Lean & AgileEnterprise Frameworks
For Managing Large U.S. Gov’tCloud Computing Projects
Dr. David F. Rico, PMP, CSEP, ACP, CSM, SAFeTwitter: @dr_david_f_rico
Website: http://www.davidfrico.comLinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidfrico
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/david.f.rico.9Agile Capabilities: http://davidfrico.com/rico-capability-agile.pdf
Agile Resources: http://www.davidfrico.com/daves-agile-resources.htmAgile Cheat Sheet: http://davidfrico.com/key-agile-theories-ideas-and-principles.pdf
Author Background Gov’t contractor with 32+ years of IT experience B.S. Comp. Sci., M.S. Soft. Eng., & D.M. Info. Sys. Large gov’t projects in U.S., Far/Mid-East, & Europe
2
Career systems & software engineering methodologist Lean-Agile, Six Sigma, CMMI, ISO 9001, DoD 5000NASA, USAF, Navy, Army, DISA, & DARPA projects Published seven books & numerous journal articles Intn’l keynote speaker, 100+ talks to 11,000 people Adjunct at GWU, UMBC, UMUC, Argosy, & NDMU Specializes in metrics, models, & cost engineeringCloud Computing, SOA, Web Services, FOSS, etc.
Today’s Whirlwind Environment
3
OverrunsAttritionEscalationRunawaysCancellation
GlobalCompetition
DemandingCustomers
OrganizationDownsizing
SystemComplexity
TechnologyChange
VagueRequirements
Work LifeImbalance
InefficiencyHigh O&MLower DoQVulnerableN-M Breach
ReducedIT Budgets
81 MonthCycle Times
RedundantData Centers
Lack ofInteroperability
PoorIT Security
OverburdeningLegacy Systems
ObsoleteTechnology & Skills
Pine, B. J. (1993). Mass customization: The new frontier in business competition. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.Pontius, R. W. (2012). Acquisition of IT: Improving efficiency and effectiveness in IT acquisition in the DoD. Second Annual AFEI/NDIA Conference on Agile in DoD, Springfield, VA, USA.
Global Project Failures
4Standish Group. (2010). Chaos summary 2010. Boston, MA: Author.Sessions, R. (2009). The IT complexity crisis: Danger and opportunity. Houston, TX: Object Watch.
Challenged and failed projects hover at 67% Big projects fail more often, which is 5% to 10% Of $1.7T spent on IT projects, over $858B were lost
16% 53% 31%
27% 33% 40%
26% 46% 28%
28% 49% 23%
34% 51% 15%
29% 53% 18%
35% 46% 19%
32% 44% 24%
33% 41% 26%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006
2008
2010
Year
Successful Challenged Failed
$0.0
$0.4
$0.7
$1.1
$1.4
$1.8
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Trill
ions
(US
Dolla
rs)
Expenditures Failed Investments
Requirements Defects & Waste
5Sheldon, F. T. et al. (1992). Reliability measurement: From theory to practice. IEEE Software, 9(4), 13-20Johnson, J. (2002). ROI: It's your job. Extreme Programming 2002 Conference, Alghero, Sardinia, Italy.
Requirements defects are #1 reason projects fail Traditional projects specify too many requirements More than 65% of requirements are never used at all
Other 7%
Requirements47%
Design28%
Implementation18%
Defects
Always 7%
Often 13%
Sometimes16%
Rarely19%
Never45%
Waste
What is Agility? A-gil-i-ty (ә-'ji-lә-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.
6
What are Agile Methods?
7
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 Systems & 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
Courage
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
8Shore, 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
9
Capability/MMF #1
● Feature 1● Feature 2● Feature 3● Feature 4● Feature 5● Feature 6● Feature 7
Capability/MMF #2
● Feature 8● Feature 9● Feature 10● Feature 11● Feature 12● Feature 13● Feature 14
Capability/MMF #3
● Feature 15● Feature 16● Feature 17● Feature 18● Feature 19● Feature 20● Feature 21
Capability/MMF #4
● Feature 22● Feature 23● Feature 24● Feature 25● Feature 26● Feature 27● Feature 28
Capability/MMF #5
● Feature 29● Feature 30● Feature 31● Feature 32● Feature 33● Feature 34● Feature 35
Capability/MMF #6
● Feature 36● Feature 37● Feature 38● Feature 39● Feature 40● Feature 41● Feature 42
Capability/MMF #7
● Feature 43● Feature 44● Feature 45● Feature 46● Feature 47● Feature 48● Feature 49
1
2 3
4
5 6
7
8 9
10
11 12
13
14 15
16
17 18
19
20 21
Evolving “Unified/Integrated” Enterprise Data Model
“Disparate” LEGACY SYSTEM DATABASES (AND DATA MODELS)
ETL
A A
B C
D E F
G H I J K
A
B C
D E F
A
B C
D E
A
B C
D
A
B C
A
B
“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)
Organize needs into capabilities, features, and stories Prioritize features, group releases, and initiate sprints Develop minimum set of features with highest value
Agile for EMBEDDED SYSTEMS 1st-generation systems used hardwired logic 2nd-generation systems used PROMS & FPGAs 3rd-generation systems use APP. SW & COTS HW
10Pries, K. H., & Quigley, J. M. (2010). Scrum project management. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.Pries, K. H., & Quigley, J. M. (2009). Project management of complex and embedded systems. Boca Raton, FL: Auerbach Publications.Thomke, S. (2003). Experimentation matters: Unlocking the potential of new technologies for innovation. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
● Short Lead● Least Cost● Lowest Risk● 90% Software● COTS Hardware● Early, Iterative Dev.● Continuous V&V
● Moderate Lead● Moderate Cost● Moderate Risk● 50% Hardware● COTS Components● Midpoint Testing● “Some” Early V&V
● Long Lead● Highest Cost● Highest Risk● 90% Hardware● Custom Hardware● Linear, Staged Dev.● Late Big-Bang I&T
AGILE“Software Model”- MOST FLEXIBLE -
NEO-TRADITIONAL“FPGA Model”
- MALLEABLE -
TRADITIONAL“Hardwired Model”
- LEAST FLEXIBLE -
GOAL – SHIFT FROM LATE HARDWARE TO EARLIER SOFTWARE SOLUTION
RISKEmbeddedSystemsMore HWThan SW
STOPCompeting
With HW
STARTCompeting
With SW
Iter
atio
ns, I
nteg
rati
ons,
& V
alid
atio
ns
11Kovacs, K. (2015). Comparison of nosql databases. Retrieved on January 9, 2015, from http://kkovacs.euSahai, S. (2013). Nosql database comparison chart. Retrieved on January 9, 2015, from http://www.infoivy.comDB-Engines (2014). System properties comparison of nosql databases. Retrieved on January 9, 2015, from http://db-engines.com
Rank Database Year Creator Firm Goal Model Lang I/F Focus Example User Rate KPro
2007 Steve Francia
10gen Gener-ality
Document C++ BSON Large-scale Web Apps
CRM Expedia 45% 48
2008 Avinash Lakshman
Facebook Relia-bility
Wide Column
Java CQL Fault-tolerant Data Stores
Mission Critical Data
iTunes 20% 15
2009 Salvatore Sanfilippo
Pivotal Speed Key Value C Binary Real-time Messaging
Instant Messaging
Twitter 20% 14
2007 Mike Carafella
Powerset Scale Wide Column
Java REST Petabyte-size Data Stores
Image Repository
Ebay 10% 8
2004 Shay Banon
Compass Search Document Java REST Full-text Search
Information Portals
Wiki-media 5% 7
Real-time, Distributed, Multi-tenant, Document-based, Schema-free, Persistence, Availability, etc.
8
Redis10
HBase14
Rapid-prototyping, Queries, Indexes, Replication, Availability, Load-balancing, Auto-Sharding, etc.
Distributed, Scalable, Performance, Durable, Caching, Operations, Transactions, Consistency
Real-time, Memory-cached, Performance, Persistence, Replication, Data structures, Age-off, etc.
Scalable, Performance, Data-replication, Flexible, Consistency, Auto-sharding, Metrics, etc.
16Elastic Search
MongoDB5
Cassandra
3 - $10M•Gen App•Reliable•Low Cplx
2 - $100M•Schema•Dist P2P•Med Cplx
1 - $1B•Limited•Sin PoF•High Cplx
Agile for CLOUD COMPUTING 1st-generation systems used HPCs & Hadoop 2nd-generation systems used COTS HW & P2P 3rd-generation systems use APP. SW & COTS HW
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
12
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
13
Agile Project Management
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
14
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
15
Agile Project Management“Simplified”
16
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)
Time Unit (Roadmap, Release, Iteration, Month, Week, Day, Hour, etc.)
Cumulative Flow
Wor
k (S
tory
, Poi
nt, T
ask)
or E
ffor
t (W
eek,
Day
, Hou
r)
Time Unit (Roadmap, Release, Iteration, Month, Week, Day, Hour, etc.)
Earned Value Management - EVMCPI
SPI
PPC
APC
Wor
k (S
tory
, Poi
nt, T
ask)
or E
ffor
t (W
eek,
Day
, Hou
r)
Time Unit (Roadmap, Release, Iteration, Month, Week, Day, Hour, etc.)
Earned Business Value - EBV
Agile Summary Agile methods DON’T mean deliver it now & fix it later Lightweight, yet disciplined approach to development Reduced cost, risk, & waste while improving quality
17Rico, 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
Agile Enterprise Frameworks
18
Dozens of Agile project management models emerged Many stem from principles of Extreme Programming All include product, project, & team management
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-governance
eScrum- 2007 -
SAFe- 2007 -
LeSS- 2007 -
DaD- 2012 -
RAGE- 2013 -
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
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
19
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
20Leffingwell, 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
21Larman, C., & Vodde, B. (2008). Scaling lean and agile development: Thinking and organizational tools for large-scale scrum. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Product OwnerProduct Backlog AreaProduct Owner
AreaProduct 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
Sprint Retrospective
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
22Ambler, 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
23Thompson, 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
Comparison of Frameworks Numerous lean-agile enterprise frameworks emerging eScrum & LeSS were 1st (but SAFe & DaD dominate) SAFe is the most widely-used (with ample resources)
24Rico, D. F. (2014). Scaled agile framework (SAFe) comparison. Retrieved June 4, 1024 from http://davidfrico.com/safe-comparison.xls
Factor eScrum SAFe LeSS DaD RAGESimple
Well-Defined Web Portal
Books Measurable
Results Training & Cert
Consultants Tools
Popularity International Fortune 500 Government Lean-Kanban
SAFe Revisited Proven, public well-defined F/W for scaling Lean-Agile Synchronizes alignment, collaboration, and deliveries Quality, execution, alignment, & transparency focus
25Leffingwell, D. (2014). Scaled agile framework (SAFe). Retrieved June 2, 1024 from http://www.scaledagileframework.com
Portfolio
Team
Program
SAFe—Scaling at PORTFOLIO Level Vision, central strategy, and decentralized control Investment themes, Kanban, and objective metrics Value delivery via epics, streams, and release trains
26Leffingwell, D. (2007). Scaling software agility: Best practices for large enterprises. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
AGILE PORTFOLIO MANAGEMENT● Decentralized decision making● Demand-based continuous flow● Lightweight epic business cases● Decentralized rolling wave planning● Objective measures & milestones● Agile estimating and planning
Strategy InvestmentFunding
Governance ProgramManagement
SAFe—Scaling at PROGRAM Level Product and release management team-of-team Common mission, backlog, estimates, and sprints Value delivery via program-level epics and features
27Leffingwell, D. (2007). Scaling software agility: Best practices for large enterprises. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
AGILE RELEASE TRAINS● Driven by vision and roadmap● Lean, economic prioritization● Frequent, quality deliveries● Fast customer feedback● Fixed, reliable cadence● Regular inspect & adapt CI
Alignment Collaboration
Synchronization ValueDelivery
SAFe—Scaling at TEAM Level Empowered, self-organizing cross-functional teams Hybrid of Scrum PM & XP technical best practices Value delivery via empowerment, quality, and CI
28Leffingwell, D. (2007). Scaling software agility: Best practices for large enterprises. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
AGILE CODE QUALITY● Pair development● Emergent design● Test-first● Refactoring● Continuous integration● Collective ownership
ProductQuality
CustomerSatisfaction
Predictability Speed
SAFe Benefits
29Leffingwell, D. (2014). Scaled agile framework (SAFe) case studies. Denver, CO: Leffingwell, LLC.Rico, D. F. (2014). Scaled agile framework (SAFe) benefits. Retrieved June 2, 2014, from http://davidfrico.com/safe-benefits.txt
Cycle time and quality are most notable improvement Productivity on par with Scrum at 10X above normal Data shows SAFe scales to teams of 1,000+ people
Benefit Nokia SEI Telstra BMCTrade
StationDiscount
TireValpak Mitchell
John Deere
Spotify Comcast Average
App Maps Trading DW IT Trading Retail Market Insurance Agricult. Cable PoS
Weeks 95.3 2 52 52 52 52 51
People 520 400 75 300 100 90 300 800 150 120 286
Teams 66 30 9 10 10 9 60 80 15 12 30
Satis 25% 29% 15% 23%
Costs 50% 10% 30%
Product 2000% 25% 10% 678%
Quality 95% 44% 50% 50% 60%
Cycle 600% 600% 300% 50% 300% 370%
ROI 2500% 200% 1350%
Morale 43% 63% 10% 39%
SAFe Case Studies Most U.S. Fortune 500 companies adopting SAFe Goal to integrate enterprise, portfolios, and systems Capital One going through end-to-end SAFe adoption
30
John Deere Spotify Comcast• Agricultural automation
• 800 developers on 80 teams
• Rolled out SAFe in one year
• Transitioned to open spaces
• Field issue resolution up 42%
• Quality improvement up 50%
• Warranty expense down 50%
• Time to production down 20%
• Time to market down 20%
• Job engagement up 10%
• Television cable/DVR boxes
• Embedded & server-side
• 150 developers on 15 teams
• Cycle time - 12 to 4 months
• Support 11 million+ DVRs
• Design features vs. layers
• Releases delivered on-time
• 100% capabilities delivered
• 95% requirements delivered
• Fully automated sprint tests
• GUI-based point of sale sys
• Switched from CMMI to SAFe
• 120 developers on 12 teams
• QA to new feature focus
• Used Rally adoption model
• 10% productivity improvement
• 10% cost of quality reduction
• 200% improved defect density
• Production defects down 50%
• Value vs. compliance focus
Leffingwell, D. (2014). Scaled agile framework (SAFe) case studies. Denver, CO: Leffingwell, LLC.Rico, D. F. (2014). Scaled agile framework (SAFe) benefits. Retrieved June 2, 2014, from http://davidfrico.com/safe-benefits.txt
SAFe Summary Lean-agile frameworks & tools emerging in droves Focus on scaling agility to enterprises & portfolios SAFe emerging as the clear international leader
31Rico, D. F. (2014). Dave's Notes: For Scaling with SAFe, DaD, LeSS, RAGE, ScrumPLoP, Enterprise Scrum, etc. Retrieved March 28, 2014 from http://davidfrico.com
SAFe is extremely well-defined in books and InternetSAFe has ample training, certification, consulting, etc.SAFe leads to increased productivity and qualitySAFe is scalable to teams of up to 1,000+ developersSAFe is preferred agile approach of Global 500 firmsSAFe is agile choice for public sector IT acquisitionsSAFe cases and performance data rapidly emerging
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
32Humble, 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.
CoQ
• 80% MS Tst• 8/10 No Val• $24B in 90s• Rep by CD• Not Add MLK
Continuous Integration Fewer integrations leave in higher bug counts Frequent, early integrations eliminate most defects Goal is to have as many early integrations as possible
33Lacoste, F. J. (2009). Killing the gatekeeper: Introducing a continuous integration system. Proceedings of the Agile 2009 Conference, Chicago, Illinois, USA, 387-392.
Number ofIntegrations
Less Defects•More Integrations•Early IntegrationsMore Defects
•Few Integrations•Late Integrations
Continuous Delivery (Assembla) Goal of continuous delivery is releases vs. build/tests Market-driven releases creates rapid business value Assembla went from 2 to 45 monthly releases w/CD
34Singleton, A. (2014). Unblock: A guide to the new continuous agile. Needham, MA: Assembla, Inc.
62x FasterU.S. DoD
IT Project
3,645x FasterU.S. DoD
IT Project
Agile Scaling 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
35Micco, 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.
440 billion unique users run 37 trillion searches each year 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 per day 80,000 builds per day – 20 million builds per year Auto code inspections – For low defect density 10X programming productivity improvement $150 million in annual labor savings (ROI as a result)
Agile Scaling at Amazon Amazon adopted agile in 1999 and Scrum in 2004 Using enterprise-scale continuous delivery by 2010 30,000+ developers deploy over 8,600 releases a day
36Atlas, A. (2009). Accidental adoption: The story of scrum at amazon.com. Proceedings of the Agile 2009 Conference, Chicago, Illinois, USA, 135-140.Jenkins, J. (2011). Velocity culture at amazon.com. Proceedings of the Velocity 2011 Conference, Santa Clara, California, USA.Elisha, S. (2013). Continuous deployment with amazon web services. Proceedings of the AWS Summit 2013, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Software deployment every 11.6 seconds (as of 2011) 24,828 to 86,320 releases per Iteration 161,379 to 561,080 releases per Quarter 645,517 to 2,244,320 releases per Year
Automatic, split-second roll-forward & backward 75-90% reduction in release-caused outages (0.001%) Millions of times faster (than traditional methods) 4,357,241 to 15,149,160 per traditional release
Thousands of times faster (than manual agility) 161,379 to 561,080 per Scrum/SAFe release
Used agile methods long before U.S. government (1999)
Agile Scaling w/Amazon Web Svcs AWS is most popular cloud computing platform Scalable service with end-to-end security & privacy AWS is compliant & certified to 30+ indiv. S&P stds.
37Barr, J. (2014). AWS achieves DoD provisional authorization. Retrieved January 12, 2015, from http://aws.amazon.comDignan, L. (2014). Amazon web services lands DoD security authorization. Retrieved January 12, 2015, from http://www.zdnet.comAmazon.com (2015). AWS govcloud earns DoD CSM Levsl 3-5 provisional authorization. Retrieved January 12, 2015, from http://aws.amazon.com
Analytics DatabaseSSAE
CrossService
Compute &NetworkingSO
C
ApplicationServices
Deployment &Management
Storage &Content Del.
DoD CSM DIACAP FedRAMP FIPSCOBIT CSAAICPA
FISMA
GLBAHITECHSA
S
ITAR ISO/IEC ISAE HIPAANIST MPAAPCI
NoSQL Sols• MongoDB• Cassandra• HBase
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 38
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
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.Heath, C., & Heath, D. (2013). Decisive: How to make better choices in life and work. New York, NY: Random House.
Change, no matter how small or large, is difficult Smaller focused changes help to cross the chasm Shrinking, simplifying, and motivation key factors
39
SWITCH
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
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 it Desirable
Surpass your Limits
Harness Peer Pressure
Find Strength in Numbers
Design Rewards
Change Environment
DRIVE
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
DECISIVE
Villains of Good Decisions Narrow framing Confirmation bias Short term emotion Over confidence
Widen Your Options Avoid a narrow frame Multi-track Find someone who solved problem
Reality Test Assumptions Consider the opposite Zoom out & zoom in Ooch
Attain Distance Overcome short-term emotion Gather more info & shift perspective Self-directed work tasks
Prepare to be Wrong Bookend the future Set a tripwire Trust the process
Conclusion One must think and act small to accomplish big things Slow down to speed up, speed up ‘til wheels come off Scaling up lowers productivity, quality, & business value
40Rico, D. F. (2014). Dave's Notes: For Scaling with SAFe, DaD, LeSS, RAGE, ScrumPLoP, Enterprise Scrum, etc. Retrieved March 28, 2014 from http://davidfrico.com
EMPOWER WORKFORCE - Allow workers to help establish enterprise business goals and objectives.
ALIGN BUSINESS VALUE - Align and focus agile teams on delivering business value to the enterprise.
PERFORM VISIONING - Frequently communicate portfolio, project, and team vision on continuous basis.
REDUCE SIZE - Reduce sizes of agile portfolios, acquisitions, products, programs, projects, and teams.
ACT SMALL - Get large agile teams to act, behave, collaborate, communicate, and perform like small ones.
BE SMALL - Get small projects to act, behave, and collaborate like small ones instead of trying to act larger.
ACT COLLOCATED - Get virtual distributed teams to act, behave, communicate and perform like collocated ones.
USE SMALL ACQUISITION BATCHES - Organize suppliers to rapidly deliver new capabilities and quickly reprioritize.
USE LEAN-AGILE CONTRACTS - Use collaborative contracts to share responsibility instead of adversarial legal ones.
USE ENTERPRISE AUTOMATION - Automate everything with Continuous Integration, Continuous Delivery, & DevOps.
Dave’s Professional Capabilities
41
SoftwareQuality
Mgt.
TechnicalProject
Mgt.
SoftwareDevelopment
Methods
OrganizationChange
SystemsEngineering
CostEstimating
GovernmentContracting
GovernmentAcquisitions
LeanKanban
Big Data,Cloud, NoSQL
WorkflowAutomation
Metrics,Models, & SPC
SixSigma
BPR, IDEF0,& DoDAF
DoD 5000,TRA, & SRA
PSP, TSP, &Code Reviews
CMMI &ISO 9001
InnovationManagement
Statistics, CFA,EFA, & SEM
ResearchMethods
EvolutionaryDesign
Valuation — Cost-Benefit Analysis, B/CR, ROI, NPV, BEP, Real Options, etc.
Lean-Agile — Scrum, SAFe, Continuous Integration & Delivery, DevOps, etc.
STRENGTHS – Data Mining Gathering & Reporting Performance Data Strategic Planning Executive & Manage-ment Briefs Brownbags & Webinars White Papers Tiger-Teams Short-Fuse Tasking Audits & Reviews Etc.
● Action-oriented. Do first (talk about it later).● Data-mining/analysis. Collect facts (then report findings).● Simplification. Communicating complex ideas (in simple terms).● Git-r-done. Prefer short, high-priority tasks (vs. long bureaucratic projects).● Team player. Consensus-oriented collaboration (vs. top-down autocratic control).
PMP, CSEP,ACP, CSM,
& SAFE
32 YEARSIN IT
INDUSTRY
Books on ROI of SW Methods Guides to software methods for business leaders Communicates the business value of IT approaches Rosetta stones to unlocking ROI of software methods
http://davidfrico.com/agile-book.htm (Description) http://davidfrico.com/roi-book.htm (Description)
42