CoE KPIs v2.0

Definition Period - Reporting period for measuring KPIs. It can be monthly/quarterly/yearly based on business needs.
Currently the model captures data for 4 reporting periods Customer Satifaction Survey - The CSS will be filled in by BSL representatives. The CSS is further divided into four major categories namely Quality, OnTime, Relevance & Communication categories. Each question will carry a weightage and will be rated on a scale of 1-4 with 4 as an optimal rating for good performance. A score will be calculated based on the rating, weightage and deviation from highest rating. Depending on the deviation, the final KPI would be either of the following Below Average Average Above Average Project Exceution -A successful project is defined as a project with no effort or schedule variance. The KPIs under this category would capture variance, % of successful projects and no. of successful projects. The efforts and FTEs for the project execution would not include any CRs during project execution Reusability - The KPIs under this category will include % of assets reused, number of reusable components per porject, and reusable assets added/removed in a given period Resource Management - The KPIS under this category will be used to capture CoE resources' utilization based on billed hours, and CoE up-to speed time based on time spent per resource for knowledge sharing/ramp up SLA Adherence - The following KPIs would be recorded under this category % of Service Requests missed SLAs % of Service Requests escalated to CoE Lead % of Service Requests escalated to CoE Manager Service Utilization - The KPIs for this category would capture utilization of CoE services. This will help CoE identify which services are not used and which are used to greater extent Defects - This category of KPIs would be used measure the peroformance of SharePoint development by identifying verified SharePoint defects during system testing and live environment. An important KPI under this category is No. of defects per 100 PDs. This KPI will give an indication of performance of SharePoint Code Review requests - The KPIs for this category measures the quality of code based on number of iterations for code review. A code review which has only 1 iteration is considered as having 100% quality Skills Matrix - This KPI is used to measure the gap between the more experienced resource and not so experienced. Various skills are identified with weightage for each skill. The resources are rated on each skill and a score is arrived for each resource based on rating and weightage. Following KPIs are identified for this category Highest Skill rating Lowest Skill rating Median Rating Gap between highest and lowest rating Gap between Median and lowest rating
KPI Customer Satisfaction Survey 1) Quality 2) OnTime 3) Relevance 4) Communication Project Execution No. of successful projects % of successful projects Schedule Variance - structural projects Schedule Variance - non structural projects Effort Variance - structural projects Effort Variance - non structural projects Reusabilility % of components reused No. of reusable components per project Reusable assets added/removed Resource Management CoE Resource Utilization CoE up-to speed time per CoE resource (PDs) SLA Adherence % of Service Requests missed SLAs % of Service Requests escalated to CoE Lead % of Service Requests escalated to CoE Manager Service Utilization No. of requests per CoE Service No. of requests per CoE Service (exluding services with no request) % of services utilized Defects % of verified SharePoint defects identified during system testing % of verified SharePoint defects in live environment No. of verified SharePoint Defects per 100 PDs Code Review Requests No. of iterations per code review request Quality of code Skills Matrix 1) Highest Skill rating
Period 1 Above Average Average Excellent Average
8 80% 4.17% 25.00% 0.00% -16.67%
40% 1.25 10
83.33% 2.67
30.00% 10.00% 10.00%
1.33 2.00 66.67%
80.00% 20.00% 25.00
1.50 66.67%
4.43
2) Lowest Skill rating 3) Median Rating 4) Gap between highest and lowest rating 5) Gap between Median and lowest rating
1.37 2.90 3.07 1.53
Period 2 Below Average Below Average Average Average
Period 3 Excellent Average Below Average Above Average
Period 4 Above Average Above Average Above Average Average
Target
11 92% -2.22% -10.00% 14.29% 0.00%
12 75% 16.67% 5.00% 20.00% 50.00%
5 100% 0.00% 50.00% 0.00% 0.00%
90%
80% 2.67 25
88% 3.5 10
92% 2.75 20
72.92% 1.67
62.50% 1.20
62.50% 0.50
10.00% 5.00% 5.00%
4.00% 0.00% 4.00%
6.67% 0.00% 6.67%
2.00 2.00 100.00%
2.67 3.33 80.00%
3.00 3.21 93.33%
66.67% 33.33% 15.00
62.50% 37.50% 13.33
70.00% 30.00% 12.50
1.40 71.43%
1.00 100.00%
1.25 80.00%
100% 90% % of successful projects 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Period 1 80%
100% 92% 75%
25
20 Successful Projects No. of requests per CoE Service CoE up-to speed time per resource
15
11 8
12
10
Period 2
Period 3
Period 4
Project Execution
100% 90% CoE Resource Utilization 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Period 2 Period 3 Period 4 Resource Management CoE Resource Utilization CoE up-to speed time per CoE resource (PDs) Period 1 83.33% 72.92% 1.20 62.50% 62.50% 0.50 1.67 2.67
3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0
100% 90% CoE Service Utilization 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 66.67% 2.00 2.00 100.00% 80.00% 3.33 3.21
3.5 3 2.5 2 93.33% 1.5 1 0.5
10% 0% Period 1 % of services utilized 0 Period 2 Period 3 Period 4 CoE Service Utilization No. of requests per CoE Service (exluding services with no request)
100% 90% 80% 70% 60% % 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Period 1 66.67% 1.50
Code Review Requests

1.40 1.25 1.00 100.00% 71.43% 80.00%
1.6 1.4 1.2 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 No. of code reviews per request
Period 2
Period 3
Period 4
Quality of code
No. of iterations per code review request
100% 90% % of components reused 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Period 1 1.25 40% 2.67 Successful Projects 80% 88% 3.5
92%
2.75
Period 2 Period 3 Period 4 Reusability % of components reused No. of reusable components per project
35% CoE up-to speed time per resource

30.00%
SLA Adherence
% of Service Requests missed SLAs % of Service Requests escalated to CoE Lead % of Service Requests escalated to CoE Manager
30% 25% 20% % 15% 10% 5% 0% Period 1 Period 2

10.00% 10.00% 10.00%
6.67% 5.00% 5.00% 4.00% 0.00% 4.00% 0.00%
6.67%
Period 3
Period 4
100% No. of requests per CoE Service 90% 80% 70% 25.00
30
25
20 60% % 50% 40%

80.00%
15.00 13.33 12.50
15
13.33 40% 30% 20%

33.33% 80.00% 66.67% 70.00% 62.50%
12.50 10
37.50% 30.00%
10% 0% No. of code reviews per request
20.00%
0 Period 1 Period 2 Defects % of verified SharePoint defects identified during system testing % of verified SharePoint defects in live environment Period 3 Period 4
4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0 Reusable components per project No. of defects per 100 PDs
sts missed SLAs
sts escalated to CoE
sts escalated to CoE
6.67%
0.00%
Period 4
30
25
20
15
No. of defects per 1
10
Measurement Area
Measurement Element
BSL Satisfaction Survey
Quality
Quality
Quality Overall Quality
OnTime
OnTime
OnTime Overall OnTime Rating
Relevance
Relevance
Relevance Overall Relevance rating
Communication
Communication
Communication Overall Communication rating
Description Was the information pertaining to CoE Service request clearly defined and documented? 0. Strongly Disagree 1. Disgaree 2. Neutral 3. Agree 4. Strongly Agree Were the CoE Deliverables communicated clearly for the requested service? 0. Strongly Disagree 1. Disgaree 2. Neutral 3. Agree 4. Strongly Agree
Rating
Weightage
Highest Rating
50.00%
30.00%
Please rate the overall quality of CoE Service Deliverables 0. Needs Improvement 1. Below Average 2. Average 3. Above Average 4. Excellent 3 Overall Quality Was the CoE Service request adhered to defined SLA? 0. Strongly Disagree 1. Disgaree 2. Neutral 3. Agree 4. Strongly Agree 1 Was the information pertaining to the CoE Service request asked for in a timely manner? 0. Strongly Disagree 1. Disgaree 2. Neutral 3. Agree 4. Strongly Agree 1 Was the CoE Service delivered as per the communicated timelines? 0. Strongly Disagree 1. Disgaree 2. Neutral 3. Agree 4. Strongly Agree 4 Overall OnTime Rating
20.00% 100.00%
25.00%
35.00%
40.00% 100.00%
Was the service delivered relevant to the request? 0. Strongly Disagree 1. Disgaree 2. Neutral 3. Agree 4. Strongly Agree Were the CoE Deliverables defined relevant to the request? 0. Strongly Disagree 1. Disgaree 2. Neutral 3. Agree 4. Strongly Agree Was the information information asked by CoE Team relevant to the request? 0. Strongly Disagree 1. Disgaree 2. Neutral 3. Agree 4. Strongly Agree Overall Relevance rating Was the information and status pertaining to the CoE Service request communicated to BSL? 0. Strongly Disagree 1. Disgaree 2. Neutral 3. Agree 4. Strongly Agree Was there a need for any escalation during the delivery of the requested service? 0. Strongly Agree 1. Agree 2. Neutral 3. Disagree 4. Strongly Disagree How effective was CoE team's communication pertaining to delivery of the service? 0. Needs Improvement 1. Below Average 2. Average 3. Above Average 4. Excellent Overall Communication rating
50.00%
30.00%
20.00% 100.00%
25.00%
25.00%
50.00% 100.00%
Interpretation
Comments
Average
Excellent
Above Average
Above Average
Average
Below Average
Excellent
Average
Excellent
Excellent
Excellent
Excellent
Average
Average
Excellent
Average
Measurement Area
Measurement Element
Quality
Quality
OnTime
OnTime
Relevance
Relevance
Communication
Communication
Rating
Weightage
Highest Rating
50.00%
30.00%
20.00% 100.00%
25.00%
35.00%
40.00% 100.00%
50.00%
30.00%
20.00% 100.00%
25.00%
25.00%
50.00% 100.00%
Interpretation
Comments
Below Average
Average
Excellent
Below Average
Average
Below Average
Below Average
Below Average
Average
Above Average
Average
Average
Average
Average
Excellent
Average
Measurement Area
Measurement Element
Quality
Quality
OnTime
OnTime
Relevance
Relevance
Communication
Communication
Rating
Weightage
Highest Rating
50.00%
30.00%
20.00% 100.00%
25.00%
35.00%
40.00% 100.00%
50.00%
30.00%
20.00% 100.00%
25.00%
25.00%
50.00% 100.00%
Interpretation
Comments
Excellent
Excellent
Excellent
Excellent
Average
Average
Excellent
Average
Below Average
Average
Above Average
Below Average
Average
Above Average
Excellent
Above Average
Measurement Area
Measurement Element
Quality
Quality
OnTime
OnTime
Relevance
Relevance
Communication
Communication
Rating
Weightage
Highest Rating
50.00%
30.00%
20.00% 100.00%
25.00%
35.00%
40.00% 100.00%
50.00%
30.00%
20.00% 100.00%
25.00%
25.00%
50.00% 100.00%
Interpretation
Comments
Average
Excellent
Excellent
Above Average
Average
Excellent
Excellent
Above Average
Excellent
Average
Excellent
Above Average
Average
Average
Excellent
Average
No. of structural projects completed No. of non-structural projects completed Planned duration (days) of completed structural projects Actual duration (days) of completed structural projects Planned duration (days) of completed non-structural projects Actual duration (days) of completed non-structural projects Planned efforts (FTE) of completed structural projects Actual efforts (FTE) of completed structural projects Planned efforts (FTE) of completed non-structural projects Actual efforts (FTE) of completed non-structural projects No. of projects completed with either schedule varince or effort variance
Period 1 4 6 240 250 120 150 5 5 6 5 2
Period 2 8 4 450 440 100 90 7 8 6 6 1
Period 3 10 6 300 350 200 210 10 12 4 6 4
Period 4 3 2 200 200 80 120 3 3 2 2 0
No. of reusable assets No. of reusable assets reused in projects No. of ongoing + completed projects
Period 1 25 10 8
Period 2 50 40 15
Period 3 40 35 10
Period 4 60 55 20
No. of CoE Resources Total No. of CoE billed hours per reporting period No. of days per reporting period Hours per day Total person days spent on knowledge sharing
Period 1 3 400 20 8 8
Period 2 6 700 20 8 10
Period 3 5 500 20 8 6
Period 4 8 800 20 8 4
No. of CoE Service Requests Executed No. of CoE Service Requests missed SLA No. of CoE Service Requests escalated to CoE Lead No. of CoE Service Requests escalated to CoE Manager
Period 1 10 3 1 1
Period 2 20 2 1 1
Period 3 25 1 0 1
Period 4 15 1 0 1
No. of CoE Services No. of CoE Service Requests per reporting period No. of CoE Services with atleast 1 request
Period 1 15 20 10
Period 2 15 30 15
Period 3 15 40 12
Period 4 15 45 14
Total No. of defects No. of defects in system testing No. of defects in live environment Development Effort (PDs)
Period 1 50 40 10 200
Period 2 60 40 20 400
Period 3 80 50 30 600
Period 4 100 70 30 800
Total No. of code review requests No. of reviews conducted before successfully completing code review requests
Period 1 40 60
Period 2 50 70
Period 3 30 30
Period 4 80 100
Skills Relevant Experience Relevant Experience Relevant Experience Technical Skills Technical Skills Technical Skills Technical Skills Technical Skills Soft Skills Soft Skills Soft Skills
Description AXA Experience SharePoint 2010 Experience Overall SharePoint Experience Architecture and Design Development and Deployment UI Design and OOTB Configuration .Net Capability SP Designer and InfoPath forms Communication Skills Stakeholder Management Project/Self Management
PROFICIENCY (1 = Beginners / 5 = Expert) COURSE / TRAINING ONLY LIMITED PRACTICAL EXPERIENCE SOLID PRACTICAL EXPERIENCE WELL VERSED, EXTENSIVE EXPERIENCE EXPERT EXPERIENCE
Level 1 2 3 4 5
Resource
Skills AXA Experience SharePoint 2010 Experience Overall SharePoint Experience Architecture and Design Development and Deployment UI Design and OOTB Configuration .Net Capability SP Designer and InfoPath forms Communication Skills Stakeholder Management Project/Self Management AXA Experience SharePoint 2010 Experience Overall SharePoint Experience Architecture and Design Development and Deployment UI Design and OOTB Configuration .Net Capability SP Designer and InfoPath forms Communication Skills Stakeholder Management
Resource1
Resource2
Resource3
Resource4
Resource5
Project/Self Management AXA Experience SharePoint 2010 Experience Overall SharePoint Experience Architecture and Design Development and Deployment UI Design and OOTB Configuration .Net Capability SP Designer and InfoPath forms Communication Skills Stakeholder Management Project/Self Management AXA Experience SharePoint 2010 Experience Overall SharePoint Experience Architecture and Design Development and Deployment UI Design and OOTB Configuration .Net Capability SP Designer and InfoPath forms Communication Skills Stakeholder Management Project/Self Management AXA Experience SharePoint 2010 Experience Overall SharePoint Experience Architecture and Design Development and Deployment UI Design and OOTB Configuration .Net Capability SP Designer and InfoPath forms Communication Skills Stakeholder Management Project/Self Management
Weightage 10.00% 50.00% 40.00% 100.00% 30.00% 40.00% 10.00% 10.00% 10.00% 100.00% 40.00% 40.00% 20.00% 100.00%
Overall Weightage 33.33%
33.33%
33.33% 100%
Level 1 3 3 2 3 2 5 3 1 3 2 4 5 5 5 4 5 2 4 4 4
Weighted Level 0.1 1.5 1.2 0.6 1.2 0.2 0.5 0.3 0.4 1.2 0.4 0.4 2.5 2 1.5 1.6 0.5 0.2 0.4 1.6 1.6
Final Score
2.53
4.43
5 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 3 2 2 1 4 5 5 5 5 5 4 5 1 1 1 3 2 3 1 5 5 2 2 2 3 5
1 0.1 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.4 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.8 0.8 0.2 0.4 2.5 2 1.5 2 0.5 0.4 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.2 0.3 1 1.2 0.3 2 0.5 0.2 0.2 0.8 1.2 1
1.37
3.60
2.90

CoE KPIs v2.0

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

CoE KPIs v2.0

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Definition Period - Reporting period for measuring KPIs. It can be monthly/quarterly/yearly based on business needs.

Period 1 Above Average Average Excellent Average

8 80% 4.17% 25.00% 0.00% -16.67%

30.00% 10.00% 10.00%

1.33 2.00 66.67%

80.00% 20.00% 25.00

1.37 2.90 3.07 1.53

Period 2 Below Average Below Average Average Average

Period 3 Excellent Average Below Average Above Average

Period 4 Above Average Above Average Above Average Average

11 92% -2.22% -10.00% 14.29% 0.00%

12 75% 16.67% 5.00% 20.00% 50.00%

5 100% 0.00% 50.00% 0.00% 0.00%

10.00% 5.00% 5.00%

4.00% 0.00% 4.00%

6.67% 0.00% 6.67%

2.00 2.00 100.00%

2.67 3.33 80.00%

3.00 3.21 93.33%

66.67% 33.33% 15.00

62.50% 37.50% 13.33

70.00% 30.00% 12.50

100% 92% 75%

3 2.5 2 1.5 1 0.5 0

3.5 3 2.5 2 93.33% 1.5 1 0.5

Code Review Requests

No. of iterations per code review request

35% CoE up-to speed time per resource

30% 25% 20% % 15% 10% 5% 0% Period 1 Period 2

6.67% 5.00% 5.00% 4.00% 0.00% 4.00% 0.00%

20 60% % 50% 40%

15.00 13.33 12.50

13.33 40% 30% 20%

10% 0% No. of code reviews per request

sts missed SLAs

sts escalated to CoE

sts escalated to CoE

No. of defects per 1

BSL Satisfaction Survey

BSL Satisfaction Survey

BSL Satisfaction Survey

Quality Overall Quality

BSL Satisfaction Survey

BSL Satisfaction Survey

BSL Satisfaction Survey

OnTime Overall OnTime Rating

BSL Satisfaction Survey

BSL Satisfaction Survey

BSL Satisfaction Survey

Relevance Overall Relevance rating

BSL Satisfaction Survey

BSL Satisfaction Survey

BSL Satisfaction Survey

Communication Overall Communication rating

BSL Satisfaction Survey

BSL Satisfaction Survey

BSL Satisfaction Survey

Quality Overall Quality

BSL Satisfaction Survey

BSL Satisfaction Survey

BSL Satisfaction Survey

OnTime Overall OnTime Rating