Assessment of Agile Adoption

8/14/2019 Assessment of Agile Adoption

1/17


2/17

2

Team and Business/Users break down the project scope into

many small releases based on business/market priority

NO YES

2

Team models Functional Architecture which drives the

Technical architecture

NO NO

2

Team models non-functional requirement as user story in

the Product Baklog NO NO

2 Team keep track of Defect density NO NO

2

Team has road-map to achieve testable architecture which

would enable to put in place Automated Unit Test

NO NO

2


would enable to put in place Automated Functional test (endto end System testing) NO NO

2


would enable to put in place Automated Integration Test NO NO

2

Team has put in place continous integration with automated

build/deployment and test suit NO NO

2Team is able to replicate environment in automated matter

2

Teams produce very low-defect software and keep technical

debt to a minimum, allowing them to have more time for

delivering features. NO NO

2

Developers machines has isolated development

environment (by stubbing the dependency)to get feedback

of feature developed or defect fix NO NO

2

Developers machines can run automted sub-system test

cases NO NO

2

Does the team assess potential customer impact prior to

release, and do they work with product marketing or others

to communicate key changes? Dont Know Dont Know


3/17

2

Does team monitors time needed to run a full regression

suite and determine if they can "release with confidence"?

3 Strong product manager/owner is full-time team member NO NO

3

Product manager/Owner understand who the key

stakeholders in the company are, and what their concerns

are NO NO

3

Is the team skilled at using MVP(Minimum Viable Product)

testing techniques to validate quickly? NO NO

3

Team have clearly defined business KPI's that they are

driving towards and measured against? NO NO

3

Do the team keep track of the percentage of the ideas killed

each week in discovery? NO NO

3

Based on the business metrics the team will generate

alternative options to the business when they discover

current direction its not producing enough value

NO NO

3

Team validats ideas each week with actual users (before

they get too attached to the ideas NO NO

3

Team validates ideas each week with business stakeholders

(before actually building)? NO NO

3

Team competent at quickly creating low and high-fidelity

user prototypes? NO NO

3

Does the team understand the difference between live-data

prototypes and building production software

NO NO

3

Does the team have an Live data testing infrastructure in

place? NO NO

3Is there some amount of real work put on the productbacklog every week NO NO

3

Do all of the other developers and testers on the team feel

able to contribute product ideas in discovery and share in

the learnings? NO NO

3

At the end each week does the discovery team do a mini-

retrospective asking if they could have validated the solution

feasibility ideas faster or cheaper?

NO NO

3

At the end each week does the discovery team do a mini-

retrospective asking if they could have validated any of these

ideas faster or cheaper NO NO

3

Is the team immediately reviewing the newly released

software to evaluate how they impacted the scorecard KPIs

NO NO

3

Are impediments identified and especially resolved quickly

(typically within 48 hours)? NO NO


4/17

r r r Technique

NO NO NO

FDD/UML domain

modelling

YES YES YES User Story

YES YES YES Planning

YES YES YES Visualize work

YES YES YES

User Centered work

breakdown

NO NO NO

Story Mapping

workshop

NO NO NO

Specification by

Example

YES YES YES

User Centered work

breakdown design

YES YES YES

Short Validated

learning loop

YES YES YES Visualize work flow

YES NA NO

Daily/Regular stand-

up meeting

YES YES Dont Know Information Radiator

YES NA NA Iteration Review

Dont Know YES Dont Know Spikes

NO NO

Requirement

Workshop

NO NO NO

Business ValueCentered Feature

clustering

NO NO NO

Business Value

Centered Feature

clustering

NO NO NO


5/17

NO NA NO Story Maps

NO YES NO

Use Case Driven

Approach

NO NO NO

NO NO NO

NO NO NO

Techniques

documented in the

book "Working

Effectively with

Legacy Code"

NO NA NA

NO YES

NO NO NO

NO NO NO

NO NO NO

NO NO NO

Dont Know NA Dont Know


6/17

NO NO NO

NO NO NO

NO NO NO

NO NO NO

NO NO NO

NO NO NO

NO NO NO

NO NO NO

NO NO NO

NO NO NO

NO NO NO

NO NO NO

NO NO NO

NO NO NO

NO NO NO

NO NO NO

NO NO NO


7/17

Artifact

UML domain/Entity model

Backlog

Project Data Sheet

Greenhopper

Greenhopper

Story Maps

Document that captures example as Specification

Greenhopper

Greenhopper

Greenhopper

Iteration Review card

Backlog

FDD Parking Lot Diagrams

FDD Parking Lot Diagrams part of weekly status report

FDD Parking Lot Diagrams part of weekly status report


8/17


9/17

1 week to 4 weeks "Build, Code, Measure, Data, Learn" cycle
















10/17

FDD


11/17


12/17


13/17


14/17


15/17

Level Benefit Investment

1 Greater visibility into teams work;

ability to redirect. Build data for

forcasting estimates. Cut down

communication overhead

throughout project life cycle

among team members. Establishshared language on the

requirement therefore reducing

defects due to misunderstanding

of reqt

read/understand info and redirect

priority items

Team development and work

process design.

Setting-up team protocols (e.g.,

exit/entry for hand-off of work) and

work flow;acceptance test scenario in user

reqmt doc, prioritized accdg to

business value

2 Reduce deployment cost.

Low defects in SIT, UAT and PRD

and high productivity primarily by

reducing and managing technical

complexity arising from addition

of features to existing system.

Lowered productivity during

technical skill development.

Infrastructure cost

3 Higher value deliveries and better

product decisions.

Social capital expended on

incorporating business expertise

into team.


16/17

Assumptions/Limitations/Risks Core Metric Time to achieve

1 wk - requirement

analysis/breakdown into user

stories

can be achieved with existing

analysis skills

Team regularly reports progress from a

business value perspective.

2-6 months

new skills to be learned on:

continuous integration,

decomposing technical architecture

into decoupled functional

architecture (functional subsystem).

acceptance test-driven

development,

automated testing (unit/sub-

system/end-to-end)

independent/isolated DEV envt

needed to lower debugging and

defect fix turn around time

Team ships on market cadence.i.e.

shipping the release at the rate market

will accept it.

3-24 months

business commitment and

involvement in brainstorming

requirement feasibility in an

iterative way together with project

team end-to-end

Team provides concrete business metrics. 1-5 years


17/17

Notes

quantifiable benefits;

more specific examples of activities to support investment required

(existing activities working well and to be continued + new activities

proposed)

eReporting - 3 part-time days to breakdown reqts into user storiesand set-up of JIRA workflow with resource having sufficient analysis

skills and not necessarily w/ agile skills

levels 1/2 are driven by agile practices but not fully implementing

agile; level 3 can enable full implementation

deliverables would need to further assessed for cmmi compliance

need to factor-in buffer for learning curve in estimating model to

incorporate agile techniques

decoupling done so sub-system is established and automation can

proceed as next step

Documents

Assessment of Agile Adoption