Lean & Agile Enterprise Frameworks

Leading APM, Enterprise Scrum, LeSS, DaD, SAFe, & RAGE ProgramsDr. 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

Today’s Whirlwind Environment

2

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

3Standish 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

4Sheldon, 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 (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.

5

What are Agile Methods?

6

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

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. 7

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

8

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

When to use Agile Project Mgt.?

Agile Enterprise Frameworks

9

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

APM- 2004 -

eScrum- 2007 -

SAFe- 2007 -

LeSS- 2007 -

DaD- 2012 -

RAGE- 2013 -

Envision

Speculate

Explore

Iteration

Launch

Close

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

Beck, K., & Fowler, M. (2001). Planning extreme programming. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Addison-Wesley.Highsmith, J. A. (2004). Agile project management: Creating innovative products. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.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

Agile Project Management (APM)

Highsmith, J. A. (2004). Agile project management: Creating innovative products. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.Wysocki, R.F. (2010). Adaptive project framework: Managing complexity in the face of uncertainty. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.

Created by Jim Highsmith of Cutter in 2004 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

10

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

11

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

12Leffingwell, 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

13Larman, 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

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

14Ambler, 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

15Thompson, 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

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

Benefits of Agile Methods Analysis of 23 agile vs. 7,500 traditional projects Agile projects are 54% better than traditional ones Agile has lower costs (61%) and fewer defects (93%)

Mah, M. (2008). Measuring agile in the enterprise: Proceedings of the Agile 2008 Conference, Toronto, Canada.

Project Cost in Millions $

0.75

1.50

2.25

3.00

2.8

1.1

Before Agile

After Agile

61%LowerCost

Total Staffing

18

11

Before Agile

After Agile

39%LessStaff

5

10

15

20

Delivery Time in Months

5

10

15

20

18

13.5

Before Agile

After Agile

24%Faster

Cumulative Defects

625

1250

1875

2500

2270

381

Before Agile

After Agile

93%Less

Defects

17

Agile vs. Traditional Success Traditional projects succeed at 50% industry avg. Traditional projects are challenged 20% more often Agile projects succeed 3x more and fail 3x less often

Standish Group. (2012). Chaos manifesto. Boston, MA: Author.

18

Agile Traditional

Success42%

Failed9%

Challenged49%

Success14%

Failed29%

Challenged57%

Hoque, F., et al. (2007). Business technology convergence. The role of business technology convergence in innovation and adaptability and its effect on financial performance. Stamford, CT: BTM Institute. 19

Study of 15 agile vs. non-agile Fortune 500 firms Based on models to measure organizational agility Agile firms out perform non agile firms by up to 36%

Benefits of Organizational Agility

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.

20

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.

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

21Micco, 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 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 22

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

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

23

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.

Agile Scaling Recap One must think and act small to accomplish big things Scaling agile projects up too large has consequences “Less” is “more” in the world of lean & agile methods

24Rico, 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

What How

Empowerment Allow workers to help establish enterprise business goals and objectivesAlignment Align and focus agile teams on delivering business value to the enterprise

Vision Continuously communicate portfolio, project, and team vision

Size Reduce portfolio, acquisition, product, program, project, and team sizeAct Small Act, behave, collaborate, communicate, and perform like small teams

Teamwork Collaborate, communicate, and perform like a small highly-motivated teamCollocation Act, behave, communicate, and perform like a collocated project team

Contracts Collaborate and share responsibility instead of legal tripwires and punishments

Batches Deliver the smallest acquisition batch possible and then reprioritizeAutomation Use Continuous Integration, Continuous Delivery, and DevOps

Conclusion

25

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.