Lean & Agile Project Management - davidfrico.com

Lean & AgileProject Management

- Simplified -Leading Large Programs & Projects

Dr. David F. Rico, PMP, CSEP, ACP, CSM, SAFe

Twitter: @dr_david_f_ricoWebsite: http://www.davidfrico.com

LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidfricoFacebook: http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1540017424

Dave’s Agile Resources: http://www.davidfrico.com/daves-agile-resources.htm

Agenda

2

• Introduction• Models

• Stories

• Phases

• Scaling

• Portfolio

• Metrics

• Tools

• Leading

• Summary

What is Agility? A-gil-i-ty (ə-'ji-lə-tē) Property consisting of quickness,

lightness, and ease of movement; To be very nimble The ability to create and respond to change in order to

profit in a turbulent global business environment The ability to quickly reprioritize use of resources when

requirements, technology, and knowledge shift A very fast response to sudden market changes and

emerging threats by intensive customer interaction Use of evolutionary, incremental, and iterative delivery

to converge on an optimal customer solution Maximizing BUSINESS VALUE with right sized, just-

enough, and just-in-time processes and documentationHighsmith, J. A. (2002). Agile software development ecosystems. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley.

3

What are Agile Methods?

4

People-centric way to create innovative solutions Product-centric alternative to documents/process Market-centric model to maximize business value

Agile Manifesto. (2001). Manifesto for agile software development. Retrieved September 3, 2008, from http://www.agilemanifesto.orgRico, D. F., Sayani, H. H., & Sone, S. (2009). The business value of agile software methods. Ft. Lauderdale, FL: J. Ross Publishing.Rico, D. F. (2012). Agile conceptual model. Retrieved February 6, 2012, from http://davidfrico.com/agile-concept-model-1.pdf

Customer Collaboration

Working Software

Individuals & Interactions

Responding to Change

valuedmore than

valuedmore than

valuedmore than

valuedmore than

Contracts

Documentation

Processes

Project Plans

Frequent comm. Close proximity Regular meetings

Multiple comm. channels Frequent feedback Relationship strength

Leadership Boundaries Empowerment

Competence Structure Manageability/Motivation

Clear objectives Small/feasible scope Acceptance criteria

Timeboxed iterations Valid operational results Regular cadence/intervals

Org. flexibility Mgt. flexibility Process flexibility

System flexibility Technology flexibility Infrastructure flexibility

Contract compliance Contract deliverables Contract change orders

Lifecycle compliance Process Maturity Level Regulatory compliance

Document deliveries Document comments Document compliance

Cost Compliance Scope Compliance Schedule Compliance

NetworkComputer

Operating SystemMiddlewareApplications

APIsGUI

How Agile Works Agile requirements implemented in slices vs. layers User needs with higher business value are done first Reduces cost & risk while increasing business success

5Shore, J. (2011). Evolutionary design illustrated. Norwegian Developers Conference, Oslo, Norway.

Agile Traditional1 2 3 Faster

Early ROI

Lower Costs

Fewer Defects

Manageable Risk

Better Performance

Smaller Attack Surface

Late

No Value

Cost Overruns

Very Poor Quality

Uncontrollable Risk

Slowest Performance

More Security Incidents Seven Wastes1.Rework2.Motion3.Waiting4.Inventory5 .Transportation6.Overprocessing7 .Overproduction

MINIMIZES MAXIMIZES

JIT, Just-enough architecture Early, in-process system V&V Fast continuous improvement Scalable to systems of systems Maximizes successful outcomes

Myth of perfect architecture Late big-bang integration tests Year long improvement cycles Breaks down on large projects Undermines business success

Thousands of TestsContinuously Executed

No More Late BigBang Integration

Agile Development Model User needs designed & developed one-at-a-time Changes automatically detected, built, and tested System fully tested and deployed as changes occur

6Humble, J., & Farley, D. (2011). Continuous delivery. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.Duvall, P., Matyas, S., & Glover, A. (2006). Continuous integration. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley.

BuildIntegration

Server

VersionControlServer

BuildScripts

UsesWatches

BuildStatus

ProvidesDeveloper A

Developer B

Developer C

CommitsChanges

CommitsChanges

CommitsChanges

Builds

Database

Analysis

Testing

Reporting

Documentation

Deployment

Early, Automated, Fast,Efficient, & Repeatable

Constant ReadinessState & CM Control

Lean, Waste Free, Low WIP,No Deadlocked Test Queues

Rapidly & SuccessfullyDev. Complex Systems

Org. system needs into capabilities, features, user stories Prioritize features, group into releases, and start sprints Develop minimum set of features with highest value

7

Capability/MMF #1

●Feature 1●Feature 2●Feature 3●Feature 4●Feature 5●Feature 6●Feature 7

Capability/MMF #2


Capability/MMF #3


Capability/MMF #4


Capability/MMF #5


Capability/MMF #6


Capability/MMF #7


Evolving “Unified/Integrated” Enterprise Data Model

“Disparate” LEGACY SYSTEM DATABASES (AND DATA MODELS)

ETL

A

“Legacy” MS SQL Server Stovepipes “Inter-Departmental” Linux Blade/Oracle/Java/WebSphere Server

“Leased” DWA/HPC/Cloud Services

Sprint 1 Sprint 2 Sprint 3 Sprint 4 Sprint 5 Sprint 6 Sprint 7

Release

Release

Release

Release

ETL ETL ETL ETL ETL ETL

Bente, S., Bombosch, U., & Langade, S. (2012). Collaborative enterprise architecture: Enriching EA with lean, agile, and enterprise 2.0 practices. Waltham, MA: Elsevier.

Agile Development In-the-Large“Incremental Business Value”

(for example, assume 25 user stories per feature, 175 user stories per capability/MMF, and 1,225 user stories total)

What is Agile Project Mgt.? A-P-M (ā-pē-ĕm): Light, flexible, collaborative, and

adaptive; Market-centric project management model: Sound, yet flexible process to manage projects under

uncertainty, urgency, and a need for unique expertise Values, principles, and practices to help project teams

in coming to grips with a challenging environment Managing the flow of human thoughts, emotions, and

interactions in a way that produces business value Rapidly and reliably creating value by engaging

customers, continuously learning, and adapting Lightweight, yet disciplined project management model

for building high-quality technology-intensive systemsAugustine, S. (2005). Managing agile projects. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.Chin, G. (2004). Agile project management: How to succeed in the face of changing project requirements. Broadway, NY: Amacom.DeCarlo, D. (2004). Extreme project management: Using leadership, principles, and tools to deliver value in the face of volatility. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Highsmith, J. A. (2010). Agile project management: Creating innovative products. Boston, MA: Pearson Education. 8

DOI. (2005). Declaration of interdependence. Retrieved April 8, 2014, from http://www.pmdoi.org 9

Declaration of Interdependence formed in 2005 Carved out a niche for agile project managers Focus on Agile Methods, ROI, and culture

Declaration of Interdependence

•We increase ROI by making continuous flow of value our focus.•We deliver reliable results by engaging customers in frequent interactions and shared ownership. •We expect uncertainty and manage for it through iterations, anticipation, and adaptation. •We unleash creativity and innovation by recognizing that individuals are the ultimate source of value•We create an environment where people can make a difference. •We boost performance through group accountability for results and shared responsibility for team effectiveness. •We improve effectiveness and reliability through situationally specific strategies, processes and practices.

Pine, B. J. (1993). Mass customization: The new frontier in business competition. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.Rico, D. F. (2012). Agile vs. traditional projects. Retrieved February 6, 2013, from http://davidfrico.com/tpm-vs-apm-ii.pdf

Agile Project Management

High levels of uncertainty and unpredictability

High technology projects

Fast paced, highly competitive industries

Rapid pace of technological change

Research oriented, discovery projects

Large fluctuations in project performance

Shorter term, performance based RDT&E contracts

Achieving high impact product/service effectiveness

Highly creative new product development contracts

Customer intensive, one off product/service solutions

Highly volatile and unstable market conditions

High margin, intellectually intensive industries

Delivering value at the point of sale

Traditional Project Management

Predictable situations

Low technology projects

Stable, slow moving industries

Low levels of technological change

Repeatable operations

Low rates of changing project performance

Long term, fixed price production contracts

Achieving concise economic efficiency goals

Highly administrative contracts

Mass production and high volume manufacturing

Highly predictable and stable market conditions

Low margin industries such as commodities

Delivering value at the point of plan

10

Exploratory or research/development projects When fast customer responsiveness is paramount In organizations that are highly innovative/creative

When to use Agile Project Mgt.?

Agenda

11

• Introduction

• Models• Stories

• Phases

• Scaling

• Portfolio

• Metrics

• Tools

• Leading

• Summary

Models of Agile Project Mgt.

12

Schwaber, K., & Beedle, M. (2001). Agile software development with scrum. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Beck, K., & Fowler, M. (2001). Planning extreme programming. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Addison-Wesley.Augustine, S. (2008). Certified scrum master training: Not just how, buy why. Herndon, VA: LitheSpeed.Wysocki, R.F. (2010). Adaptive project framework: Managing complexity in the face of uncertainty. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.Highsmith, J. A. (2010). Agile project management: Creating innovative products. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.Layton, M. C., & Maurer, R. (2011). Agile project management for dummies. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley Publishing.

Scrum- 1994 -

XP- 1998 -

XP-Scrum- 2008 -

Adaptive- 2010 -

APM- 2010 -

sAPM- 2011 -

Product BL

Sprint BL

Sprints

Daily standup

Sprint Review

Retrospective

User stories

Estimating

Release plan

Iteration plan

Task plan

Iterating

Release plan

Sprint plan

Sprinting

Daily standup

Sprint review

Retrospective

Scoping

Planning

Feasibility

Cyclical dev.

Checkpoint

Review

Envision

Speculate

Explore

Iteration

Launch

Close

Vision

Roadmap

Release plan

Sprint plan

Daily Scrum

Review-Retro

Dozens of Agile project management models emerged Stem from XP, Scrum, and new product development Vision, release, iteration, and learning are common

Scrum

Schwaber, K., & Beedle, M. (2001). Agile software development with scrum. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Created by Jeff Sutherland at Easel in 1993 Product backlog comprised of needed features Sprint-to-sprint, iterative, adaptive emergent model

13

Extreme Programming

Beck, K., & Fowler, M. (2001). Planning extreme programming. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Addison-Wesley.

Created by Kent Beck at Chrysler in 1998 Release plan is comprised of customer needs Lightweight, rigorous near-term planning element

14

UserStories

ArchitecturalSpike

ReleasePlanning Iteration Acceptance

TestsSmall

Releases

Spike

TestScenarios

SystemMetaphor

CustomerApproval

LatestVersion

ReleasePlan

NextIteration

BugsNewStoriesRequirements

UncertainEstimates

ConfidentEstimates

Scrum-XP Hybrid

Augustine, S. (2008). Certified scrum master training: Not just how, buy why. Herndon, VA: LitheSpeed.

Created by Sanjiv Augustine of Lithespeed in 2008 Release planning used to create product backlog Extends Scrum beyond Sprint-to-sprint planning

Initial Planning Sprint Cycle

Discovery Session

Agile Training Project Discovery Process Discovery Team Discovery Initial Backlog

Release Planning

Business Case Desired Backlog Hi-Level Estimates Prioritize Backlog Finalize Backlog

Product Backlog

Prioritized Requirements

Sprint Planning

Set Sprint Capacity Identify Tasks Estimate Tasks

Sprint Review

Present Backlog Items Record Feedback Adjust Backlog

Daily Scrum

Completed Backlog Items Planned Backlog Items Impediments to Progress

Sprint Backlog

List of Technical Tasks Assigned to a Sprint

Potentially Shippable Product

Working Operational Software

Sprint

Select Tasks and Create Tests Create Simple Designs Code and Test Software Units Perform Integration Testing Maintain Daily Burndown Chart Update Sprint Backlog

Sprint Retrospective

15

Adaptive Project Framework

Wysocki, R.F. (2010). Adaptive project framework: Managing complexity in the face of uncertainty. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.

Created by Bob Wysocki for consulting in 2008 Designed to be a generic model for non-IT projects Lightweight traditional project management approach

Adaptive Project Framework

Scoping

Identify Opportunity Develop CoS Write PoS Document Needs Stage Gate 1 Review

Planning

Identify Project Type Prioritize Constraints Develop WBS Team Formation Stage Gate 2 Review

Feasibility

Develop Prototype Reprioritize Needs Detailed WBS Estimate Resources Stage Gate 3 Review

Checkpoint

Analyze Needs Evaluation Solution Estimate Value Determine Success Stage Gate 4 Review

Review

Finalize Documents Lessons Learned Process Changes Final Report Stage Gate 5 Review

Cyclical Product or Service Implementation

Cycle Planning

Responsibilities Timelines Work Packages Communications Governance

Continually improve process, documents, team, architecture, designs, implementation, tests, etc.Stage Gate 3.n

Review

Cycle Reviews

Update Requirements Update Scope Update Schedules Update Plans Inform Stakeholders

Daily Meetings

Arrange Facilities Prepare Agendas Send Meeting Notices Facilitate Meetings Record Action Items

Product or Service Implementation

Select Personnel with Needed Skills Identify Detailed Technical Tasks Create Detailed Architectures and Designs Select and Implement Technical Solutions Perform Development and Operational Tests

Continuous Improvement

16


Highsmith, J. A. (2010). Agile project management: Creating innovative products. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.

Created by Jim Highsmith of Cutter in 2010 Front-end visions and architectures and final QA Light project model wrapped around agile practices

Innovation Lifecycle

Envision

Product Vision Product Architecture Project Objectives Project Community Delivery Approach

Speculate

Gather Requirements Product Backlog Release Planning Risk Planning Cost Estimation

Explore

Iteration Management Technical Practices Team Development Team Decisions Collaboration

Launch

Final Review Final Acceptance Final QA Final Documentation Final Deployment

Close

Clean Up Open Items Support Material Final Retrospective Final Reports Project Celebration

Iterative Delivery

Technical Planning

Story Analysis Task Development Task Estimation Task Splitting Task Planning

Standups, Architecture, Design, Build, Integration, Documentation, Change, Migration, and IntegrationStory Deployment

Adapt

Focus Groups Technical Reviews Team Evaluations Project Reporting Adaptive Action

Operational Testing

Integration Testing System Testing Operational Testing Usability Testing Acceptance Testing

Development, Test, & Evaluation

Development Pairing Unit Test Development Simple Designs Coding and Refactoring Unit and Component Testing

Continuous

17

Layton, M. C., & Maurer, R. (2011). Agile project management for dummies. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley Publishing.

Created by Mark Layton at PlatinumEdge in 2012 Mix of new product development, XP, and Scrum Simple codification of common XP-Scrum hybrid

18

Agile Project Management“Simplified”

Agenda

19

• Introduction

• Models

• Stories• Phases

• Scaling

• Portfolio

• Metrics

• Tools

• Leading

• Summary

User Story

Beck, K., & Fowler, M. (2004). Planning extreme programming. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Addison-Wesley.

A function or feature of value to a customer An estimable and testable software requirement 7 to 15 stories should be implemented per iteration

20

User Story Examples

Cohn, M. (2004). User stories applied: For agile software development. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Requirement written from perspective of a user Function or a feature that has value to a customer Discrete unit of functionality written on an index card

21

Conditions of Satisfaction Conditions of satisfaction added to user stories Serve as a set of user acceptance test criteria Used for development and operational tests

22Cohn, M. (2004). User stories applied: For agile software development. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Detailed Sub-Stories Details can be added in smaller sub-stories Good way to functionally-decompose user stories May also represent an object-oriented point-of-view


Epics Epics are very large enterprise requirements They are often called capabilities or feature sets A very-large unit of work that must be decomposed


User Story Workshops Form stakeholder groups to brainstorm user stories Goal is to write as many user stories as possible Start with epics and decompose user stories


Agenda

26

• Introduction

• Models

• Stories

• Phases• Scaling

• Portfolio

• Metrics

• Tools

• Leading

• Summary

Process Steps

1. Develop product objective.

2. Create draft vision statement.

3. Validate and revise vision statement.

4. Finalize vision statement.

Stage 1—Vision Description. Product goals aligned with strategy Owner. Product Owner Frequency. At least annually [1-2 hours]

27

Product owner identifies product vision. Vision is project's destination. It defines what product is, how it supports organization strategy, who will use it, and why people will use it.

Vision

Example

• For. <target customer>• Who. <needs it>• The. <product name>• Is a. <product category>• That. <product benefit, reason to buy>• Unlike. <competitors>• Our product. <differentiator, value added>

• For. Bank customers• Who. Want mobile banking• The. Mobile banking application• Is a. Mobile device enable banking app• That. Provides secure, 24x7 mobile banking• Unlike. Brick-and-mortar access points• Our product. Enable 24-hour a day services

Stage 2—Product Roadmap Description. Holistic view of product features Owner. Product Owner Frequency. At least biannually [2-4 hours]

28

Process Steps

1. Identify product features.

2. Arrange product features.

3. Estimate and order product features.

4. Determine high-level time frames.

Product owner creates product roadmap. Roadmap is high-level view of product requirements with loose timeframe for development. Identify, estimate, valuate, prioritize, and schedule themes.

Features

Roadmap

Account• Open acct.• Modify acct.• Close acct.

Transaction• Deposit• Withdrawal• Transfer

Status• Login• Balances• Statements

1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q 5Q

Transaction

Status

Account

Stage 3—Release Planning Description. Release timing for product functions Owner. Product Owner Frequency. At least quarterly [4-8 hours]

29

Process Steps

1. Decompose product features.

2. Create release plan.

Establish release goal.

Prioritize or order user stories.

Set release date.

Refine user stories.

Verify release plan.

Product owner creates release plan. Release plan identifies high-level timetable for releasing functions. Mid-term goals that team mobilizes around. There are many releases in priority order.

Decomposition

Release Plan

Account

ModifyOpen Close

• Create• Login• Setup

• Password• Address• Type

• Notify• Refund• Rationale

Sprint 1 Sprint 2 Sprint 3 Release 1

• Story 1

• Story 11

• Story 1

• Story 11

• Story 1

• Story 11

• Story 1

• Story 11

Stage 4—Sprint Planning Description. Specific iteration goals and tasks Owner. Product Owner and Development Team Frequency. At the start of each sprint [2-4 hours]

30

Process Steps

1. Establish goals and choose user stories.

2. Decompose stories into tasks and create sprint backlog.

Product owner, Scrum Master, and Developers create sprint plan. Sprint planning done at start of sprint. Product backlog must be ready. Developers select sprint goal and what can be done.

Goals & User Stories

Sprint Backlog

As a mobile banking customer, I want to create an account so I can write personal checks

• Create account.• Login to account.• Setup checking account.

Task Pri Status Who App. M T W T F

• Create account: Setup 1 Done Sue Joe 4 4 0 0 0 Install 2 Done Sue Joe 4 4 0 0 0 Schema 3 Done John Joe 0 0 8 0 0 Queries 4 In-work Bob - 0 0 0 8 0 Forms 5 N/S Patty - 0 0 0 0 0 Test 6 N/S Sam - 0 0 0 0 0

Stage 5—Daily Scrum Description. Establish & coordinate daily priorities Owner. Development Team Frequency. Daily [15-minutes]

31

Developers hold daily standup meetings. Purpose is to coordinate daily priorities. Identify what was done, what will be done, and impediments. Task boards and Sprint burndown are updated.

Daily Standup

Sprint Burndown

Process Steps

1. Hold daily standup meeting.

2. Update sprint burndown chart.

3. Perform design, development, test, and evaluation.

All Developers on Team Answer Three Questions in Round-Robin Style

• What has been done since the last meeting?• What will be done before the next meeting?• What obstacles are in my way?

Stage 6—Sprint Review Description. Demonstration of working product Owner. Product Owner and Development Team Frequency. At the end of each sprint [2-4 hours]

32

Process Steps

1. Prepare sprint review meeting.

2. Hold sprint review meeting.

3. Collect feedback from stakeholders.

Developers hold a sprint review. Sprint review performed at end of sprint. Developers demo validated code to stakeholders. Stakeholders vote on demo outcome. Product backlog reprioritized.

Product Demonstration

Stakeholder Feedback

Developers Perform a Live Demo Target Hardware and Answer Stakeholder Questions

• What was the goal of the sprint?• What user stories were attempted?• What user stories were implemented?

Poll Stakeholders One-by-One in Round-Robin Style to Solicit their Feedback

• Is the product acceptable as implemented?• Is the product acceptable with modifications?• Is the product unacceptable as implemented?

Stage 7—Sprint Retrospective Description. Refine environment and processes Owner. Development Team Frequency. At the end of each sprint [1-2 hours]

33

Process Steps

1. Plan sprint retrospective meeting.

2. Hold sprint retrospective meeting.

3. Inspect and adapt.

Developers hold sprint retrospective. Retrospective held at end of sprint. Developers identify the good and bad. Scrum master records results. Processes, tools, and backlog may be adjusted.


Process Improvements

Developers Perform a Live Demo Target Hardware and Answer Stakeholder Questions

• What went well in the last sprint?• What could be improved in the next sprint?• What people, process, and tools should change?

Scrum Master Records Action Items and Prepares Process Improvement Plan

• Scrum master records suggested improvements.• Developers prioritize suggested improvements.• Add high-priority non-functional items to backlog.

Agenda

34

• Introduction

• Models

• Stories

• Phases

• Scaling

• Portfolio

• Metrics

• Tools

• Leading

• Summary

Multi-Level Teams


Enables projects to plan for the future and present Decomposes capabilities into implementable pieces Unclogs the drainpipes to let the execution flow freely

Multi-Level Teams

Product Management Team Product Management Team

Chief Product Manager Chief Architect Product Development Manager Release Management Team members (1-2 per release team)

Release Management Team

Feature Team

Release Management Team

Product Manager Project Manager Chief Architect Feature team members (1-2 per feature team)

Feature Teams

Product Specialist (and owner) Iteration Manager Technical and product Members Development team members (1-2 per development team)

35

Multi-Level Planning


Enables multiple level enterprise plans to co-exist Allows stakeholders to build viewpoint-specific plans Ensures capabilities are delivered at regular intervals

Multi-Level Planning

Product Roadmap Product Roadmap

Enterprise architecture needs Capability focused Vision, objectives, and backlog 18 to 36 weeks

Release Plan

Iteration Plan

Release Plan

Subsystem architecture Feature set focused Strategy, objectives, and backlog 6 to 12 weeks

Iteration Plan

Component-level architecture User story focused Implementation plan, objectives, and backlog 2 to 4 weeks

36

Multi-Level Backlog


Enables multiple levels of abstraction to co-exist Allows customers and developers to communicate Makes optimum use of people’s time and resources

Multi-Level Backlog

Capabilities Capability

Mission goal or objective level High-level business or product function Also called an Epic, i.e., multiple feature sets Comprises 18-90 days worth of work

Feature Set

Cross-functional mission threads Related user stories that are grouped together Also called a Theme, i.e., implemented as an entity Comprises 6 to 30 days worth of work

User Story

Functional, system-level requirements Simple requirement written by customer or user A small unit of functionality having business value Comprises 2 to 10 days worth of work

Capability1

Capability2

Capability3

Feature Sets

Feature1

Feature2

Feature3

User Stories

Story 1 Story 4 Story 7



37

Multi-Level Coordination


Enables lean and agile methods to scale-up Allows enterprises to create large-scale programs Unleashes optimum productivity and overall control

38

Multi-Level Coordination & Governance

User Story Teams User Story Teams User Story Teams

Feature Set Team

Capability Team

Feature Set Team Feature Set Team

Multi-Level Governance


Enables enterprises to achieve functional needs Allows programs to coordinate functional activities Ensures optimal technical performance is achieved

Multi-Level Governance

Feature Team Feature Team Feature Team

Functional Team

Governing Team

Functional Team Functional Team

R T S

RRR

RRR

RRR

TTT

TTT

TTT

SSS

SSS

SSS

QIR

TA

SCD

QIR

TA

SCD

QIR

TA

SCD

QIR

TA

SCD

QIR

TA

SCD

QIR

TA

SCD

QIR

TA

SCD

QIR

TA

SCD

QIR

TA

SCD

QIR

TA

SCD

QIR

TA

SCD

QIR

TA

SCD

QIR

TA

SCD

QIR

TA

SCD

QIR

TA

SCD

QIR

TA

SCD

QIR

TA

SCD

QIR

TA

SCD

QIR

TA

SCD

QIR

TA

SCD

QIR

TA

SCD

QIR

TA

SCD

QIR

TA

SCD

QIR

TA

SCD

QIR

TA

SCD

QIR

TA

SCD

QIR

TA

SCD

M M M

M M

M M M

M

M M M

M M M

M M M

M M M

M M M

M M M

39

Value Stream Mapping

40Anderson, D. J. (2010). Kanban: Successful evolutionary change for your technology business. Sequim, WA: Blue Hole Press.

Start by flow-charting the as-is product workflow Add buffers and queues one feels are necessary Add WIP limits to buffers, queues, and activity

Agenda

41

• Introduction

• Models

• Stories

• Phases

• Scaling

• Portfolio• Metrics

• Tools

• Leading

• Summary

Agile Enterprise Frameworks

42

Dozens of Agile enterprise frameworks have emerged Many stem from principles of Extreme Programming All include product, project, & team management

Beck, K., & Fowler, M. (2001). Planning extreme programming. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Addison-Wesley.Schwaber, K. (2007). The enterprise and scrum. Redmond, WA: Microsoft Press.Leffingwell, D. (2007). Scaling software agility: Best practices for large enterprises. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.Larman, C., & Vodde, B. (2008). Scaling lean and agile development: Thinking and organizational tools for large-scale scrum. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley.Ambler, S. W., & Lines, M. (2012). Disciplined agile delivery: A practitioner's guide to agile software delivery in the enterprise. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.Thompson, K. (2013). cPrime’s R.A.G.E. is unleashed: Agile leaders rejoice! Retrieved March 28, 2014, from http://www.cprime.com/tag/agile-governanceHumble, J., & Farley, D. (2011). Continuous delivery. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.

eScrum- 2007 -

SAFe- 2007 -

LeSS- 2007 -

DaD- 2007 -

RAGE- 2012 -

eCD- 2011 -

Product Mgt

Program Mgt

Project Mgt

Process Mgt

Business Mgt

Market Mgt

Strategic Mgt

Portfolio Mgt

Program Mgt

Team Mgt

Quality Mgt

Delivery Mgt

Business Mgt

Portfolio Mgt

Product Mgt

Area Mgt

Sprint Mgt

Release Mgt

Business Mgt

Portfolio Mgt

Inception

Construction

Iterations

Transition

Business

Governance

Portfolio

Program

Project

Delivery

Source Ctrl

Build Auto

Test Auto

Cont Integ

Release Auto

Cont Deploy

Enterprise Scrum (eScrum)

Schwaber, K. (2007). The enterprise and scrum. Redmond, WA: Microsoft Press.

Created by Ken Schwaber of Scrum Alliance in 2007 Application of Scrum at any place in the enterprise Basic Scrum with extensive Backlog grooming

43

Scaled Agile Framework (SAFe) Created by Dean Leffingwell of Rally in 2007 Knowledge to scale agile practices to enterprise Hybrid of Kanban, XP release planning, and Scrum

44Leffingwell, D. (2007). Scaling software agility: Best practices for large enterprises. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.

Large Scale Scrum (LeSS) Created by Craig Larman of Valtech in 2008 Scrum for larger projects of 500 to 1,500 people Model to nest product owners, backlogs, and teams

45Larman, C., & Vodde, B. (2008). Scaling lean and agile development: Thinking and organizational tools for large-scale scrum. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Product Owner

Product Backlog

Area Product Owner

Area Product Backlog

SprintBacklog

Daily Scrum15 minutes

Product Backlog Refinement5 - 10% of Sprint

2 - 4 Week Sprint

1 DayFeature Team +Scrum Master

Sprint Planning II2 - 4 hours

SprintPlanning I2 - 4 hours

Potentially ShippableProduct Increment

SprintReview

JointSprint

Review


Disciplined Agile Delivery (DaD) Created by Scott Ambler of IBM in 2012 People, learning-centric hybrid agile IT delivery Scrum mapping to a model-driven RUP framework

46Ambler, S. W., & Lines, M. (2012). Disciplined agile delivery: A practitioner's guide to agile software delivery in the enterprise. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.

Recipes for Agile Governance (RAGE) Created by Kevin Thompson of cPrime in 2013 Agile governance model for large Scrum projects Traditional-agile hybrid of portfolio-project planning

47Thompson, K. (2013). cPrime’s R.A.G.E. is unleashed: Agile leaders rejoice. Retrieved March 28, 2014, from http://www.cprime.com/tag/agile-governance

Enterprise Continuous Delivery Created by Jez Humble of ThoughtWorks in 2011 Includes CM, build, testing, integration, release, etc. Goal is “one-touch” automation of deployment pipeline

48

Humble, J., & Farley, D. (2011). Continuous delivery. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.Duvall, P., Matyas, S., & Glover, A. (2006). Continuous integration. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley. Ohara, D. (2012). Continuous delivery and the world of devops. San Francisco, CA: GigaOM Pro.

Agenda

49

• Introduction

• Models

• Stories

• Phases

• Scaling

• Portfolio

• Metrics• Tools

• Leading

• Summary

50

Agile Performance MeasurementW

ork

(Sto

ry, P

oint

, Tas

k)or

Eff

ort

(Wee

k, D

ay, H

our)

Time Unit (Roadmap, Release, Iteration, Month, Week, Day, Hour, etc.)

Burndown

Wor

k (S

tory

, Poi

nt, T

ask)

or E

ffor

t (W

eek,

Day

, Hou

r)


Cumulative Flow

Wor

k (S

tory

, Poi

nt, T

ask)

or E

ffor

t (W

eek,

Day

, Hou

r)


Earned Value Management - EVMCPI

SPI

PPC

APC

Wor

k (S

tory

, Poi

nt, T

ask)

or E

ffor

t (W

eek,

Day

, Hou

r)


Earned Business Value - EBV

Agile Metrics Taxonomy Agile methods are based on traditional measures Story points, velocity, and burndown basic metrics Experts use Agile EVM, portfolio, contract, ent., etc.

51Rico, D. F., Sayani, H. H., & Sone, S. (2009). The business value of agile software methods. Ft. Lauderdale, FL: J. Ross Publishing.

Agile Metrics

1. Traditional Metrics

2. Basic Agile Metrics

3. Agile EVM Metrics

Size Effort Productivity Quality Complexity Cycle Time

Story Points Ideal Days Velocity Burndown Cumulative Flow Running Tested Features

Planned Story Points Planned Sprints Planned Release Budget Completed Story Points Completed Sprints Completed Releases

4. Agile Portfolio Metrics

5. Agile Contract Metrics

6. Agile Enterprise Metrics

Benefit-Cost Ratio Return on Investment Net Present Value Breakeven Point Real Options Earned Business Value

Level of Effort Dynamic Value Performance Based Target Cost Optional Scope Collaborative

Relationships Communications Collaboration Motivation Creativity Satisfaction

0. “No Metrics”1. Traditional Metrics2. Basic Agile Metrics3. Agile EVM Metrics4. Agile Portfolio Metrics5. Agile Contract Metrics6. Agile Enterprise Metrics

Agile Testing Metrics Agile testing also based on traditional metrics Agile testing measures include basic volumetrics Key metrics are RTF, code coverage, complexity, etc.

52Rico, D. F., Sayani, H. H., & Sone, S. (2009). The business value of agile software methods. Ft. Lauderdale, FL: J. Ross Publishing.

Volumetrics Number of lines of code Number of function points Number of story points Number of user stories Number of features Number of epics Number of capabilities Number of MMFs

Code CoverageRunning Tested Code

Defect DensityCode Complexity

Running tested epics Running tested features Running tested releases Running tested iterations Running tested builds Running tested user stories

Epic coverage Feature coverage Release coverage Iteration coverage Build coverage Statement coverage Function coverage Other coverage types

Epic complexity Feature complexity Release complexity Iteration complexity Build complexity Cyclomatic complexity Actual complexity Other complexity types

Defects per epic Defects per feature Defects per release Defects per iteration Defects per build Defects per user story Defects per story point Defects per other types

Continuous IntegrationBuild number and durationDatabase number and durationInspection number and durationTest number and durationFeedback number and duration

Document number and durationDeployment number and duration

Agile Testing ROI at Google Google early adopter of agile methods and Scrum Google also uses agile testing at enterprise scale 15,000 developers run 120 million tests per day

53Micco, J. (2013). Continuous integration at google scale. Eclipse Con, Boston, MA.Whittaker, J., Arbon, J., & Carollo, J. (2012). How google tests software. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education. Kumar, A. (2010). Development at the speed and scale of google. International Software Development Conference (QCon 2010), San Francisco, CA.

15,000+ developers & 4,000 projects in 40+ offices Single monolithic code tree with mixed language code Submissions at head – One branch – All from source 20+ code changes/minute – 50% code change/month 5,500+ submissions/day – 120 million tests/day 80,000 builds per day – 20 million builds per year Automatic code inspections – For low defect density 10X programming productivity improvement $150 million in annual labor savings (ROI as a result)

Agenda

54

• Introduction• Models• Stories• Phases• Scaling

• Portfolio• Metrics• Tools• Leading• Summary

APM Tool Variety

55VersionOne. (2010). 5th annual state of agile survey. Atlanta, GA: Author.Allen, W. (2008). Agile PM tools (hosted). Retrieved May 11, 2011 from http://weblogs.asp.net/wallen

There are literally dozens, if not 100s of APM tools There are dozens of free open source software tools Annual tool & price surveys are frequently conducted

Enables enterprises to be flexible but disciplined Allows enterprises to distribute project work teams Ensures distributed project teams are collaborating

56

Agile Tools“Across the Life Cycle”

Project Management

RequirementsDOORSRequisite ProSLATE

DesignRhapsodyTelelogic System ArchitectRational System Architect

CodingEclipseVisual StudioSun Studio

TestingJUnitNUnitXunitCPPUnit

GtestFitFitnesseSelenium

Quality AssuranceCheckStylePMDEMMAJdependCoberturaGcov

Configuration MgtSubversion (SVN)Concurrent Versions Sys.ClearCase

Build AutomationAntNAntMavenMake

Continuous Integ.Cruise ControlHudsonBuildBot

CollaborationWebExSkypeMeetMeWimba

WikiMediaWikiTracWikiPhpWiki

DocumentationNDocJavadocDoxygeniText

Version OneRallyScrum WorksVSTS

Agile TeamAgile EnterpriseScope ManagerStory Studio

XP Plan ItIterateXP TrackerAgilo

XP CGIXP WebXplannerIce Scrum

Project CardsTarget ProcessXtreme PlannerTeam System

CommunityEnterpriseMingleHansoft

There are literally hundreds of agile testing tools There are tools for building, testing, and deploying Integration tools monitor repositories and initiate tests

57

Agile Tools“In-Depth Test Automation”

Smart, J. (2009). Automated deployment with maven and friends: Going the whole nine yards. Proceedings of the Agile 2009 Conference, Chicago, Illinois, USA.

Agenda

58

• Introduction

• Models

• Stories

• Phases

• Scaling

• Portfolio

• Metrics

• Tools

• Leading• Summary

Agile World View “Agility” has many dimensions other than IT It ranges from leadership to technological agility The focus of this brief is program management agility

Agile Leaders

Agile Organization Change

Agile Acquisition & Contracting

Agile Strategic Planning

Agile Capability Analysis

Agile Program Management

Agile Tech.

Agile Information Systems

Agile Tools

Agile Processes & Practices

Agile Systems Development


59

Agile Leadership

Rico, D. F. (2013). Agile coaching in high-conflict environments. Retrieved April 11, 2013 from http://davidfrico.com/agile-conflict-mgt.pdfRico, D. F. (2013). Agile project management for virtual distributed teams. Retrieved July 29, 2013 from http://www.davidfrico.com/rico13m.pdfRico, D. F. (2013). Agile vs. traditional contract manifesto. Retrieved March 28, 2013 from http://www.davidfrico.com/agile-vs-trad-contract-manifesto.pdf 60

Personal Project Enterprise

• Don't Be a Know-it-All• Be Open & Willing to Learn• Treat People Respectfully• Be Gracious, Humble, & Kind• Listen & Be Slow-to-Speak• Be Patient & Longsuffering• Be Objective & Dispassionate• Don't Micromanage & Direct• Exhibit Maturity & Composure• Don't Escalate or Exacerbate• Don't Gossip or be Negative• Delegate, Empower, & Trust• Gently Coach, Guide, & Lead

• Customer Communication• Product Visioning• Distribution Strategy• Team Development• Standards & Practices• Telecom Infrastructure• Development Tools• High-Context Meetings• Coordination & Governance• F2F Communications• Consensus Based Decisions• Performance Management• Personal Development

• Business Value vs. Scope• Interactions vs. Contracts• Relationship vs. Regulation• Conversation vs. Negotiation• Consensus vs. Dictatorship• Collaboration vs. Control• Openness vs. Adversarialism• Exploration vs. Planning• Incremental vs. All Inclusive• Entrepreneurial vs. Managerial• Creativity vs. Constraints• Satisfaction vs. Compliance• Quality vs. Quantity

Power & authority delegated to the lowest level Tap into the creative nuclear power of team’s talent Coaching, communication, and relationships key skills

Agile Leadership Model

Augustine, S. (2005). Managing agile projects. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.

Guiding Vision Simple Rules Open Information Light Touch

Foster Alignment and Cooperation Encourage Emergence and Self Organization

Adaptive Leadership

Learning/Adaptation

Leadership

Team Vision Team Alignment Bold Future Shared Expectations

Management

Business Outcomes Delineate Scope Estimate Effort Design Vision Box Elevator Statement

Leadership

Culture of Change Value Focus

Management

Assess Status Quo Customize Method Release Plan Iteration Plans Facilitate Design Conduct Testing Manage Releases

Leadership

Conduct Standups Promote Feedback Build Trust Facilitate Action

Management

Team Collocation Get Onsite Customer Practice Pairing Information Radiator Map Value Stream

Leadership

Adapt Style Roving Leadership Go With Flow Work Life Quality Build on Strengths Gain Commitments

Management

Decentralize Control Pull vs. Push Manage Flow Use Action Sprints

Leadership

Embodied Presence Embodied Learning

Management

Daily Feedback Monitor/Adapt Rules Monitor Practices Retrospectives Scenario Planning

Organic Teams

Leadership

Craftsmanship Collaboration Guiding Coalition Community

Management

Identify Community Design Structures Get Team Players Adaptive Enterprise

61

Created by Sanjiv Augustine at CC Pace in 2005 Builds agile cultures, mind-sets, & environments Leadership model for managing agile projects

New Agile Contracts Emerging

Rico, D. F. (2011). The necessity of new contract models for agile project management. Fairfax, VA: Gantthead.Com.Rico, D. F. (2013). Agile vs. traditional contract manifesto. Retrieved March 28, 2013 from http://www.davidfrico.com 62

Dynamic Value Performance Based Target Cost Optional Scope Collaborative

Business & Mission Value OVER Scope, Processes, & Deliverables

Personal Interactions OVER Contract, Auditor, & Legal Interactions

Conversations and Consensus OVER Contract Negotiations & Control

Collaboration & Co-Dependency OVER Methodology & Adversarialism

Exploration, Evolution, & Emergence OVER Forecasting & Control

Early Continuous Quality Solutions OVER Late, Long-Term Deliveries

Entrepreneurialism & Openness OVER Compliance & Self-Interest

Customer Satisfaction and Quality OVER Policies & Governance

Communication, cooperation, and interaction key Shared responsibility vs. blame and adversarialism Needs greater focus on collaboration vs. legal terms

Organizational Change Models

Heath, C., & Heath, D. (2010). Switch: How to change things when change is hard. New York, NY: Random House.Patterson, K., et al. (2008). Influencer: The power to change anything: New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.Pink, D. H. (2009). Drive: The surprising truth about what motivates us. New York, NY: Riverhead Books.

Change, no matter how small or large, is difficult Smaller focused changes help to cross the chasm Shrinking, simplifying, and motivation key factors

63

SWITCH - How to Change Things When Change is Hard

Follow the bright spots Script the critical moves

Point to the destination

Find the feeling

Shrink the change Grow your people

Tweak the environment Build habits

Rally the herd

Direct the Rider

Motivate the Elephant

Shape the Path

INFLUENCER - The Power to Change Anything

Create new experiences Create new motives

Perfect complex skills Build emotional skills

Recruit public personalities Recruit influential leaders

Utilize teamwork Enlist the power of social capital

Use incentives wisely Use punishment sparingly

Make it easy Make it unavoidable

Make the Undesirable Desirable

Surpass your Limits

Harness Peer Pressure

Find Strength in Numbers

Design Rewards & Demand Acct.

Change the Environment

DRIVE - The Surprising Truth About What Motivates Us

Purpose

Autonomy

Mastery

Purpose and profit equality Business and societal benefit Share control of profits Delegate implementation Culture and goal alignment Remake society and globe

Be accountable to someone Self-selected work tasks Self-directed work tasks Self-selected timelines Self-selected teams Self-selected implementation

Experimentation and innovation Align tasks to abilities Continuously improve abilities Elevate learning over profits Create challenging tasks Establish high expectations

Agenda

64

• Introduction

• Models

• Stories

• Phases

• Scaling

• Portfolio

• Metrics

• Tools

• Leading

• Summary

65

Schwaber, K., & Beedle, M. (2001). Agile software development with scrum. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Beck, K., & Fowler, M. (2001). Planning extreme programming. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Addison-Wesley.Augustine, S. (2008). Certified scrum master training: Not just how, buy why. Herndon, VA: LitheSpeed.Wysocki, R.F. (2010). Adaptive project framework: Managing complexity in the face of uncertainty. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.Highsmith, J. A. (2010). Agile project management: Creating innovative products. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.Layton, M. C., & Maurer, R. (2011). Agile project management for dummies. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley Publishing.

Scrum- 1994 -

XP- 1998 -

XP-Scrum- 2008 -

Adaptive- 2010 -

APM- 2010 -

sAPM- 2011 -

Product BL

Sprint BL

Sprints

Daily standup

Sprint Review

Retrospective

User stories

Estimating

Release plan

Iteration plan

Task plan

Iterating

Release plan

Sprint plan

Sprinting

Daily standup

Sprint review

Retrospective

Scoping

Planning

Feasibility

Cyclical dev.

Checkpoint

Review

Envision

Speculate

Explore

Iteration

Launch

Close

Vision

Roadmap

Release plan

Sprint plan

Daily Scrum

Review-Retro

Dozens of Agile project management models emerged Stem from XP, Scrum, and new product development Vision, release, iteration, and learning are common

Recap of Agile Project Mgt.

Recap of Agile Ent. Frameworks

66

Dozens of Agile enterprise frameworks have emerged Many stem from principles of Extreme Programming All include product, project, & team management

Beck, K., & Fowler, M. (2001). Planning extreme programming. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Addison-Wesley.Schwaber, K. (2007). The enterprise and scrum. Redmond, WA: Microsoft Press.Leffingwell, D. (2007). Scaling software agility: Best practices for large enterprises. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.Larman, C., & Vodde, B. (2008). Scaling lean and agile development: Thinking and organizational tools for large-scale scrum. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley.Ambler, S. W., & Lines, M. (2012). Disciplined agile delivery: A practitioner's guide to agile software delivery in the enterprise. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.Thompson, K. (2013). cPrime’s R.A.G.E. is unleashed: Agile leaders rejoice! Retrieved March 28, 2014, from http://www.cprime.com/tag/agile-governanceHumble, J., & Farley, D. (2011). Continuous delivery. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.

eScrum- 2007 -

SAFe- 2007 -

LeSS- 2007 -

DaD- 2007 -

RAGE- 2012 -

eCD- 2011 -

Product Mgt

Program Mgt

Project Mgt

Process Mgt

Business Mgt

Market Mgt

Strategic Mgt

Portfolio Mgt

Program Mgt

Team Mgt

Quality Mgt

Delivery Mgt

Business Mgt

Portfolio Mgt

Product Mgt

Area Mgt

Sprint Mgt

Release Mgt

Business Mgt

Portfolio Mgt

Inception

Construction

Iterations

Transition

Business

Governance

Portfolio

Program

Project

Delivery

Source Ctrl

Build Auto

Test Auto

Cont Integ

Release Auto

Cont Deploy

Who is Using Agile Methods 84% of worldwide IT projects use agile methods Includes regulated industries, i.e., DoD, FDA, etc. Agile now used for safety critical systems, FBI, etc.

67

Industry

ShrinkWrapped

ElectronicCommerce

HealthCare

LawEnforcement

Org 20 teams 140 people 5 countries

Size

15 teams 90 people Collocated 4 teams 20 people Collocated 10 teams 50 people Collocated 3 teams 12 people Collocated

U.S.DoD

Primavera

Google

Stratcom

FBI

FDA

Project

Primavera

Adwords

SKIweb

Sentinel

m2000

Purpose

ProjectManagement

Advertising

KnowledgeManagement

Case FileWorkflow

BloodAnalysis

1,838 User Stories 6,250 Function Points 500,000 Lines of Code

Metrics

26,809 User Stories 91,146 Function Points 7,291,666 Lines of Code 1,659 User Stories 5,640 Function Points 451,235 Lines of Code 3,947 User Stories 13,419 Function Points 1,073,529 Lines of Code 390 User Stories 1,324 Function Points 105,958 Lines of Code

Rico, D. F. (2010). Lean and agile project management: For large programs and projects. Proceedings of the First International Conference on Lean Enterprise Software and Systems, Helsinki, Finland, 37-43.

Recap of Agile Methods Agile methods DON’T mean deliver it now & fix it later Lightweight, yet disciplined approach to development Reduced cost, risk, & waste while improving quality

68Rico, D. F. (2012). What’s really happening in agile methods: Its principles revisited? Retrieved June 6, 2012, from http://davidfrico.com/agile-principles.pdfRico, D. F. (2012). The promises and pitfalls of agile methods. Retrieved February 6, 2013 from, http://davidfrico.com/agile-pros-cons.pdfRico, D. F. (2012). How do lean & agile intersect? Retrieved February 6, 2013, from http://davidfrico.com/agile-concept-model-3.pdf

What How ResultFlexibility Use lightweight, yet disciplined processes and artifacts Low work-in-process

Customer Involve customers early and often throughout development Early feedback

Prioritize Identify highest-priority, value-adding business needs Focus resources

Descope Descope complex programs by an order of magnitude Simplify problem

Decompose Divide the remaining scope into smaller batches Manageable pieces

Iterate Implement pieces one at a time over long periods of time Diffuse risk

Leanness Architect and design the system one iteration at a time JIT waste-free design

Swarm Implement each component in small cross-functional teams Knowledge transfer

Collaborate Use frequent informal communications as often as possible Efficient data transfer

Test Early Incrementally test each component as it is developed Early verification

Test Often Perform system-level regression testing every few minutes Early validation

Adapt Frequently identify optimal process and product solutions Improve performance

How do Lean & Agile Intersect?

69

Agile is naturally lean and based on small batches Agile directly supports six principles of lean thinking Agile may be converted to a continuous flow system

Womack, J. P., & Jones, D. T. (1996). Lean thinking: Banish waste and create wealth in your corporation. New York, NY: Free Press.Reinertsen, D. G. (2009). The principles of product development flow: Second generation lean product development. New York, NY: Celeritas.Reagan, R. B., & Rico, D. F. (2010). Lean and agile acquisition and systems engineering: A paradigm whose time has come. DoD AT&L Magazine, 39(6).

Economic View

Decentralization

Fast Feedback

Control Cadence& Small Batches

Manage Queues/Exploit Variability

WIP Constraints& Kanban

Flow PrinciplesAgile Values

CustomerCollaboration

EmpoweredTeams

IterativeDelivery

Respondingto Change

Lean Pillars

Respectfor People

ContinuousImprovement

Customer Value

Relationships

Customer Pull

Continuous Flow

Perfection

Value Stream

Lean Principles Customer relationships, satisfaction, trust, and loyalty Team authority, empowerment, and resources Team identification, cohesion, and communication

Lean & Agile Practices

Product vision, mission, needs, and capabilities Product scope, constraints, and business value Product objectives, specifications, and performance As is policies, processes, procedures, and instructions To be business processes, flowcharts, and swim lanes Initial workflow analysis, metrication, and optimization Batch size, work in process, and artifact size constraints Cadence, queue size, buffers, slack, and bottlenecks Workflow, test, integration, and deployment automation Roadmaps, releases, iterations, and product priorities Epics, themes, feature sets, features, and user stories Product demonstrations, feedback, and new backlogs Refactor, test driven design, and continuous integration Standups, retrospectives, and process improvements Organization, project, and process adaptability/flexibility

Conclusion

70

Agility is the evolution of management thought Confluence of traditional and non-traditional ideas Improves performance by over an order of magnitude

“The world of traditional methods belongs to yesterday”“Don’t waste your time using traditional methods on 21st century projects”

Agile methods are …

Systems development approachesNew product development approachesExpertly designed to be fast and efficientIntentionally lean and free of waste (muda) Systematic highly-disciplined approachesCapable of producing high quality systemsRight-sized, just-enough, and just-in-time tools

Scalable to large, complex mission-critical systems Designed to maximize business value for customers

Wysocki, R.F. (2010). Adaptive project framework: Managing complexity in the face of uncertainty. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.