Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Method for Software Cost Estimating Using Scope Champions

  • Conference paper
Product-Focused Software Process Improvement (PROFES 2009)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing ((LNBIP,volume 32))

  • 3055 Accesses

Abstract

There are many methods of software cost estimating (COCOMO, function points analysis, three-point estimate, use case points, class points, XP user stories, SLOC prediction and others), with their advantages and drawbacks. One common problem with all methods is the necessity to estimate the whole requirements specification, item by item. At the end, either this process is expensive or the numbers are inaccurate. This paper presents a method of software cost estimating using a limited number of functional requirements, called Scope Champions. Estimators produce more detailed and grounded numbers that are used in a final estimation formula. The method reduces the costs of estimating and increases accuracy.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Project Management Institute, Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK) Guide v.3, 3rd edn. PMI Press (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Boehm, B.: Software Engineering Economics. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1981)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  3. International Organization for Standardization, ISO 20926, Software Engineering — IFPUG 4.1 Unadjusted functional size measurement method — Counting practices manual (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Boehm, B.: Software Cost Estimation with Cocomo II. Addison-Wesley, Reading (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Beck, K., Fowler, M.: Planning Extreme Programming. Addison-Wesley, Reading (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Cockburn, A.: Agile Software Development. Addison-Wesley, Reading (2001)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  7. Albrecht, A.J., Gaffney, J.E.: Software Function, Source Lines of Code, and Development Effort Prediction: A Software Science Validation. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 9(6), 639–648 (1983)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Shepperd, M., Schofield, C.: Estimating software project effort using analogies. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 23(11), 736–743 (1997)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Mohagheghi, P., Anda, B., Conradi, R.: Effort estimation of use cases for incremental large-scale software development. In: ICSE 2005: Proceedings of the 27th international conference on Software engineering, St. Louis, MO, USA, pp. 303–311. ACM, New York (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Kanmani, S., Kathiravan, J., Kumar, S.S., Shanmugam, M.: Class point based effort estimation of OO systems using fuzzy subtractive clustering and artificial neural networks. In: ISEC 2008: Proceedings of the 1st conference on India software engineering conference, Hyderabad, India, pp. 141–142. ACM, New York (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Software Engineering Standards Committee of the IEEE Computer Society, The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc., IEEE Recommended Practice for Software Requirements Specifications, IEEE Std 830-1998 (Revision of IEEE Std 830-1993), NY, USA (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  12. McConnell, S.: Software Estimation, Demistifying the Black Art. Microsoft Press, Redmond (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Wiegers, K.: Software Requirements, Thorny Issues and Practical Advise, 2nd edn. Microsoft Press, Redmond (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Software Engineering Standards Committee of the IEEE Computer Society, The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc., Recommended Practice for Architectural Description of Software-Intensive Systems, IEEE Std 1471-2000, NY, USA (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Software Engineering Standards Committee of the IEEE Computer Society, The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc., Recommended Practice for Software Design Descriptions, IEEE Std 1016-1998, NY, USA (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Software Engineering Standards Committee of the IEEE Computer Society, The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc., IEEE Standard for Software Test Documentation, IEEE Std 829-1998, NY, USA (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Klenke, A.: Probability Theory, Comprehensive Course. Springer, London (2006)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  18. Renyi, A.: Probability Theory. Dover Publications Inc., New York (2007)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  19. IBM, Rational, Rational Unified Process in Rational Method Composer (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Nuseibeh, B., Easterbrook, S.: Requirements engineering: a roadmap. In: ICSE 2000: Proceedings of the Conference on The Future of Software Engineering, Limerick, Ireland, pp. 35–46. ACM, New York (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Cheng, B.H.C., Atlee, J.M.: Research Directions in Requirements Engineering. In: FOSE 2007: 2007 Future of Software Engineering, pp. 285–303. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Podgorelec, V., Heričko, M.: Estimating software complexity from UML models. SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes 32(2), 1–5 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Object Management Group: Unified Modeling Language (UML), Superstructure, Version 2.0 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Crow, J., Vito, B.D.: Formalizing space shuttle software requirements: four case studies. ACM Transactions Software Engineering Methodologies 7(3), 296–332 (1998)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Gervasi, V., Zowghi, D.: Reasoning about inconsistencies in natural language requirements. ACM Transactions Software Engineering Methodologies 14(3), 277–330 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Jain, H., Vitharana, P., Zahedi, F.M.: An assessment model for requirements identification in component-based software development. SIGMIS Database 34(4), 48–63 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Jeffords, R.D., Heitmeyer, C.L.: A strategy for efficiently verifying requirements. SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes 5(28), 28–37 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Kit, L.K., Man, C.K., Baniassad, E.: Isolating and relating concerns in requirements using latent semantic analysis. SIGPLAN Notes 10(41), 383–396 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Loconsole, A.: Empirical Studies on Requirement Management Measures. In: ICSE 2004: Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on Software Engineering, pp. 42–44. IEEE Computer Society, Washington (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Maiden, N., Manning, S., Robertson, S., Greenwood, J.: Integrating creativity workshops into structured requirements processes. In: DIS 2004: Proceedings of the 5th conference on Designing interactive systems, pp. 113–122. ACM Press, New York (2004)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  31. Maiden, N., Gizikis, A., Robertson, S.: Provoking Creativity: Imagine What Your Requirements Could Be Like. IEEE Software 21(5), 68–75 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Trendowicz, A., Heidrich, J., Münch, J., Ishigai, Y., Yokoyama, K., Kikuchi, N.: Development of a hybrid cost estimation model in an iterative manner. In: ICSE 2006: Proceedings of the 28th international conference on Software engineering, Shanghai, China, pp. 331–340. ACM, New York (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  33. Lee, S.W., Rine, D.C.: Missing requirements and relationship discovery through proxy viewpoints model. In: SAC 2004: Proceedings of the 2004 ACM symposium on Applied computing, pp. 1513–1518. ACM, New York (2004)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. TechnoPark Corp., 568 9th Street South 202, Naples, Florida, 34102

    Yegor Bugayenko

Authors
  1. Yegor Bugayenko
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Fraunhofer IIESE, Fraunhoferplatz 1, 67663, Kaiserslautern, Germany

    Frank Bomarius

  2. Department of Information Processing Science, University of Oulu, P.O.Box 3000, 90014, Finland

    Markku Oivo

  3. VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland, Tietotie 3, 02150, Espoo, Finland

    Päivi Jaring

  4. Department of Computer Science, University of Helsinki, P.O.Box 68, 00014, Helsinki, Finland

    Pekka Abrahamsson

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2009 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Bugayenko, Y. (2009). Method for Software Cost Estimating Using Scope Champions. In: Bomarius, F., Oivo, M., Jaring, P., Abrahamsson, P. (eds) Product-Focused Software Process Improvement. PROFES 2009. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol 32. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-02152-7_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-02152-7_6

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-02151-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-02152-7

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation