EXECUTIVE SUMMARY DEPAUL UNIVERSITY MAINFRAME MAINTENANCE & DEVELOPMENT STUDY

The DePaul research measured the time taken to accomplish When using the Micro Focus Mainframe a comprehensive cross-section of mainframe-maintenance Express and Enterprise Edition , and development tasks. The study revealed that for standard maintenance and development project requirements a “statistically participants experienced performance gains significant” difference emerged between the two environments. from 24% to as much as 71%. Desktop workstation based MFEEE provided increased efficiency and effectiveness.

Overview The Results Independent Study Impresses Industry Experts with When using the Micro Focus workstation-based solutions in 28 Results of “Offloaded” Mainframe Maintenance and “standard” (commonly performed) COBOL maintenance and Development development tasks, participants experienced performance gains When was the last time you examined the costs of maintaining from 24% to as much as 71%. These participants were Mainframe/ your mainframe-based applications? Studies show that over a COBOL programmers, possessing an average of 12 years of applied standard application lifecycle of six years, the price of maintenance TSO/ISPF work experience. The tasks were broken out into four can be up to ten times more than the cost of the original product categories: Analysis, Editing, Program Compilation, Unit and development. Given the longevity of mission-critical COBOL . systems, it’s not uncommon for the price tag of maintenance to 60% performance gain in analysis-related tasks account for as much as 80% of the total project expense – both in terms of budget dollars, and programming resources. 71% speed increase in compiling and syntax error clean-up

Expect maintenance costs to soar even higher as the code gets 50% improvement in editing older and more complex due to modifications and revisions. The increasing demands of application-maintenance, time-to-market, 24% and 40% increase in overall testing performance lowered costs, and improved programmer productivity will force These findings reflect a total average increase of 33% ­­− gains that companies to invest in solutions that exploit technology as a can substantially improve your maintenance bottom line. The study competitive weapon in order to quickly meet evolving market showed that Micro Focus solutions give IT maintenance teams a demands. The questions become: What technologies to invest greater ability to: in and where do companies turn for definitive results to prove product performance? Complete mainframe projects in significantly less time

Improving Productivity and Lowering Free up programmers to tackle a growing backlog of new Maintenance Costs – The Basis For Study projects

To help answer both those questions, DePaul University researchers Bring solutions to market faster Dr. Kanter and Dr. Muscarello measured programmer-maintenance Improve code reliability performance using both traditional mainframe-based tools and workstation-based Micro Focus Mainframe Express™ Enterprise Edition (MFEEE). When the study was complete, it proved MFEEE outperformed mainframe-based counterparts by striking margins. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY | DePaul University Mainframe Maintenance & Development Study

Proving the Productivity of Maintenance of predicting lowered mainframe-connect costs, based on more Practices effective and accurate maintenance practices.

Software metrics and measurement methodologies are commonly used in project development and tracking. However, little formal work has been done to measure the costs involved in the execution “After installing MFEEE we saw results of key tasks in the maintenance, testing and operations immediately. The speed and flexibility of or the direct effect products have to increase productivity in these the search facilities helped to greatly reduce areas. In this study, Dr. Kanter and Dr. Muscarello investigated impact analysis time. The largest benefit was the influence of the type of maintenance tool and maintenance platform, on the efficiency and effectiveness of completing a set an immediate decrease in impact analysis time of commonly performed mainframe tasks. above 50 percent” The results not only quantified findings for authoritative software maintenance resource and budget forecasting, but they impressed Dave Novitski Dr. Kanter and Dr. Muscarello, industry experts who have spent Senior Technical Consultant several decades collectively, participating in, and researching Convergys AT&T software metrics. Wireline Retail Group

Across the Board Results Put the Numbers into Practice Participants in this study fell into two categories: beginner and expert. The beginners had an abbreviated amount of training and EXAMPLE: abbreviated practice time on MFEEE. They demonstrated little-to- no Windows graphical development skill (not uncommon in highly If your number of programmers is 100, and the elapsed time for competent TSO/ISPF “green screen” programmers). “Experts” were project completion equals 12 months and the number of projects designated based on having demonstrated fluency in Windows completed in a year totals 200, you see productivity gains in three graphical navigation, having been formally trained on MFEEE and critical areas: having worked with the tools for a minimum of one month. As Number of IT Resources = R mentioned previously, both “beginners” and “experts” possessed extensive Mainframe experience and skill (average 12 years). This Time Period = T demographic breakout of study participants is similar to real-world situations, where “early adapters” of technology often pave the Number of Projects Completed = P way for the majority of the work force. By capturing and analyzing the data in this fashion, you can use it to build an accurate Productivity gain using MFEEE = 1.36 Return on Investment model, based on the kinds of projects and IT Operations Using Micro Focus Mainframe Enterprise personnel you employ. Edition

Cost Modeling Maintenance Projects Using Same number of projects completed in less time = 3.2 months the Benchmark Results time savings, or

For example, in the Applying the Benchmark Results, we have More projects completed in same amount of time = 72 more extrapolated the results from the DePaul research onto a typical projects, or small-scale COBOL maintenance project. In this model we estimate Fewer programmers assigned to the same number of projects the amount of time programmers spend doing specific tasks in the same time = 26 available programmers to complete such as analysis (50%), editing (15%), testing, etc. You may insert backlogged enhancement requests and other business revenue different numbers for these percentages. Then we added the generating projects productivity findings from the Benchmark for both beginners and experts. Finally, we summarized totals, and provided a means EXECUTIVE SUMMARY | DePaul University Mainframe Maintenance & Development Study

Applying Benchmark Results and complexity programmers commonly face, with a total of over 60 programs with over 6,000 lines of source code that consisted of Type of Project COBOL, JCL, data, copybooks, and other related information.

Small-scale maintenance or enhancement request. Number of * The three types of software maintenance are usually classified hours to finish (typically): 16-80 hours as perfective, adaptive, and corrective. [NBS, 1986]. The study concentrated on Perfective and Corrective Maintenance. Analysis Phase 8-40 hrs. Perfective maintenance includes all changes, insertions, deletions, Analysis Phase with i.Sight 3.2-24 hrs. modifications, extensions, and enhancements that are made to a system to meet the evolving and/or expanding needs of the Improved time-to-market 60% user. They are generally performed as a result of new or changing requirements, or in an attempt to augment or fine-tune the Editing Phase 2.4 -12 hrs. software.

Editing Phase with MFE. 1.8-9 hrs Adaptive maintenance consists of any effort that is initiated as a result of changes in the environment in which a software system Improved time-to-market 25% must operate. It accounts for about 20% of all the software maintenance efforts.

Compile/Link Phase 48-120 min. Corrective maintenance refers to changes necessitated by actual errors in a system. It accounts for 20% of all the software Compile/Line Phase with MFE 14-35 min. maintenance efforts and consists of activities normally considered Improved time-to-market 71% to be error correction required to keep the system operational. Benchmark Summary Unit/Integration Testing Phases 1.6-4 hrs. All tasks Unit/Integration Testing Phases using MFE 1-2.7 hrs. Productivity factors input directly from DePaul University Benchmark (programmer averages, grouped by Beginner/Expert). Improved time-to-market 32% Analysis

Highlights Analysis capabilities map on to 60% of all application research requirements. Savings calculated as (% project spent on analysis) * Time to project completion 16-80 hrs. .6 * productivity factor from Benchmark (.6 or .68).

Time to project completion using Edit i.Sight/MFE 6.2-36.2 hrs. Beginner users showed no appreciable gains over the mainframe. Mainframe connect time savings Expert users showed a 50% productivity over the mainframe. using i.Sight/MFE 3.2-16 hrs. Explanation: Experienced ISPF users require time and practice to Connect Time Savings 56% realize the benefits ofgraphical editing tools.

Compile/Link (All productivity gains based on average Benchmark results) All users benefited substantially (71%) from MFEEE compile and Footnotes and Facts syntax error clean-up features.

The study concentrated on two major types of maintenance: perfective and corrective maintenance. Within these maintenance functions, two applications simulating actual business mainframe Beginner users demonstrated 24% productivity gains. Expert users operations were used. These applications mirrored the functionality demonstrated 40% productivity gains. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY | DePaul University Mainframe Maintenance & Development Study

Mainframe Connect Time

Analysis is done primarily using listings. Small amount of TSO- based research (Assumption 10% of analysis time spent on the mainframe)

Analysis capabilities map to 100% of the work that would be done on the mainframev(ISPF FIND, concatenated PDS Find, etc.)

Edit, Compile, Unit/Integration testing all done completely off the mainframe when using MFEEE

System testing done completely on the mainframe

Calculation for mainframe connect time without MFEEE (Analysis time * .1) + Edit Time + Compile Time + Unit/ Integration testing time + System test time = Total TSO Connect Time

Calculation for mainframe connect time with MFEEE (Analysis time *.1) - (i.Sight Analysis Time) + System Test Time = Total TSO Connect Time

For additional information please visit: www.microfocus.com © 2010 Micro Focus (IP) Limited. All rights reserved. MICRO FOCUS, the Micro Focus logo, among others, are trademarks or registered trademarks of Micro Focus (IP) Limited or its subsidiaries or affiliated companies in the United Kingdom, United States and other countries. All other marks are the property of their respective owners. sESDUMM1010