project management cookbook part 3 (ara) feb16

Project Mgt – Part 3

ARA (Feb’16)- © 2016 - 1

ARA TRAINING

ARA TRAINING

PDCA Project ManagementCookbookA.R. Alvarez


ARA (Feb’16)- © 2016 - 2

ARA TRAINING Preamble Objective:

Provide a Practical and Straightforward Approach to Project Mgt Emphasis on New Product Development; But Methodology Covered Can Be Applied to Pretty Much Any Type of Project

Included: Best Practices in Scheduling, Resourcing, Uncertainty & Risk Mgt with Special Emphasis on Resolving Schedule Conflicts Introduction to Problem Solving (Separate Workshop Available) Phase Gate Architecture Incorporation of Agile/Scrum Concepts In General Project Mgt Review Meeting Templates

Excluded: New Product Portfolio Management (Separate Workshop) Detailed Project Phase Gate Meeting Templates


ARA (Feb’16)- © 2016 - 3

ARA TRAINING Project Management Outline Part 1: Project Management Set-Up(Plan)

Project Management Principles Goals & Objectives Risk Management High Level Scheduling Concepts The Market Window- Development Team Capability Conundrum

Part 2: Project Management Execution (Do) Detailed Project Scheduling & Schedule Uncertainty Project Team Meetings Project Management Toolkit

Part 3: Project Management Oversight (Check & Act) Project Phase Gate Reviews Project Management Reviews Project Feedback & Response Appendix


ARA (Feb’16)- © 2016 - 4

ARA TRAINING What You Need to KnowYou Need to Know Where You’re Going

You Need to Know Where You Are

You Need to Know if You’re Off Track


ARA (Feb’16)- © 2016 - 5

ARA TRAINING What You Need to DoStart With The End in Mind:Define Success Criteria / Vital Signs

(If Project is Long, > 30 Days, …)Develop a Roadmap:Breakdown Success Criteria into GatesTrack The Path:Develop Leading Indicators for Critical Steps & Tasks


ARA (Feb’16)- © 2016 - 6

ARA TRAINING

WhatWe

WantTo

Achieve

HowWe

IntendTo

Achieve It

HowWe

WorkTo

Achieve It“Customer”Inputs ProjectPlan ProjectExecution


ARA (Feb’16)- © 2016 - 7

ARA TRAINING PDCA: Project Mgt

1 After 1st Cycle Replace “Set” With “Adjust”

Plan(Set1 Goals, Resources & High Level Schedule)

Check(Mgt & Milestone Reviews)

Act(Adjust Resources, Goals, & Schedule) Do(Detailed Schedule, Daily /Weekly Checks & Pull-in)


ARA (Feb’16)- © 2016 - 8

ARA TRAININGProject Management HierarchyPhase Gate

Review

Bi-Monthly orMonthly Review

Weekly PrjTeam Meeting

Team WorkingMeetings

EyesSpeedometer

Odometer

Map

After Agile Game Development With Scrum, C. Keith 2010

Different Measures & Monitors Keep You On Track When Driving Same Applies to Projects


ARA (Feb’16)- © 2016 - 9

ARA TRAININGProject Roadmap: Phase Gates

Scope: What Are We Trying To Do (What’s In / What’s Out) ? Commit/Launch: Is This Worth Doing? Why? What Priority? Interim Gate(s) (For Projects > 30 Days): Are We on Track? Beta Demonstration / Soft Turn-On: Are We Ready to Risk Customer Sampling? Is There a Clear Path to Final Release? Project Completion / Final Release: Are We Really Going to Make Money? Are We Ready to Make It?

PR1 PR2 PR3 PR4Project Scope Project Commit / Launch Alpha / Beta Demonstration Final Release / Project CompleteSimplified Project Phase Gate Matrix


ARA (Feb’16)- © 2016 - 10

ARA TRAINING Phase Gate Review Meeting What Do You Need to Communicate?

Answers to the Basic Questions For the Phase Gate (See Next Page) Barriers to Meeting Commitments for Next Phase Gate or Critrical Milestone Highlight Risk Items, Major Areas of Uncertainty, White Spaces, Resource Gaps, Skill Set Gaps, etc.

What to Do: Focus on Completeness of Deliverables for Current Phase Gate Milestone Look Forward to The Next Phase Gate Milestone & Highlight Risk Areas Propose Recovery and/or Contingency Plans For Next Phase Gate as Required Summarize, Issue Minutes and Update Action Items

How Long Should it Take: 20 – 40 MinutesWho Should Be There: Appropriate Exec Mgt, Project & Functional Team LeadsWho Should Run It?

Be Open, Be Clear, Be ConciseEach Phase Gate Review Should HaveIts Own Standard Reporting Template

(10 – 20 Pgs) To Make Meeting Efficient


ARA (Feb’16)- © 2016 - 11

ARA TRAINING Generic Project Phase Gates

Phase Gates Can Number From 4 – 7 (Could Have Both Alpha & Beta Demo) Optional Phase Gates Include: Feasibility, Proto Launch or Alpha (Prj Complexity) Tailor Purpose, Questions, Etc. to Specific Project

PR1 PRF PR2 PR3 PR-Alpha PR4Project Scope Feasibility Project Commit / Launch Prototype Launch Alpha or Beta Demonstration Project Complete

Description & Purpose

• Justification:• Business Need• How it Helps Competitiveness• Prelim Financials

• Objective Spec (Prelim Goals)• BPI Scope / Budget• Prelim Schedule• PRF Resource Approval

• Feasibility Review• Process Map:

• “As Is”, • Assessment• “Desired ”• Gap

• BenchmarkingComplete; Best-in Class Identified• Tool Needs Identified• PR 2 Resource Approval

• Concept & Scope Complete• Sub-Projects Defined• Ties to Other Processes• Tool Finalists• Metrics Set• Financials/ROI• Schedule• Resources R&R• PR3 Resource Approval

• Implementation Plan Review(s)• Barrier ID & Removal Plan• Integration with Existing BP• RAPID Model• Metrics Update• Schedule, Resources & ROI• New Tools Available as Required

• Metrics: Actual vs. Goals; Tracking Methods• Customer Level Fcst Accuracy• Key (All) Tools Functional as Required• Path to Beta or PR4• Training Plan & Materials

• Metrics: Actual vs. Goals?• Integration with Existing BP• Final Specs• Maintenance Requirements• Sustaining Org• Forum for Continuous Improvement• Process Maturity• Steps to Next Level

Questions• Is Project Worth Considering?• Is Project Scoped?• Is There a Strategic Fit?

• Has Baseline BP & Gaps Been Defined?• Have New Tool Requirements Been Identified?

• Targets Set?• ResourcesAvailable?• Does ROI Merit ‘Go’?

• Are We Ready To Launch?• Segmentation?• New Tools Ready?• Does ROI Merit ‘Go’?

• Alpha Stage Goals Met?• Clear Path To PR-Beta and / or PR4?

• Ready For Unconditional Release?• All Related Areas Addressed?

Recommend Exec/Mgt Sponsor Appropriate Mgr Project Lead Project Lead Project Lead Project LeadAgree Appropriate Functional Execs Appropriate FunctionalExecs Appropriate Functional Execs Appropriate FunctionalExecs Appropriate Functional Execs Appropriate FunctionalExecsDecide COO/CFO COO/CFO COO/CFO COO COO COO/CFO


ARA (Feb’16)- © 2016 - 12

ARA TRAININGPG-1 PG-F PG-2 PG-3 PG-AS PG-ES PG-4

Marketing Product “Request” Feasibility CompanyCommit POR / TapeoutReview Alpha(Prelim) Sample Engineering (Final) Sample Release to Production

Description & Purpose

• Justification:• Business Need• How Helps Competitiveness

• Preliminary Objective Spec• Prelim Financials• Prelim Schedule• PG-F Resource Approval

• Feasibility Study Review• EquipmentNeeds Identified• PG-2 Resource Approval

• Goals Set• Metrics Set• Financials Set• Schedule Set• Resources R&R• Equipment List Finalized• PG-3 Resource Approval

• Process of Record Review• Metrics Update• Schedule & Resources• Financials• Equipment POs

• Metrics: Actual vs. Goals• Key Tools / Equipment Functional• Path to PG-ES or PG-4

• Metrics: Actual vs. Goals• Prelim QualData• All Tools / Equip at Spec• Path to PG-4

• Metrics: Actual vs. Goals?• Final Specs• Final Qual• Equip Capability

Questions• Is product worth considering?• Is there a strategy fit?

• Is there a path to achieving the product targets?

• Will we make money?• Can we make and sell the product?

• Are we ready to make the product?• Will we make money?

• Are we ready to Alpha Sample?• Will we make money?• Clear path to ES, PG-4?

• Ready to Eng Sample / Sell?• Will we make money?• Clear path to PG-4?

• Are we ready to make it?• Are we ready to sell it?• Do we make money?

Recommend Marketing Mgr Eng Lead Marketing or PrjMgr Eng or Prj Mgr Eng or Prj Mgr Eng or Prj Mgr Eng or Prj Mgr

Agree VP MarketingVP SalesVP Eng VP Eng VP SalesVP MarketingVP Eng, VP OpsVP MarketingVP EngVP Ops

AppsSalesAppsSalesCOO

VP SalesVP MarketingVP OpsDecide CEO, COO or GM VP-Marketing CEO, COO or GM CEO, COO or GM VP Marketing VP Marketing COO or VP Mfg

New Product Phase Gates

Phase Gates Can Number From 4 – 7 Optional Phase Gates Include: Feasibility, Alpha (or Engineering Sample) Tailor Purpose, Questions, Etc. to Specific Situation / Company


ARA (Feb’16)- © 2016 - 13

ARA TRAINING Project Risk Mgt Table

Risk is Not Static Review Table at Each Phase Gate (Or In Case of Major Change) Highlight Changes in Risk Evolution:

New Risks Reduced or Increased Risk Eliminated Risks

Keep Updated & Relevant

RiskCategory Risk Prob Impact LearningRequired Mitigation Strategy Who ReductionDate Elimination DateMarket

Technology

Mfg


ARA (Feb’16)- © 2016 - 14

ARA TRAINING Decision Making High Performance Teams Make Good Decisions & Make Them Happen Fast

Focus on Decisions That Matter What Decisions Need to Be Made to Move The Project Forward? Know When Those Decisions Need to Be Made By & Then Make Them

Action is The Goal Good Decision Making Ends With Implementation, Not Decision Objective Isn’t Necessarily Consensus, But Buy-in Critical

Ambiguity is The Enemy Clear Accountability is Essential Who Contributes Input, Who Makes Decision, Who Carries It Out Without Clarity, Delay (Foot Dragging) is the Most Likely Outcome Know When a Decision is Made – Communicate It


ARA (Feb’16)- © 2016 - 15

ARA TRAINING Decision Making High Performance Teams Make Good Decisions & Make Them Happen Fast Speed & Adaptability Are Critical

Create Environment Where People Come Together Quickly & Efficiently to Make Decisions Understand Consequences of Decision (Even Unintended Ones)

Decisions Roles Supersede The Organizational Chart Involve Right People at Right Level, at Right Time Involve People That Will Live with Decisions to Design Them Process of Thinking About Decision Motivates People to Adopt Them

Well-Aligned Organization Reinforces Roles Reinforce Effective Approach to Decision Making, Information Flow . . . Have Common Language & Practices for Decision Making


ARA (Feb’16)- © 2016 - 16

ARA TRAININGStacey Matrix & Decision Making

Stacey R.D.; Strategic Management and Organizational Dynamics: The Challenge of Complexity, 3rd Ed; Prentice Hall, 2002http://www.gp-training.net/training/communication_skills/consultation/equipoise/complexity/stacey.htm

(Coalition Building,Compromise, Negotiation)ExploratoryExperimentation

Serendipity

Constructive Debate & Creativity Can Lead to Innovation & Breakthroughs

(Or Decision Avoidance)

Close to CertaintyCause-Effect Clear and/orPrior History Available

Far From CertaintyCause-Effect Unclear, Situation is Unique or New to Decision Makers

“Judgmental”Decision MakingGuided Experimentation

Adapt M

gt/ Lea

dership

Appro

achto L

evel of

Agree

ment

“Rational”Decision MakingStandards & ConventionPrevail

Intuition &“Eureka” Moment


ARA (Feb’16)- © 2016 - 17

ARA TRAINING “Rapid” Decision Making Recommend:

Person Responsible for Making Proposal, Gathering Input, Providing Right Data & Analysis to Make Sensible Decision in Timely Fashion Recommenders Consult With Others to Get Broad Input, Build Buy-in

Agree: People In This Role Have Veto Power; There Should be Few if Any of These Veto Triggers Debate With Recommenders; Be Clear on Who Has to Agree to What Escalate to Person with “D” if Takes Too Long to Resolve

Perform: Once Decision is Made, People Responsible to Execute / Implement

Input: People That are Consulted on Decision Typically Involved With Implementation

Decide: Formal & Final Decision Maker Accountability for Decision & Authority to Resolve Impasses & Commit to Action


ARA (Feb’16)- © 2016 - 18

ARA TRAININGBi-Monthly* Prj Review Meeting What Do You Need to Communicate?

Make Sure Your Executive Management Grasps Risk Levels to Key Deliverables and Key Areas of Uncertainty: Schedule, Performance Targets, Quality, etc. Barriers to Meeting Commitments That Need Executive Management Attention Highlight Risk Items, White Spaces, Resource Gaps, Skill Set Holes, etc.

What to Do: Focus on Deliverables Highlight Key Decisions That Need to Be Made Highlight Key Areas of Uncertainty, “Creeps”, & Learning Required Highlight Any Escalation Required – Get Help (Do it Earlier Rather Than Later) Propose Recovery and/or Contingency Plans as Required Summarize, Issue Minutes and Update Action Items

How Long Should it Take: 10 – 15 Minutes (Four Page Template) Who Should Be There: Appropriate Exec Mgt, Project Leads Who Should Run It?Be Open, Be Clear, Be Concise * Every 2 Weeks


ARA (Feb’16)- © 2016 - 19

ARA TRAINING Project OverviewBusiness ParametersLifetime Revenue $100M(PG-2)

GrossMargin 35%(PG-2)Revenue Start Sept2016

Lead Customer Apple

PG-1 PG-F PG-2 PG-3 PG-AS PG-ES PG-4At PG-2 6/1/14 7/1/14 8/1/14 12/1/14 3/30/15 7/30/15 5/30/16PreviousReview 6/1/14 7/1/14 9/1/14 12/1/14 4/30/15 8/30/15 6/30/16Current Plan 6/1/14 7/1/14 9/1/14 12/1/14 4/30/15 10/30/15 7/30/16

Key New Product RequirementsPG-4 Goal PG-ES Goal Current

Spec 1Spec 2Spec 3Etc

Project ParametersNPD Type New Product

Market MobilePriority #1

Team Site CA, Korea, TaiwanDesign Rule 25 nmTechnology LP Mixed-SignalFrontend TSMCBackend ChipMOS

Team Lead IsabelTeam Size 3 (FTE = 7) Pro

duct

Technology

HighlightAny Changes


ARA (Feb’16)- © 2016 - 20

ARA TRAINING Current Phase MilestonesEquip Eng EquipEng MaterialsEng MaterialsEng Process Eng Process Eng QA Ops Ops Marketing Marketing

PG-3

Equipm

entSpe

cs Signe

d Off

Equipm

ent SPC

Input V

ariable

s Def

ined

Materi

alsSou

rcing Sp

ec Rele

ased

Incomin

g Ma

terials

SPC

Input V

ariable

s Spe

cedPro

cess

Capabil

ity Spec

Signed O

ffSPC

Spec Si

gned

OffInit

ial Qual

PlanSign

ed Off

Faciliti

esPlan

Signed O

ffCos

t Reduc

tion

Plan Sig

nedOff

Initial “

Go To

Marke

t” Plan

Signed o

ffInit

ial Custo

mer

Sample

Plan

Define

d PG-ES

Previous 12/1/14 12/30/14 1/30/15 12/30/14 2/15/15 1/15/15 2/15/15 3/15/15 1/30/15 2/28/15 3/15/15 3/15/15 3/30/15Current 12/1/14 12/15/14 1/30/15 12/30/14 3/1/15 1/15/15 2/15/15 3/15/15 4/15/15 2/28/15 3/15/15 3/15/15 3/30/15

Interim Deliverable Issue Hypothesis Action Owner Date for Confirmation Date forFixFacilities Plan Signed Off Facilities Upgrade Bid in Excess of Budget Over-Specing Facilities Requirements Re-Spec and Re-Bid Facilities Updgrade Chris 2/28/15 3/15/15

Top Table: Key Deliverables to Complete Next Phase Gate Milestone Bottom Table: Response to Items Behind or in Danger of Falling Behind


Task Done (Dark) or On Schedule (light) Task Behind, Mitigation/Catchup In Place)

Task Behind, No Catchup, Intervention May Be Required



ARA (Feb’16)- © 2016 - 21

ARA TRAINING Two-Week PlanPrevious Two Weeks – Performance to Plan

Milestone/Task Original Schedule

CurrentSchedule Owner Status

Activity 1 2/28/15 2/28/15 Chris CompleteActivity 2 3/3/15 2/26/15 Liz Pulled InActivity 3 2/26/15 3/3/15 Ashok Need One More Week, But Will CompleteEtc.

Plan for Coming Two - Four WeeksMilestone/Task Original

ScheduleCurrent

Schedule Owner StatusActivity 1 3/15/15 3/15/15 LizActivity 2 3/9/15 3/12/15 AnneActivity 3 2/26/15 3/3/15 AshokEtc.

Updates Key Actions From Previous Mgt Review Meeting Provides Succinct View of Key Actions for Next 1 – 2 Mgt Review MeetingsAdd Burn Down Chart In This Section if Using

HighlightDelays & Recovery


ARA (Feb’16)- © 2016 - 22

ARA TRAINING Vital SignsParameter Unit PG-2 Spec AS Target ES Target PG-4 Target Current Comment

Operations Vital SignsCost $Yield %

Throughput W/HrCycle Time Hrs

Full Set of Critical Technical Specifications

Full Set of Critical Operations Specifications

Should Be Fairly Static; But HighlightAny Changes & New Information


ARA (Feb’16)- © 2016 - 23

ARA TRAINING Project Creeps Scope Creep

Changes to Project Goals and Objective Specs are Not Un-Common Be Prepared to Manage; More on That Next

Hope Creep Project Team Members May Hide or Not Be Aware of When They Are Falling Behind Team Transparency in Addressing Task Delivery Problem, Appropriate Monitoring, Scrubbing, etc. and Having Proper Leading Indicators are All Critical; Culture Focused on “Winning” as a Team

Effort Creep Sometimes Team or Team Member Just Not Effective Could Be Competency Issue, Could Be Task Complexity Issue Needs Proper Diagnosis; Same Points Noted Above Critical

After: Introduction to Project Management: Principles, Techniques and Tools, UC Davis, 2013


ARA (Feb’16)- © 2016 - 24

ARA TRAINING Project Scope CreepBe Prepared to Manage Them

Dependent on Many Factors (Some Good, Some Bad, Some Under Team’s Control, Some Not): Project Length (The Longer The Project, The More Likely That Scope Creeps) Competitive and Market Place Environment & Dynamics (And Maturity) Capability of People Defining Product Project Development Process Methodology Engineering Culture Generally Wants to Be Responsive to Customers – Inclined to “Yes”

Different Ways to Address “Just Say No” and Queue For Next Project . . . Or “Just Say Yes” and Incorporate into Project Fixed Project Timing “Freeze” Points Beyond Which Certain Types Change Not Allowed Incorporate Changes Into Process Through Explicit Iteration Planning (ala Scrum / Agile) ROI Hurdle: Evaluate Return vs. Investment (Time, Resources, Cost) Required for Change

Recommend Managing Through Mgt Bi-Monthly Review Meetings Marketing Presents Justification, Engineering Presents Schedule/Resource Impact Option to Hold Ad Hoc Meeting if Required


ARA (Feb’16)- © 2016 - 26

ARA TRAINING Set & Enforce Expectations Don’t React to Minutia, Focus On Critical Items & Pre-Set Triggers Generic Problems:

Schedule Slip Resource Problem Goal / Objective Change Revenue (or Investment Return) Drop

Expected Response Prj Mgr Should Frame Problem and Clarify Impact on Project Problem May Not Fully or Even Partially Recoverable, Prj Mgr Should Highlight Current Thinking, Assumptions and Limitations Problem Owner Should Present Options Considered / Proposed Containment / Recommended Root Cause Corrective Action Prj Mgr Should Summarize Recommended Recovery Plan & Implications Action: Accept Proposal, Improve Proposal, or Kill Project

Take Action: Accept Proposal, Improve Proposal, or Kill Project


ARA (Feb’16)- © 2016 - 27

ARA TRAININGUltimate Test: Right Direction? Progress or Motion ?

Entropy vs. Convergent Consistent Kill or Move Forward?

Repeated Slips ? Diagnose Root Cause Containment / Root Cause Corrective Action Typical: Excess AIPs, Capability, Subject Matter Knowledge, Team Dynamics, Outside Interference, Leadership, …

Repeated Quality Problems? Diagnose Root Cause Containment / Root Cause Corrective Action Typical: Same as Above Its OK (Good) to Get Help if Project is In Trouble


ARA (Feb’16)- © 2016 - 28

ARA TRAINING Project Wrap-up Formal Closure

Formal Passing of Final Phase Gate Formal Acceptance By Customer or Stakeholder Required Documentation (If Use Phase-Gate Templates & Checklist Deliverables, I’s Built Into Process, So Won’t Be An Issue) Archive For Future Retrival

Retrospective / Post-Mortem It’s About Learning & Improving, . . . . . . Not About Punishing/Embarrassing Breakdown Learning Into Categories Double-Loop Learning (More Than One “Why”) Capture & Incorporate Into Process, But . . . Not All “Lessons” Worth Capturing; Prioritize

Don’t Wait Until End, Celebrate Interim “Wins”, . . . But Definitely Have Team Celebration at End


ARA (Feb’16)- © 2016 - 30

ARA TRAINING What You Need to KnowYou Need to Know Where You’re Going:Balanced Vital Sign Methodology Does That

You Need to Know Where You AreProduct Development Phase GatesAnd COL Driven Scheduling Do ThatYou Need to Know if You’re Off TrackGood Project Management Does That


ARA (Feb’16)- © 2016 - 31

ARA TRAINING Good Luck & Smooth Surfing


ARA (Feb’16)- © 2016 - 32

ARA TRAINING

ARA TRAINING

Appendix References Introduction to Scrum / Agile Prj Mgt Methodology PERT Definitions Project Management & Uncertainty Team Stages Report Templates


ARA (Feb’16)- © 2016 - 33

ARA TRAINING References Note: Specific References Are Noted on Individual Pages General Project Management

A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge: PMBOK(R) Guide 5th Ed, Project Management Institute, 2013 Project Management for Engineers, M.D. Rosenau, 1984 Visualizing Project Management, K. Forsberg, H. Mooz, H. Cotterman, 1996. Project Management Handbook, 2nd Ed, D.I Clelan, W.R. King Editors, 1988. Fast TTM Project Planning Methodology, Lateral Works Systems, 1993. Fast Time to Market Success Factors, Barry Hills (Tandem), Circa 1992. Time Warrior, P.R. Thomas, 1992. Introduction to Project Management: Principles, Techniques and Tools, UC Davis, 2013. Project Management – A Systems Approach to Planning, Scheduling & Control, 10th Ed, H. Kerzner, 2009.

Project Risk Management: Identifying & Managing Project Risk 3rd Edition, T. Kendrick, 2015 Project Risk Management 2nd Edition, C. Chapman, S. Ward, 2003 Managing Project Risk & Uncertainty, C. Chapman, S. Ward, 2002

Scrum: “The New Product Development Game”, H. Takeuchi, I. Nonaka, HBR Jan-Feb 1986 The Scrum Guide™ ; J. Sutherland, K. Schwaber, July’13 “Going Beyond Scrum: Disciplined Agile Delivery”, S.W. Ambler, Oct’13 Scrum (Software Development); https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scrum_(software_development)


ARA (Feb’16)- © 2016 - 34

ARA TRAINING

ARA TRAINING

AppendixIntroduction to Scrum / Agile Prj Mgt Methodology


ARA (Feb’16)- © 2016 - 35

ARA TRAINING Agile (Scrum) Project MgtGroup of Project Development MethodsBased on Iterative and Incremental Development

Originally Conceived For and Most Practiced in Software DevelopmentHandful of Agile Methodologies, But Scrum Probably Remains The Most Broadly Implemented

Disciplined Agile Delivery (DAD) Offers Evolution Beyond Conventional Scrum


ARA (Feb’16)- © 2016 - 36

ARA TRAINING Manifesto For AgileSoftware DevelopmentIndividuals and Interactions OverProcesses and Tools

Working Software OverComprehensive DocumentationCustomer Collaboration OverContract NegotiationResponding to Change OverFollowing a Plan

http://www.agilemanifesto.org/


ARA (Feb’16)- © 2016 - 37

ARA TRAINING Agile Manifesto Principleshttp://www.agilemanifesto.org/principles.html

Our Highest Priority is to Satisfy The Customer Through Early and Continuous Delivery of Valuable Software. Welcome Changing Requirements, Even Late in Development. Agile Processes Harness Change For The Customer's Competitive Advantage. Deliver Working Software Frequently, From a Couple of Weeks to a Couple of Months, With a Preference to The Shorter Timescale. Business People and Developers Must Work Together Daily Throughout The Project. Build Projects Around Motivated Individuals. Give Them The Environment and Support They Need, and Trust Them to Get The Job Done. The Most Efficient and Effective Method of Conveying Information to and Within a Development Team is Face-to-Face Conversation. Working Software is The Primary Measure of Progress. Agile Processes Promote Sustainable Development. The Sponsors, Developers, and Users Should Be Able to Maintain a Constant Pace Indefinitely. Continuous Attention to Technical Excellence and Good Design Enhances Agility. Simplicity--the Art of Maximizing The Amount of Work Not Done--is Essential. The Best Architectures, Requirements, and Designs Emerge From Self-Organizing Teams. At Regular Intervals, The Team Reflects on How to Become More Effective, Then Tunes and Adjusts its Behavior Accordingly.


ARA (Feb’16)- © 2016 - 38

ARA TRAINING Agile Project Elements Soft Control:

Focus on Value Creation Rather Than Cost - Features Prioritized Accordingly Visual Control – Scrum Board & Burn Charts Being Examples Adaptive Control – Expect Environment to Change Often; Learn From Cycle to Cycle; Be Adaptive Lessons Learned – Continuous Improvement Driven By Lessons Harvested From Each Iteration

High Collaboration: Collaborative Development Leadership & Collaboration Rather Than Command & Control; Focus on Barrier Removal Co-Located High-Performing Teams – Enables Better Collaboration

Iteration Driven: Test-Driven Development – Test Often, Iterate Feature-Driven Development – Focus on One or a Very Limited Number of Features/Tasks

After “The Blending of Traditional & Agile Project Management, Hass”, May 2007


ARA (Feb’16)- © 2016 - 39

ARA TRAININGScrum Development Process Flow

“Going Beyond Scrum”, S.W. Ambler, O t’13

SprintPlanning

SprintRetrospective

Planning Session toSelect RequirementsFor Current Sprint &To Identify Work Tasks

Note: Classical Scrum Has Very Specific Proscriptive Implementation Rules


ARA (Feb’16)- © 2016 - 40

ARA TRAINING Scrum Board

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/fd/Scrum_task_board_example.jpgUseful Concept in Any Project, But Practical Only if Limit Number of Tasks(Can Always Have Parallel Scrums To Keep Tasks/Scrum Manageable)


ARA (Feb’16)- © 2016 - 41

ARA TRAINING Scrum Board Variation

http://theagilepirate.net/archives/907


ARA (Feb’16)- © 2016 - 42

ARA TRAINING Why The Hype? Scrum Advantages

Customer Engagement / Focus: Customer– Prj Team Engagement is Frequent & Early; Can Give Customer Sense of Prj Ownership Transparency: Client Insight Into Project Through Frequent Interaction Iterative: Can Take Advantage of 80-20 Rule, So Can Potentially Get to Market Sooner With The 20% of The Features That Deliver80% of The Value and Iterate From There With Successive Releases Focuses on Business Value: Client Input Prioritizes Feature Allows for Change: Iteration Built In Through Sprint Process Early and Predictable Delivery: Time-Boxed Fixed Schedule Sprints as Well as Daily Updates Predictable Costs and Schedule: Tied to Fixed-Schedule Time Box Improves Quality: Smaller Blocks Enable Faster Testing and Feedback

Scrum Limitations: Customer Engagement / Focus: May Present Problems For Some Customers Who Simply May Not Have The Time or Interest ForHigh Levels of Engagement; Frequent Customer Interaction Can Also Make ‘Feature Creep’ Worse – Harder to Separate “Must”From “Nice to” Have Iterative: Can Also Produce Multiple Product Releases – Requires Careful Management Scalability/Integration: Iterative Process Can Lead To Frequent Refactoring if Full Scope of System is Not Considered in InitialArchitecture & Design. Can Become More Pronounced in Larger-Scale Implementations, or Systems That Require High Levels ofIntegration Greater Stress on Teamwork: Scrum Requires Frequent Interaction, So Works Best When Members of Development Team are Co-located & Completely Dedicated to Project

Adapted From “8 Benefits of Agile Software Development”, Segue Technologies, Aug’15

Note: Take These With a Grain of Salt. Most of The Claimed Advantages are Over a ‘Strawdog’ Method That Doesn’t Exist in Practice; At Least Not One Used By Any Semi-Competent Project Team. Also Many of the Limitations Noted Have Been Addressed Through Scrum Evolutions Such as DAD or Hybrids


ARA (Feb’16)- © 2016 - 43

ARA TRAINING Why The Hype? Scrum Advantages

Customer Engagement / Focus: Customer– Prj Team Engagement is Frequent & Early; Can Give Customer Sense of Prj Ownership Transparency: Client Insight Into Project Through Frequent Interaction Iterative: Can Take Advantage of 80-20 Rule, So Can Potentially Get to Market Sooner With The 20% of The Features That Deliver80% of The Value and Iterate From There With Successive Releases Focuses on Business Value: Client Input Prioritizes Feature Allows for Change: Iteration Built In Through Sprint Process Early and Predictable Delivery: Time-Boxed Fixed Schedule Sprints as Well as Daily Updates Predictable Costs and Schedule: Tied to Fixed-Schedule Time Box Improves Quality: Smaller Blocks Enable Faster Testing and Feeback

Scrum Limitations: Customer Engagement / Focus: May Present Problems For Some Customers Who Simply May Not Have The Time or Interest ForHigh Levels of Engagement; Frequent Customer Interaction Can Also Make ‘Feature Creep’ Worse – Harder to Separate “Must”From “Nice to” Have Iterative: Can Also Produce Multiple Product Releases – Requires Careful Management Scalability/Integration: Iterative Process Can Lead To Frequent Refactoring if Full Scope of System is Not Considered in InitialArchitecture & Design. Can Become More Pronounced in Larger-Scale Implementations, or Systems That Require High Levels ofIntegration Greater Stress on Teamwork: Scrum Requires Frequent Interaction, So Works Best When Members of Development Team are Co-located & Completely Dedicated to Project

Adapted From “8 Benefits of Agile Software Development”, Segue Technologies, Aug’15

Note: Take These With a Grain of Salt. Most of The Claimed Advantages are Over a ‘Strawdog’ Method That Doesn’t Exist in Practice; At Least Not One Used By Any Semi-Competent Project Team. Also Many of the Limitations Have Been Addressed Through Scrum Evolutions Such as D.A.D.

What I Find Most Appealing is Scrum’s Embraces of Iterative / Incremental Practices to Get Products to Market FasterThis Could Conceivably Allow a Team to Take Advantage of the 80-20 Rule; i.e. 20% of a Product’s Feature Set Provides 80% of a Product’s Value. So, Get That First Generation Out Quickly, Learn More From Market Feedback, and Then Follow-up Quickly With Next Generation.

Efficacy of This Approach However is Very Dependent on The Cycle Time For Each Iteration. This Could Explain Why Pure Scrum Has Not Been as Fully Embraced for HW Projects as for SW Projects


ARA (Feb’16)- © 2016 - 44

ARA TRAINING “Non-Branded” Scrum Flow

“Going Beyond Scrum”, S.W. Ambler, Oct’13

Replaces Scrum Nomenclature With Conventional Project Management Nomenclature

(Eliminates Mysticism)


ARA (Feb’16)- © 2016 - 45

ARA TRAINING “Governed” Agile Process

“Going Beyond Scrum”, S.W. Ambler, Oct’13Adds Inception & Transition Prj Phases For Improved Prj Lifecycle Mgt


ARA (Feb’16)- © 2016 - 47

ARA TRAININGFast Time-to-Market Success Factors Product Strategy Cluster

Rapid Product Positioning: Market Driven, Fast Decision-Making That Authorize Fast Starts &Guidelines; Foster Rapid Incrementalism Continuous Product Definition: Obtain Voice-of-the-Customer Over Entire Project Cycle; Short-Term Specs to start Design Concurrently With Refinement of Customer Requirements; FlexibleStrategy to Delimit and Converge Specs

Operating Environment Cluster Organize for Speed: Rapid Decision-Making, Team Co-location, Empowered Teams, Cross-Functional Processes Management Oversight Without Delay: Schedule is King, Pay to Save a Day, Don’t AcceptResource Constraints, Make Reviews / Controls Informal

Project Execution Fast Plans and Fast Schedules: Continuously scrub schedule, short duration detail for grasp, notfor control, Day-by-Day Concurrence Continuous Effort to Pull-in The Schedule: Plan-Break Plan-Re-Plan, Pull-in Schedule, ManageNear Term Intensely to Save a Day at a Time, Keep Activities on Critical Path (Not Off), FastCycle Time for Micro Tasks

Fast Time-To-Market System – Summary of Best Practices , Lateral Work Systems, January 1993 Looks A Lot Like Agile Doesn’t It?


ARA (Feb’16)- © 2016 - 49

ARA TRAINING PERT Definitions IEvent/Node: Beginning & Finish of Job; Connecting Points

Job/Activity: Task requiring length of time for completion

Immediate Predecessor: Job to be completed before next step

Immediate Successor: Job can't start before previous complete

Initial/Terminal Node: Start/End Nodes for Given Job

Node 1

Node 1 Node 2Job 1

Node 1 Node 2 Node 3Job 1 Job 2


ARA (Feb’16)- © 2016 - 50

ARA TRAINING PERT Definitions II Duration: Length of time for job completion

Dummies: Used to clarify when one job has more than one node feeding into it from the same immediate predecessor

Earliest Start Time: Given cum duration of predecessors, ES

Earliest Finish Time: Given ES & duration, earliest finish, EF

Latest Start Time: Given jobs that feed in, latest job(n) can start without becoming critical (delaying) path, LS


ARA (Feb’16)- © 2016 - 51

ARA TRAINING PERT Definitions III Latest Finish Time: Given jobs that jobn feed into, latest jobn can finish

without becoming critical path, LF

Critical Path: Implementation path with longest cum duration. Quickest that total project can be completed (CP)

Total Slack: Time job can be delayed without delaying overall project schedule. Jobs on CP have 0 slack

Forward Pass: Calculation of all ES & EF starting with 1st jobs & working forward to final jobs in project

Backward Pass: Calculation of all LS & LF starting with last jobs & working backward to 1st jobs in project


ARA (Feb’16)- © 2016 - 56

ARA TRAINING Team Stages (After B. Tuckman, 1965) Forming: Initiation Phase Project Team Initially Concerned With Orientation, Accomplished Primarily Through Testing. Such Testing Serves To Identify The Boundaries of Both Interpersonal and Task Behaviors. Coincident With Testing is Establishment of Dependency Relationships With Leaders, Other Group Members, or Pre-existing Standards. Team Members Behave Quite Independently. They May Be Motivated But Are Usually Relatively Uninformed of The Issues and Objectives of The Team. Some Team Members May Display Traits of Uncertainty and Anxiety. Project Manager Must Bring Team Together, Ensuring They Trust Each Other and Have Ability to Develop Working Relationships. Directing or "Telling" Style. Sharing Concept of "Forming, Storming, Norming, Performing" With Team Can Be Helpful.

Storming: Ideas Compete, Often Fiercely, For Consideration Project Team Gains Confidence, But There is Conflict and Polarization Around Interpersonal Issues Team Members are Showing Their Own Personalities as They Confront Each Other's Ideas and Perspectives. Frustrations or Disagreements About Goals, Expectations, Roles And Responsibilities are Being Expressed Openly. Project Manager Guides Project Team Through This Turbulent Transition Phase. Coaching Style. Tolerance of Each Team Member and Their Differences Needs to Be Emphasized.

Norming: Rules, Values, Behavior, Methods, Tools Being Established Project Team Effectiveness Increases and Team Starts to Develop an Identity. Team Members Adjust Their Behavior to Each Other as They Develop Agreements to Make the Teamwork More Natural and Fluid. Conscious Effort to Resolve Problems and to Achieve Group Harmony. Motivation Levels are Increasing. Project Manager Allows Team to Become Much More Autonomous. Participative Style.

http://www.12manage.com/methods_tuckman_stages_team_development.html


ARA (Feb’16)- © 2016 - 57

ARA TRAINING Team Stages (After B. Tuckman, 1965)

Performing: Interpersonal Structure Becomes Tool of Task Activities. Roles Become Flexible &Functional; Group Energy Channeled Into the Task Project Team Is Now Able To Function As A Unit. It Gets The Job Done Smoothly And Effectively Without Inappropriate Conflict Or The Need For External Supervision. Team Members Have A Clear Understanding Of What Is Required Of Them At A Task Level. They Are Now Competent, Autonomous And Able To Handle The Decision-making Process Without Supervision. A "Can Do" Attitude Is Visible. Offers To Assist One Another Are Made. Project Manager Lets The Team Make Most Of The Necessary Decisions. Delegating Style.

Adjourning. Tasks Are Being Completed & Team is Disassembled Project Team. Some Authors Describe Stage 5 As "Deforming and Mourning", Recognizing Sense of Loss Felt By Group Members. Team Members' Motivation Levels Can Decline as Uncertainty About the Future Begins to Set In. Project Manager: Good Point to Introduce New Projects in Order to Recommence The Forming Stage of Team Development. Detaching Style

http://www.12manage.com/methods_tuckman_stages_team_development.html


ARA (Feb’16)- © 2016 - 59

ARA TRAININGTechnical (or Quality or …) Report TemplateI. Problem Definition:

Performance Gap, Temporal Effects, “Geography”, Impact, Priority, …Objective of Current Step/Report

II. Summary / Conclusion:What Was Done: (Containment vs. Root Cause, Did we fix problem?) What It Means / Impact:

• Technical Implications:• Business Implications:

What We’re Going to Do About It: (Include Appropriate ARs/W3s)• Containment:• Root Cause:

What is Left:• How Much More Work Required:• How Much Longer it Will Take• How Much it Will Cost (as Appropriate):


ARA (Feb’16)- © 2016 - 60

ARA TRAINING

III. Schedule (Cycle of Learning, Time/Cycle, Calendar Time)

IV. Background History: (As Appropriate) Alternatives Considered: (Which ones were tried, not tried, why; tradeoffs) Solution Path: (As Appropriate) Etc.:

V. Experimental Description: (As required; Design, Execution, Expectation)

VI. Results & Discussion:VII. Appendix: (Data as Appropriate)

Technical (or Quality or …) Report Template