11, wherein the assembly line includes software that automatically recognizes a project type for the software project proposal, and wherein the assembly line assembles the work packets into the deliverable software in accordance with the project type that is recognized by the assembly line.

15. The tangible non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 11, wherein the assembly line conducts an integration test, a system test, a system integration test and a performance test of the deliverable software, wherein the integration test tests the deliverable software for compatibility with a client'"'"'s system, the system test checks the client'"'"'s system to ensure that the client'"'"'s system is operating properly, the system integration test tests for bugs that may arise when the deliverable software is integrated into the client'"'"'s system, and the performance test tests the deliverable software for defects as it is executing in the client'"'"'s system.

16. The tangible non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 11, wherein the tangible non-transitory computer-readable medium is a component of a remote server, and wherein the computer executable instructions are deployable to a supervisory computer from the remote server.

17. The tangible non-transitory computer-readable medium of claim 11, wherein the computer executable instructions are capable of being provided by a service provider to the customer on an on-demand basis.