Sie sind auf Seite 1von 28


4 Participate in reviews

4.4.1 Expert Team Reviews

4.4.2 Formal Technical Reviews
4.4.3 Group Evaluation and Decision
4.4.1 Expert Team Reviews
Expert team review includes inspection, walkthroughs, audits and peer
Inspection: the process is characterized by examine documents (and
computer code in case of software inspections) as well as collecting
various metrics about the inspection process itself. It is characterized by
any analysis tactic that best suits the inspection objectives.
Walkthroughs: the creator of the evaluated object presents it to a group
and they in turn analyze it sequentially and hopefully recognize errors,
coding bugs or potential performance problems.
Audits: Audits use sampling of actual process performance to determine if
an organization is actually following proscribed practices, or the practices
they claim to be following.
Peer reviews: peer reviews are made by the responsible engineer or
author. In principle , peers may carry out any inspection, walkthrough or
even audit.
Document inspection
Document inspection is a disciplined engineering practice for detecting
defects in technical documentations and preventing the consequence of
their inaccuracies from leaking into production and actual use.
Each organization or project must agree on inspection entry conditions
and inspection exit conditions
The most important purpose of document inspection is to identify defect
and to reach inspectors consensus, approving the document for use, once it
is considered defect free.
Document inspection comprises of following steps: Inspection planning,
initial meeting, inspection preparation, inspection meeting, Product
correction, inspection follow-up.
Tips on Optimizing Inspection Process

1. Establishing inspection purpose

The greatest payback comes when inspection improves the future
work, that is , reduces the number of documentation defects.
Inspection should be planned to address a set of specific purpose and
cover both technical and management documents.

2. Choosing work products intelligently

In particular ,inspection of requirements and design documents is
more profitable.
Document defect sampling is an inexpensive technique to determine
to determine entry and exit conditions. Defect sampling is carried
out by devoting a short time to inspect a few pages of document in
order to ascertain the amount of major defects in this sample.
Author of the document identify important text or graphics that can
translate into serious downstream costs in order to distinguish these
from less important areas.
3. Focusing on finding major defects
Check a single line against many sources.( 0.2 and 1.8 pages of 300
words per checking hour)
Document error
Not to waste time on minor defects.
4. Applying Good Inspection practice
Inspection entry conditions should have upstream source documents
available in order to inspect given document and are of high quality
Inspection necessitates effective work standards need to be brief, to
the point, monitored for usefulness and most importantly respected
by the development team.
An overall master plan for the entire inspection sequence of a
project should be generated early in the project lifecycle.
Inspection team should utilize commercial or proprietary software
tools to capture the data, summarize it and present trends and
One should always focus on defects that may be present in source
and kin documents.
Adapt an effective inspection team strategy
Involvement of professional in inspections to maximize and
meaningful progress on the project.
Correctly formulated and seriously taken Exit conditions.
5. Providing adequate training and follow-up
Properly trained team leaders and periodically coached by an
experienced person before giving inspection certificate.
An engineering organization should ensure that there are an
adequate number of trained people to support inspections.
6. Publicizing inspection results and statics
7. Continuously improving inspection process.
System inspection:
System inspection are often portrayed from a maintenance
point of view and may be characterized as any task undertaken
to determine the condition of a system.
Guide for Inspection of Quality Systems and processes
1. Management control: The purpose of management control is to
provide adequate resources for system design, manufacturing, quality
assurance, distribution, installation and servicing activities; assure the
quality is functioning properly; monitor the quality system; and make
necessary adjustments. The inspection method should include:
Verify the following have been defined and documented: quality
policy, management review, quality audit procedures, quality plan
and quality system procedures and instructions.
Verify quality policies and objectives are in fact implemented.
Confirm that a management representative has been appointed and
evaluate his or her range of management authority and
Verify that quality audits, including repeated audits of previously
identified deficient issues of the quality system are being conducted
on a regular basis and ensures effective quality system has been
established and maintained.
2. Design controls: the purpose of design control quality element is to control
the design process to assure that system meet user needs, intended uses and
specified requirements.
Verify the design control procedure for the selected project meet any
regulation requirements.
Review the design plan for the project.
Conform design inputs established, design output verified.
Conform that acceptance criteria were established prior to actual
verification and validation activities.
Conform the design validation data prove predetermined user needs and
intended uses and did not leave any unresolved inconsistencies.
Conform risk analysis was performed
Determine if design reviews were conducted and correctly transferred into
production specification.
3. Corrective and preventive actions: the purpose is to collect information,
analyze , identify and investigate product and quality problems and take
appropriate and effective corrective or preventive action to prevent their
Determine if the correct reason for the product and quality problems has,
in fact , been identified. Confirm that data from these sources have been
analyzed to identified existing systems and quality problems that may
require corrective action.
Verify that the data generated by CAPA system are complete, accurate and
Verify that appropriate statistical methods are employed to detect recurring
quality problems.
Determine if the degree to which a quality problem or nonconforming
product is, in fact, investigated in accordance with the level of risk involved
and also determine if failure investigations are conducted to determine the
root cause of the problem.
Determine if corrective and preventive actions were, in fact, effective and
verified or validated prior to implementation.
Verify that corrective and preventive actions for systems and quality
problems were implemented and documented.
Malfunction product reporting: the purpose of malfunction product
reporting is to ensure the identification , investigation and reporting of all
malfunction information related to a firms products and systems.
Verify that firm has defined an appropriate system reporting procedure and
this SRP is indeed established and maintained.
Confirm that appropriate SRP information is being identified, reviewed,
reported , document and field.
Confirm that firm follows its SRP and they are effective in identifying
reportable malfunctions and their consequences.
System corrections and removals: the purpose is to ensure that system
posing known hazards to users, operators or the public be corrected or
removed from use.
Determine if the manufacturer initiated corrections or removals of a
Verify that organization has established and continues to maintain a
database for all nonreportable corrections and removals.
Conform that firms management has implemented the reporting
System tracking: the purpose is to ensure that manufacturers or
importers of the products and systems expeditiously locate and
remove defective systems from the market or notify appropriate
authorities and the public of significant system problems.
Determine if the firm manufacturers or imports a tracked system
or product.
Verify that the firm has established a written Standard Operation
Procedure (SOP) for tracking of defective systems and products.
Verify that the firms quality assurance program includes audits of
its failed systems, devices and product-tracking system within an
appropriate and acceptable timeframe.
4. Production and process controls: the purpose is to manufacture
systems and products that meets specification.
Select process for review on the basis of CAPA indicators of
process problems, degree of risk of the process to cause system
failures, variety in process in manufacturing of multiple systems
and use of the process for manufacturing higher risk systems.
Review the specific procedures for the manufacturing process
selected and the methods for controlling and monitoring the
process. Verify the process is controlled and monitored.
If review of system history records the product non-
conformance determine whether any nonconformance was
handled appropriately, review equipment adjustment,
calibration and maintenance and evaluate the validation study
in full to determine whether the process has been adequately
If the process is software controlled , verify the software was
Verify that the personnel have been appropriately qualified to
implement validated process or appropriately trained to
implement process .
4.4.2 Forma technical reviews:
The role of a formal technical review is to bring together the
most relevant people to criticize the work done, solve open issues
and decide the action items required to pass to the next formal
review. The objective of review is to satisfy all relevant
individuals that the system and its comprising hardware and
software satisfy all aspects of the system requirement and needs.
Identify problematic issues earlier .
Facilitate information exchange
Guide future projects.
Mechanism to make major system decisions.
Generic process of formal technical review( IEEE STD 1028)
1. Entry evaluation: use standard checklist to entry criteria
2. Management preparation: adequate resources to conduct review
and conducted according to policies , standards or other relevant
3. Planning review: conform objectives, organize team and ensure
team is equipped.
4. Overview of review procedures: understands review goals and
review procedures.
5. Individual preparation: individual examine carefully for
6. Conducting review: planned time and arrive at a consensus
regarding the status of the system and the activities or
documents to be reviewed.
7. Rework/follow-up: necessary actions to satisfy the requirements
agreed at review meeting.
8. Exit evaluation: activities necessary for successful review has
been accomplished and output is finalized.
VVT Activities : Pre-Review
The VVT team leader should prepare for formal technical reviews along the
following steps.
Collect results of Activities
Prepare Material for review: Agenda, technical VVT documents and
material for VVT status presentation
Analyze material: shows technical and management status of VVT
Create Review package: agenda and material to be examined by the review
VVT Activities During Review: the VVT team leader should contribute VVT-
related input and be involved in technical review along the following lines
Review meeting agenda: key VVT issues are presented and discussed
during review.
Review project and system status: to ensure both schedule and budget
issues related to VVT
Review technical items: Technical status is presented to the attendees and
will receive remarks and critics from review team.
Review open issues and action list: VVT team leader will attend to any
VVT problem discovered during review.
Decision pass or fail: VVT team leader is to monitor all open VVT issues
and provide professional advice to the rest of group.
VVT Activities : Post Review
At the end of formal technical review, the review leader should
create minutes of the review, recording decisions and agreement
reached along with a list of follow-up actions items.
The review final report should be completed and distributed within a
reasonable time and should include meeting minutes, , an action
item list, a review of score results and the scoring system used and
lessons learned.
Guidance for technical reviews:
Should have clear and predefined set of objectives and clear SOP
Advisable to conduct internal reviews first with honest criticism and
train reviewers prior to assign a project.
Careful attention should be paid to areas that contain new and
unfamiliar problems.
Selecting proper reviewers is crucial.
It is recommended that review team be comprised of representatives
of the customer and relevant stakeholder, program manager, chief
system engineer, one or more quality assurance, configuration
control and process improvement representatives and one or more
system developers, maintainers and user domain experts.
Reviews should be encouraged to perform the following: agree
on the scope of the review, collect and review data, inspect the
review package, assess review readiness, present findings ,
assess review completeness and improve review process.
Reviewers should educate the participants and project team as
well as emphasize process improvement.
Allocating adequate manpower, facilities and time for the
review and encourage the review team to bring all significant
problems into focus.
All involved in a review should recognize that a success
criterion, more important than passing.
Often having the customer as an active participant in the
review is valuable.
4.4.3 Group Evaluation and Decision

Group evaluation and decision provide leaders, system designers,

builders, test engineers and production engineers with valuable
insight into the state of the system with which they are involved.
They aid in the conducting of technical review.
Identify errors in logic and facts as well as reject incorrect
More ideas are generated and the option for evaluation
All group members had a chance to air their opinions and open
issues were settled in a fair manner.
Decisions accepted by group of people are more likely to
Group evaluation and decision process: Basic phases involved in a typical
group evaluation and decision process are :
1. Phase 1: Defining Issue at Hand: accurate understanding of the system by
discussion , exchange and share information. Problem nature, extent and
seriousness, cause and possible consequences analyzed. Alternative lines
of action based on analysis.
2. Phase 2: Making decision :individual, voting, consensus
3. Phase 3: Implementing and Evaluation the decision: review the
implemented solutions and evaluates the consequences of this process.

Factors in Group Process: group process effectiveness in terms of decision-

making speed, correctness or accuracy often depends on the following
1. Individual and Group skill
2. Cognitive mechanism
3. Communication dynamics
4. Decision policies
5. Task complexity
6. Social factors.
7. Environmental influences
Group process leadership styles:
Group process risks: Group evaluation and decision process are
not always successful. The following describes the pitfalls, often
found in bad decision made by groups.
Shared information bias: discuss issues familial to all but avoid
examine information known to few.
Cognitive limitations
Group polarization
Group thinking
Social loafing: reason for social loafing are diffusion of
responsibility, free-rider effect, sucker effect.
Group Decision Methods:
Informal Approach : Brainstorming: usually one person,
perhaps the leader of the team or another experienced person
leads the brainstorming session. During brainstorming
following rules should be enforce:
No egos
Anything goes
Quantity over quality
Evolving ideas
Brainstorming follow these steps:
1. Preliminary discussion to share their understanding of the
problem , its root causes, the barriers to change, the specifics
of present situation and vison of ideal solution
2. Private brainstorming
3. Share his or her ideas with other group member
4. Narrow set of ideas generated by group.
Formal Approach: General formal group evaluation and decision represents
a process directly inverse to obtaining ideas and reaching conclusions by
way of brainstorming. Formal group evaluation and decision will follow
these three stages:
1. Step 1: preliminaries: team leader prepare the evaluation and decision
process, collect necessary data needed for evaluation and prepare for
review. Prepare agenda, schedule group meeting and send invitations
along with information packages.
2. Step 2: evaluation and decision: team leader present team members and
agenda. Team members present their work for evaluation to evaluation
group. Evaluation group evaluates on the basis of their knowledge and
experience and make decisions. Open issues and questions that raise a
substantial risk for the project are postponed.
3. Step 3: closure and implementation: team leader prepare summary of
group findings as well as decisions. Team leader prepare list of open
actions together with planned closure dates and details of people
responsible for rectifying these problems.
Formal approach: consensus agreement: it is a process of coming to an
agreement on a particular technical issue.
As a rule issue is brought up for the discussion will be debated until
the group reaches an agreement that all sides can accept.
Depending on national culture, personalities and specific technical
issues, reaching consensus takes a considerable time, but the
outcome is often worth it.
First consensus agreement fosters open communication
Second, encourages more informed decision
Third, people who interreact to understand the issues and who have
developed solutions using consensus will see the reasoning behind a
specific decision and once consensus is reached, members tend to
accept it.
Formal approach: Parliamentary procedure is also a process of coming to
an agreement on a particular technical issue and its purpose is also to help a
group evaluate technical subjects efficiently while preserving a sprit of
Parliamentary procedure voting results tend to create a win-lose
First every member of the evaluation and decision group has equal rights.
Second, each issue presented to the group is entitled to discussion time.
Using parliamentary procedure evaluation and decision group is quite
accommodating and informal.
Quantitative Approach: Modeling Group Decision
Group decision making is a formal quantitative method of making a
judgement based on the opinion of people.
GDM is an active area of research within Multicriteria Decision making
(MCDM) studies
Engineering choice EC is the collection of all possibilities in conjunction
with their respective choice sets and the aggregation of individual