Quantifying benefits of IZ Analyzer for Mule Projects

Written by:
Published on October 24, 2019

Quantifying benefits of IZ Analyzer for Mule Projects

Here at Integral Zone we want to ensure we give you the support that you need for your Mule Integration projects to be successful. As part of our portfolio of products, IZ Analyzer provides a clear business case which we detail here to help you gain the necessary investment to introduce IZ Analyzer into your projects.

IZ Analyzer adds value to your projects in several areas, what we call Value Points. These include time savings during code review, time savings during peer review, fewer bugs to re-work and better quality of deliverables achieved faster.

By introducing features such as Real-time Developer Suggestions and Enforceable Standards, IZ Analyzer adds real value to your projects from day one. Let’s take a look at an example.

First to set some project metrics for a typical project scenario. The resources on this example project include the following, with their associated rates;

  • Architect $1,000/day
  • Lead Developer $800/day
  • Developers $600/day
  • Testers $400/day

Our scenario has 50 Mule Projects, with a 12-month duration and an average Bug Identification Rate of 10 bugs per month.

Using this example data set we can extrapolate the following effort estimates for each of the Value Points:

  • Code Review Effort
  • Peer Review Effort
  • Bug Fix Effort
IZ Analyzer - Mule value proposition

Typical Scenario Without IZ Analyzer

  • An architect will spend approximately 1 day of effort per week on Code reviews in this scenario
  • A Lead Developer with spend approximately 1 day of effort per week on Peer Review in this scenario
  • Developers and Testers will spend up to 1.5 days of effort per week on bug fixes further requiring support from Architects and Lead Developers
  • The summed cost of this activity for this project scenario without IZ Analyzer is $177,000 per year.

Typical Scenario With IZ Analyzer

  • An architect will save approximately 80% of their 1 day per week of effort on Code Reviews with IZ Analyzer
  • A Lead Developer with save approximately 80% of their 1 day per week of effort on Peer Reviews with IZ Analyzer
  • Developers and Testers will have fewer bugs to fix, reducing their required effort from 1.5 days per week to 1 day per month, whilst also reducing the effort needed from the Architect and Lead Developer drastically
  • The summed cost of this activity for this project scenario with IZ Analyzer is $35,400 per year.

In Summary

Our typical Mule project scenario reduces its cost drastically by around 80%, from $177,000 to $35,400 when using IZ Analyzer.

However you choose to benefit from this saved effort, whether it’s re-allocating team members to other backlog activities, reducing your overall team size or growing your business whilst maintaining your current team size, IZ Analyzer has clear quantifiable benefits that will help you meet your targets.

Furthermore, your projects will benefit from qualitative value such as increased team member morale, higher quality of output and better customer satisfaction.

Come and talk to us about how IZ Analyzer can help you improve your project productivity.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Other Blog Posts

Other Blog Posts

API Management – For SOAP APIs

Learn to develop SOAP Web Services using Mule, deploy it on Anypoint Runtime Manager and manage the deployed Web Services using Anypoint API Manager by applying policies.

Read more

Visualize Application Network – Anypoint Visualizer

Visualize your application network using Anypoint Visualizer. Explanation with System APIs, Process APIs and Experience APIs

Read more

Cloudhub vs on-Premise – why compare?

MuleSoft has a few offerings in terms of hosting. For the purposes of this blog, I would like to class them as Cloudhub hosted or non-Cloudhub hosted.
Cloudhub provides a bursting option only for 0.1 and 0.2 vCores. The reason for this classification is to compare like for like performance between the MuleSoft Managed Cloudhub option against the non-Cloudhub hosted option, specifically in the bursting context.

Read more