Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Dynamic monitoring and control of software project effort based on an effort buffer

  • General Paper
  • Published:
Journal of the Operational Research Society

Abstract

The improvement to the monitoring and control efficiency of software project effort is a challenge for project management research. We propose to overcome this challenge through the use of a model for the buffer determination and monitoring of software project effort. This software project effort buffer was originally determined on the basis of a risk management factor analysis with total consideration for project managers’ risk preference. The effort buffer was next allocated to different stages according to the buffer allocation cardinal. An effort deviation monitoring and control model was then established based on the grey prediction model, including the establishment of a deviation monitoring and control model, a simulation test of the accuracy and the deviation prediction algorithm flow chart. The method system was eventually applied to an actual project and compared with the actual project data. The results show that the relative error test accuracy of the proposed model is qualified according to the test standard of the grey model, signifying that it could be used for the prediction of effort deviation and decision-making. The proposed model could use the dynamic control system to monitor and control software project effort in an effective manner.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abdul-Rahman H, Mohd-Rahim FA and Chen W (2012). Reducing failures in software development projects: Effectiveness of risk mitigation strategies. Journal of Risk Research 15 (4): 417–433.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barki H, Rivard S and Talbot J (2001). An integrative contingency model of software project risk management. Journal of Management Information Systems 17 (2): 37–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bevilacqua M, Ciarapica FE and Giacchetta G (2009). Critical chain and risk analysis applied to high-risk industry maintenance: A case study. International Journal of Project Management 27 (4): 419–432.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bie L and Cui N (2010). Research on dynamic buffer monitoring in critical chain project management. Chinese Journal of Management Science 18 (6): 97–103.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cai C and Wan W (2003). Critical chain project management based on PERT/CPM. Chinese Journal of Management Science 11 (6): 35–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Oliveira M, Lima CM and Guilherme HT (2004). Supporting risks in software project management. The Journal of Systems and Software 70 (1): 21–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fallahd M, Ashtiani B and Aryanezhad MB (2010). Critical chain project scheduling: Utilizing uncertainty for buffer sizing. International Journal of Research and Reviews in Applied Sciences 3 (3): 280–289.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldratt EM (1997). Critical Chain. The North River Press: Great Barrington, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • González V, Alarcón LF and Yiu TW (2013). Integrated methodology to design and manage work-in-process buffers in repetitive building projects. Journal of the Operational Research Society 64 (8): 1182–1193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herman S (2001). An investigation into the fundamentals of critical chain project scheduling. International Journal of Project Management 19 (6): 363–369.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herroelen W and Leus R (2001). On the merits and pitfalls of critical chain scheduling. Journal of Operations Management 19 (5): 559–577.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herroelen W and Leus R (2004). Identification and illumination of popular misconceptions about project scheduling and time buffering in a resource-constrained environment. Journal of the Operational Research Society 56 (1): 102–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Iversen JH, Mathiassen L and Nielsen PA (2004). Managing risk in software process improvement: An action research approach. MIS Quarterly 28 (3): 395–433.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jalote PM (2002). Software Project Management in Practice. Addison-Wesley Professional: New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jiang J and Klein G (2001). Information system success as impacted by risks and development strategies. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 48 (1): 46–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khemakhem MA and Chtourou H (2013). Efficient robustness measures for the resource-constrained project scheduling problem. International Journal of Industrial and Systems Engineering 14 (2): 245–267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuo TC, Chang SH and Huang SN (2009). Due-date performance improvement using TOC’s aggregated time buffer method at a wafer fabrication factory. Expert Systems with Applications 36 (2): 1783–1792.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuo YC and Lu ST (2012). Using fuzzy multiple criteria decision making approach to enhance risk assessment for metropolitan construction projects. International Journal of Project Management 31 (4): 602–614.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leach LP (2005). Critical Chain Project Management. Artech House Inc.: London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu J and Whangbo TK (2012). A study on the buffer sizing method of CCPM technique using statistical analysis. Communications in Computer and Information Science 310 (2): 672–679.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Long LD and Ohsato A (2008). Fuzzy critical chain method for project scheduling under resource constraints and uncertainty. International Journal of Project Management 26 (6): 688–698.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ma G, Li L and Chen Z (2012). Research on the buffer sizing approach in critical chain scheduling in perspective of flexible management. Advances in Intelligent and Soft Computing 143 (3): 61–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mahaney RC and Lederer AL (2009). The role of monitoring and shirking in information systems project management. International Journal of Project Management 28 (1): 14–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newbold RC (1998). Project Management in the Fast Lane—Applying the Theory of Constraints. The St. Lucie Press: Boca Raton, FL.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peng J (2003). Study on Software Project Risk Assessment. Beijing University of Technology: Beijing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rand GK (2000). Critical chain: The theory of constraints applied to project management. International Journal of Project Management 18 (3): 173–177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwalbe K. (2005). Information Technology Project Management. 4th edn Course Technology: Boston, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seo Y-S, Yoon KA and Bae DH (2009). Improving the accuracy of software effort estimation based on multiple least square regression models by estimation error-based data partitioning. IEEE Computer Society 9: 1530–1362.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shan M-Y, Liu Y, Ren B and Zhang R (2009). Research on critical chain buffer based on the perspective of uncertainties. Software Science 8: 26–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shi Q, Wang Y-T and Gong T (2012). An improved approach for project buffer sizing and evaluation. Systems Engineering—Theory & Practice 32 (8): 1739–1746.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steyn H (2002). Project management applications of the theory of the constraints beyond critical chain scheduling. International Journal of Project Management 20 (1): 75–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor H (2006). Risk management and problem resolution strategies for IT projects: Prescription and practice. Project Management Journal 37 (5): 49–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trietsch D and Baker KR (2012). PERT 21: Fitting PERT/CPM for use in the 21st century. International Journal of Project Management 30 (4): 490–502.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tukel OI, Rom WO and Eksioglu SD (2006). An investigation of buffer sizing techniques in critical chain scheduling. European Journal of Operational Research 172 (2): 401–411.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watson KJ, Blackstone JH and Gardiner SC (2007). The evolution of a management philosophy: The theory of constraints. Journal of Operations Management 25 (2): 387–402.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Science and Technology Beijing, Beijing, P.R. China

    Junguang Zhang

  2. California State University, Fullerton, USA

    Ruixia Shi

  3. University of Castilla-La Mancha, Ciudad Real, Spain

    Estrella Diaz

Authors
  1. Junguang Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ruixia Shi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Estrella Diaz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Junguang Zhang.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zhang, J., Shi, R. & Diaz, E. Dynamic monitoring and control of software project effort based on an effort buffer. J Oper Res Soc 66, 1555–1565 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1057/jors.2014.125

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/jors.2014.125

Keywords

Search

Navigation