Using statistical and other quantitative techniques, compose a defined process that enables the project to achieve its quality and process performance objectives.
Composing the project’s defined process goes beyond the process selection and tailoring described in the Integrated Project Management process area. It involves identifying alternatives to one or more processes or subprocesses, performing quantitative analysis of performance and selecting the alternatives that are best able to help the project to achieve its quality and process performance objectives.
Example Work Products
- Criteria used to evaluate alternatives for the project
- Alternative subprocesses
- Subprocesses to be included in the project’s defined process
- Assessment of risk of not achieving the project’s objectives
1. Establish the criteria to use in evaluating process alternatives for the project.
- Quality and process performance objectives
- Availability of process performance data and the relevance of the data to evaluating an alternative
- Familiarity with an alternative or with alternatives similar in composition
- Existence of process performance models that can be used in evaluating an alternative
- Product line standards
- Project lifecycle models
- Stakeholder requirements
- Laws and regulations
2. Identify alternative processes and subprocesses for the project.
Identifying alternatives can include one or more of the following:
- Analyzing organizational process performance baselines to identify candidate subprocesses that would help achieve the project’s quality and process performance objectives
- Identifying subprocesses from the organization’s set of standard processes as well as tailored processes in the process asset library that can help to achieve the objectives
- Identifying processes from external sources (e.g., such as other organizations, professional conferences, academic research)
- Adjusting the level or depth of intensity with which a subprocess is applied (as described in further detail in a subpractice that follows)
Adjusting the level or depth of intensity with which the subprocesses are applied can involve the following choices:
- Number and type of peer reviews to be held and when
- Amount of effort or calendar time devoted to particular tasks
- Number and selection of people involved
- Skill level requirements for performing specific tasks
- Selective application of specialized construction or verification techniques
- Reuse decisions and associated risk mitigation strategies
- The product and process attributes to be measured
- Sampling rate for management data
3. Analyze the interaction of alternative subprocesses to understand relationships among the subprocesses, including their attributes.
An analysis of the interaction will provide insight into the relative strengths and weaknesses of particular alternatives. This analysis can be supported by a calibration of the organization’s process performance models with process performance data (e.g., as characterized in process performance baselines).
Additional modeling may be needed if existing process performance models cannot address significant relationships among the alternative subprocesses under consideration and there is high risk of not achieving objectives.
4. Evaluate alternative subprocesses against the criteria.
Use historical data, process performance baselines, and process performance models as appropriate to assist in evaluating alternatives against the criteria. These evaluations can include use of a sensitivity analysis particularly in high risk situations.
5. Select the alternative subprocesses that best meet the criteria.
It may be necessary to iterate through the activities described in the previous subpractices several times before confidence is achieved that the best available alternatives have been identified.
6. Evaluate the risk of not achieving the project’s quality and process performance objectives.
An analysis of risk associated with the selected alternative defined process can lead to identifying new alternatives to be evaluated, as well as areas requiring more management attention.