Driving Performance and Value in Software Investments

Transcription

1 Driving Performance and Value in Software Investments Dr. Danny Sabbah General Manager IBM Rational software 2008 IBM Corporation

2 Agenda IBM Rational Software Development Conference 2008 Changing the conversation software delivery in the real world Business and organizational trends and dependencies Impact and realities for software and systems Evolving software and systems delivery From conversation to action Patterns of success Rational Software Delivery Platform and Roadmap 2

3 An increasingly intense focus on business outcomes Align IT and business goals enabling greater business flexibility Manage value and mitigate risks by improving project management Control costs & improve global operational efficiencies (GDD) Ensure security and compliance in a changing global environment Ensure regulatory compliance in a changing global environment Integrate value in organizationally diverse environments 3

4 Cost-based conversations spiral top down CONVERSATIONS START HERE CFO We re cutting budgets 8%. How can you reduce cost? CIO OK. What can we cut? How can we globalize to lower costs? Great, I see our labor costs are down in your group! Program Manager Regardless of whether we cut staff or move to globalize, it s going to impact the existing project schedule by at least 3 months! Developer Beginning of THE END LOB Owner Great, another opportunity to be jerked around, I m out of here! So, let me get this. You re going to be how late? Basic efficiency is the cost of entry into changing the conversation, but they only take you so far 4

5 Another way to have a cost-based conversation Where productive conversations can start anywhere CFO I ve got to cut budget 8% How can we justify the investment we re making? CRO We need to protect the business in an auditable way. Project B can t go live without this coverage. CONVERSATIONS START ANYWHERE CIO Program Manager You can see the what we ve got here. We re investing in new distribution system for programs for $ return and $ to avoid future security risks and costs So we could move to de-prioritize P & Q projects to get Q2 to get project B done sooner LOB Owner Here s what we re delivering to the business on B project In-house Developer I think we can reuse something from Project G to get Project B done faster. Partner Developer If I tailor this asset we have instead of writing new code, I could reduce the cost here 20%. 5

6 A history of software and systems governance 1960s-1980s 1990s-2000s Complexity Process 100% Custom Ad-hoc 30% Reused Assets 70% Custom Repeatable Team Tools Project Performance Collocated On the Job Training Proprietary Not Integrated Predictable over budget, over schedule Collocated Software Skills Mix of Proprietary and Commercial Not Integrated Unpredictable Infrequently on budget, on schedule Success Rate 10% 25%-33% 6

7 Changing the conversation: Software engineering metrics 7

8 New governance challenges have emerged Complexity Challenges More granular service functionality in composite business applications Large number of projects and assets including custom, outsourced and packaged Team Challenges Geographically dispersed teams that often include business partners Effective cross-organizational visibility and synchronization, sharing becomes an imperative Process Challenges Blind adherence to process insensitive to potential business trade-offs Need for market experimentation Tools Challenges Lack of standards impacts ability to collaborate, automate and report across teams and assumptions Frequent asset updates and changing interdependencies How do I control this world to gain advantage? 8

9 Software metrics in context of business outcomes Value Control Project/Program Governance Software investment management aligned with business priorities Efficiency Breadth of Impact Individual efficiency through automation Global team effectiveness and collaboration Value INDIVIDUAL TEAM ORGANIZATION BUSINESS 9

10 Software metrics in context of business outcomes Value Control Measuring value: Examples % increase in services reuse resulting in % reduction in time to value Architectural reuse across application models resulting in % improvement in quality Project/Program Governance Software investment management aligned with business priorities Efficiency Breadth of Impact Individual efficiency through automation Global team effectiveness and collaboration Value INDIVIDUAL TEAM ORGANIZATION BUSINESS 10

11 Software metrics in context of business outcomes Value Control Project/Program Governance Software investment management aligned with business priorities Efficiency Breadth of Impact Measures of increasing value Individual efficiency through automation INDIVIDUAL % reduction in labor costs on a project Improvement in quality of releases Global team effectiveness and collaboration TEAM % reduction in development labor cost worldwide Reduction in % of labor spent on maintenance ORGANIZATION % increase in project pipeline with % increase in quality from resulting projects BUSINESS Value % increase in services reuse resulting in % reduction time to value Architectural reuse across application models resulting in % improvement in quality 11

12 Transitioning from the old way to the new way Conventional Governance Activity-based management Adversarial relationships Apply too much or too little process Early false precision Requirements first Modern Governance Results-based management Honest collaborative communication Right-size the process Evolving artifacts Architecture (risk mitigation) first 12

13 Reality of governance is not pretty Requires honest conversation to manage uncertainty and variance A completion date is not a point in time, it is a probability distribution Scope is not a requirements document, it is a continuous negotiation A plan is not a prescription, it is an evolving, moving target Uncertainty in stakeholder satisfaction space Initial State Plans/Resource estimates Scope Product features/quality Actual path and precision of Scope/Plan Initial Plan 13

14 Improve organizational capability Quality Productivity Timeliness (Successive Projects) 1. Ad hoc processes, methods, tools Custom defined on each project, no ROI Ungoverned 2. Foundation project disciplines Analysis and design, configuration and change management, planning, scope management, testing 3. Organizational process discipline Common methods, tools and training, objective metrics collection 4/5. Software economies of scale Business performance optimization, quantitative process management Repeatable practices Governance Business driven development 14

15 Making progress that s consumable, incremental and iterative Measured Capability Improvement (MCI) Deployment Evaluation Framework The need A systematic approach to business value articulation and delivery The approach A delivery model that accelerates adoption through out-of-the-box assets Captures over 10 years of Rational and industry experiences in incremental adoption Context Business Objectives Measure Subjective Survey Evaluation Framework Practice Adoption IBM IT Governance Approach Objective Precise Business Outcome Adopt Enact Being used today in agile transformation of over 80 IBM internal projects Process independent used with RUP, XP, Scrum and other processes 15

16 Flexible models for maturing projects Agile Steering Methodical Production Rigorous Quality Controlled Inception Elaboration Construction Transition / Maintenance Variance in Cost, Schedule Analysis Design Development planning High Variance Implementation Iteration planning Version control Build/Integration/test Maintenance/Test UCM Product Data Management 80% reduction 96% reduction Medium Variance Low Variance 16

17 Measured Capability Improvement Map business value to software delivery best practices Customer Business Challenges Create financial products more quickly Functionality of customer web falling behind competition Inconsistencies with integrated financial reporting Recent SOX audit failure Project A B C D E Business Metrics Time to Market (M) Quality (Defect Density) Productivity (SLOCS / PM) Example: Financial Service Company Operational Objectives Reflections Reduce time-to-market Improve productivity Increase innovation Improve consistency/predictability Improve oversight Enable flexible/global resourcing Satisfy compliance mandate Measured Iterative Practice Adoption Consumable High Quality Stakeholder Feedback Daily Scrum Time -Boxed Iteration Target: Phase 1 Already implemented Outside scope Software Delivery Best Practice Use-case driven development Continuous integration Shared vision Whole team Staged integration Multi-team management Risk-value lifecycle Asset-based development Asset governance Iterative development SOA modeling Enterprise SOA SOA governance Architecture modeling Test driven development Functional testing Test management Structured testing 17

18 The value of any development platform Business Driven Development Collaborate More efficient global teams with accelerated proficiency, more engineering, and less overhead Automate Content generation, instrumentation, and change management Report Governance, guidance and variance management Custom crafted: Artifacts Processes Plans Methods Tools Training Existing artifacts, practices Old Way Megatons New Way Much Less Human Developed Stuff Cost and Time Project and process tailoring Automated Content Generation Existing starting points 18

19 What Rational is doing to help you Delivering a Measured Capability Improvement Framework to provide a flexible, feedback-based software delivery process Introducing an automation and collaboration platform for gathering, managing and reporting global software delivery progress and history Process & Portfolio Management Change & Release Management Integrated Requirements Management Governance & Lifecycle Management Enterprise Modernization Quality Management Architecture & Construction 19

20 Distributed development: Green thread based approach Scenario: Tracking a change request Assess solution Request a change Bob: Business Analyst, Europe Bob and his LOB peers review and define requirements for the latest milestone release He identifies that UI changes are required to meet business needs. He submits a request Collaborate on a plan Patricia: Project Manager, US Patricia is managing the review and approval of new business requirements She and the AO team plans, assesses and assigns requests and work for next milestone Monitor Health Patricia tracks work progress and project health Develop solution Al: Software Architect, US Deidre: Developer, Europe Al find opportunities for asset reuse Deidre collaborates with the team on design scenarios and impact. She develops, reviews and integrates the change Deidre delivers the change set to the integration stream and central build in US Deliver Rebecca: Release Engineer, US Rebecca packages and publishes releases and milestones for others to use She baselines project artifacts Manage quality Tammy: Test Lead, US Tanuj: Test Engineer, India Tammy schedules and assigns system tests Tanuj ensures application release quality and performance Tanuj and his peers use the centralized build and test lab to make quality follow the sun Build and verify Rebecca: Release Engineer, US Rebecca monitors the continuous build and verification process and resolve and report baseline instabilities She publishes and announces availability of recommended builds 20

21 Distributed development: Green thread based approach Scenario: Tracking a change request Assess solution Request a change Bob: Business Analyst, Europe Bob and his LOB peers review and define requirements for the latest milestone release Organizational silos, not on same page He identifies that UI changes are required to meet business needs. He submits a request Collaborate on a plan Patricia: Project Manager, US Patricia is managing the review and approval of No new common business process/workflow, requirements can t plan iteratively and collaborate with distributed heterogeneous teams She and the AO team plans, assesses and assigns requests and work for next milestone Monitor Health Patricia tracks work progress Lack and of global project health visibility/metrics Develop solution Al: Software Architect, US Deidre: Developer, Europe Al find opportunities for asset reuse Developers working remotely Deidre collaborates with the team on design scenarios and can t impact. easily She find develops, and access reviews and integrates development the change assets Deidre delivers the change set to the integration stream and central build in US Deliver Rebecca: Release Engineer, US Rebecca packages and publishes releases and milestones for others to use Complex global release management with slow baselines She baselines project artifacts Manage quality Tammy: Test Lead, US Tanuj: Test Engineer, India Tammy schedules and assigns system tests Tanuj Most ensures time application spend on release manual test quality and performance case creation and setting up test lab and not on test coverage Tanuj and his peers use the centralized build and test lab to make quality follow the sun Build and verify Rebecca: Release Engineer, US Rebecca monitors Lack the continuous of scalable build global and verification process infrastructure and resolve and and high report TCO baseline instabilities She publishes and announces availability of recommended builds 21

22 Distributed development: Green thread based approach Roadmap Assess solution Request a change Bob: Business Analyst, Europe New Bob and RD his Offering LOB peers (2H08) Improved review and process define requirements for for discovering, for the capturing, validating latest milestone requirements release Organizational among org distributed silos, teams using multiple vocabularies not on same page ReqPro He identifies 7.1 that (1H08) UI changes are required GDD to meet focused business Web-client needs. parity, BIRT reporting, He submits enhanced a request security models Deliver Rebecca: Release Engineer, US Rebecca packages and publishes releases and milestones for others to use CQ 7.1 (1H08) Complex global release ClearQuest management ALM schema with slow for for OOTB baselines change and release management without extensive She schema baselines development and improved project baseline artifacts performance Collaborate on a plan Patricia: Project Manager, US RTC Patricia is managing the review and approval of No new common business process/workflow, requirements can t plan iteratively and collaborate 1.0 (1H08) CC/CQ Connectors (1H08) Enables with collaboration distributed heterogeneous with agile iteration teams planning She and the and AO common team plans, process assesses enactment across and assigns heterogeneous requests and teams work for next milestone RTC Monitor 1.0, CQ Health 7.1 (1H08) BIRT project health monitoring Patricia tracks work progress and project Vega Lack of global (1H09) health Reporting visibility/metrics DW for for portfolio & program health with third-party BI BI tool support Manage quality Tammy: Test Lead, US Tanuj: Test Engineer, India Tammy schedules and assigns system New testseqm Offering (2H08) Collaborative Web-based test management with Tanuj Most ensures time application spend release automatic manual test quality generation and performance of of test cases case creation and setting up test New Lab Manager lab (1H08) and not on test coverage Automated Tanuj and his discovery, peers use setup the of of test lab lab and deployment centralized build of of test and tools test lab to make quality follow the sun Develop solution Al: Software Architect, US Deidre: Developer, Europe Al find opportunities for CQ asset 7.1 reuse (1H08) New Web 2.0 Developers CQ client, 95%+ working functional remotely Deidre parity collaborates allows web with the team on design scenarios and can t client impact. easily to She find develops, and access to be be used as as primary client reviews and integrates development the change assets CCRC 7.1 (1H08) 500+ remote users from 200 today Deidre delivers the change set to the integration stream and central build in US Build and verify Rebecca: Release Engineer, US Rebecca monitors Lack the continuous of scalable build global and verification process infrastructure and resolve and and high report TCO baseline CCRC instabilities 7.1 (1H08) Remote monitoring for for 24/7 uptime She Lower publishes TCO: and Enables centralized, server announces model for for availability both ClearCase of and recommended ClearQuest builds 22

23 Service Lifecycle Management Scenario: New business goal, change process. Deploy to service. Change business requirement New business process. Bob and the steering committee examine the business goal, review current inventory of applications, processes, and set new requirements The identify a new set of new processes and level the requirements to create. New process model Patricia models the new business process, including costs, organizations involved She and the business team approve the new process, They now seek to view re-use options,. assess which assets, services, applications change? New Process model validate existing services, collaborate on optimizing re-use. Al and Deidre find opportunities for asset reuse, supporting the new Business Process. Deidre finds several existing services, but requires modification to several others. Services need to be created, modified and deployed across a wide number of systems. Deploy to production Monitor service Rebecca releases the services into the production environments She monitors performance of the services. Manage service quality Tammy: Test Lead, US Tanuj: Test Engineer, India Tanuj tests the services, including aspects of their performance performance Tammy approves deployment of the services to live production Automate service creation To help collaboration and automation, Rebecca automates the creation approach for the services 23

24 Change business requirement New business process. IBM Rational Software Development Conference 2008 Service Lifecycle Management Scenario: New business goal, change process. Deploy to service. Bob and the steering committee examine the business goal, review current inventory of applications, processes, and set new requirements The identify a new set of new processes and level the requirements to create. New process model Patricia models the new business process, including costs, organizations involvedtime spent on transferring and coordinating between to be She and the business team approve model and service assets the new process, They now seek to view re-use options,. Can t dynamically see the assess which assets, services, assets (services, applications) applications change? affected by process change. New Process model validate existing services, collaborate on optimizing re-use. Al and Deidre find opportunities for asset reuse, supporting the new Business Process. Time spent in collaborating with agile team working on authoring Deidre finds several existing services, but requires modification to several others. Services need to be created, modified and deployed across a wide number of systems. Deploy to productionspeed of notification from operational issue to Monitor service development resolution Rebecca releases the services into the production environments She monitors performance of the services. Manage service quality Tammy: Test Lead, US Tanuj: Test Engineer, India Tanuj tests the services, including aspects of their performance performance Most time spend on manual test case creation and setting up test lab and not on test coverage Tammy approves deployment of the services to live production Slow speed of transfer of reusable services to build automator Automate service creation To help collaboration and automation, Rebecca automates the creation approach for the services 24

25 Change business requirement New business process. IBM Rational Software Development Conference 2008 Service Lifecycle Management Scenario: New business goal, change process. Deploy to service. New process model New Process model validate existing services, collaborate on optimizing re-use. Patricia models the WBM new and business RAM 7.1 (1H08) process, including Transfer costs, a completed to to be business model organizations involved Al and Deidre find opportunities for and Bob and the steering committee examine all all Time artifacts spent direct on to to transferring Service repository and asset reuse, supporting the new the business goal, review current inventory Rational coordinating Asset Manage between to be model Business RAM Process. 7.1, RTC, CC, CQ (1H08) She and the business team approve of applications, and service assets Enables collaborative Time spent development in collaborating Develop the new process, They now seek to processes, and set new requirements code with in in agile a team team environment, working on create authoring search view re-use options, RAM. 7.1 (1H08) Can t dynamically see the assess which assets, services, Deidre finds re-use, several Agile existing capabilities services, in in RTC. Provides but The identify a new set of new processes assets (services, applications) applications notification of of a change to to asset change? (services, requires modification to several others. and level the requirements to create. applications). affected by process change. To Services need to be created, modified and To minimize risk of of change, RAM 7.1 also supports deployed across a wide number of systems. policy enforcement reviews for for the modified assets. BuildForge and RAM 7.1 Use Slow of of new speed (ANT) interface of transfer in of reusable in RAM 7.1 allows automation of services to of services build creation automator and RAM 7.1 and CCMDB (1H08) deployment by by Buildforge. Deploy to Notify production Speed development of notification quickly from of of operational Manage service quality operational issue to Tammy: Test Lead, US problems for for quick Monitor service resolution with direct development links from resolution Tivoli Automate service creation CCMDB Tanuj: Test Engineer, India to to RAM To help collaboration and automation, Rebecca releases the services into the Tanuj tests the services, including Rebecca automates the creation production environments aspects of their New performance EQM Offering (2H08) approach for the services performance Collaborative Most time Web-based spend on test manual management test She monitors performance of the services. with case creation and setting up test automatic generation of of test cases lab and not on test coverage New Tammy approves Lab Manager deployment (1H08) of Automated the services to discovery, live production setup of of test lab lab and deployment of of test tools 25

26 Delivering key capabilities on the Jazz platform An evolution of value for new and existing customers New Rational Jazz Offering New Rational Jazz Offering New Rational Jazz Offering Future Release of Current Rational Offering Best Practice Processes Future Release of Current Telelogic Offering Future IBM Jazz Offerings Business Partner Jazz Offerings Team Awareness Dashboards Security Events Notification Search and Query In Context Collaboration Client Integrations Eclipse Web 2.0 Visual Studio (4Q) Others to come (Microsoft SharePoint, Microsoft Project, Lotus Quickr, etc.) JAZZ TEAM SERVER Open Lifecycle Service Integrations Server Integrations Existing Rational offerings Business partner offerings Open source offerings (Subversion, etc.) Others to come (Other IBM servers, etc.) 26

27 Introducing the first wave of Rational Jazz offerings Collaborative Application Lifecycle Management Requirements Composer Business Expert Collaboration Elicit, capture, elaborate, discuss and review requirements using a variety of techniques and notations Quality Manager Business Driven Quality Coordinate and manage quality assurance plans, processes and resources across the lifecycle Coming soon Real-time enterprise reporting Collaborative project management Process design and enactment Business partner offerings Web TEAM SERVER In-context collaboration, real-time project health, event notification, process enactment and enforcement, global search and query, security, role-based access, automated traceability Team Concert Software Innovation Through Real-time Project Team Collaboration Eclipse Work Item Management Automated and flexible software change management improving project control and visibility ClearQuest Connector Configuration Management Source code control, traceability and versioning leveraging dynamic workspaces and parallel development ClearCase Connector Build Management Automates build planning, project construction, build of materials and release processes Build Forge Integration Visual Studio (future) Enhancements to ClearQuest, Build Forge and ClearCase 27

28 Web as open architecture Jazz: Open, extensible, web-centric, integration architecture Discovery Administration (users, projects, process) Query Core Logic REST API Task Specific Logic Data Warehousing Storage Data Collaboration Additional Services Core Services Open Lifecycle Services Open Lifecycle Services Universal addressing and access Language neutral Loose coupling Tools independent 28

29 Leveraging Web-centric SOA To embrace flexible architectures Existing Offerings New Offerings Business Partner Offerings Best Practice Processes Client Integrations Eclipse Web 2.0 Visual Studio (4Q) In-Context Collaboration TEAM SERVER Open Lifecycle Services Server Integrations Existing Rational/ Telelogic offerings Business partner offerings Open source offerings (Subversion, etc.) 29

30 Learn more at: IBM Rational software IBM Rational Software Delivery Platform Process and portfolio management Change and release management Quality management Architecture management Rational trial downloads Leading Innovation Web site developerworks Rational IBM Rational TV IBM Business Partners IBM Rational Case Studies Copyright IBM Corporation All rights reserved. The information contained in these materials is provided for informational purposes only, and is provided AS IS without warranty of any kind, express or implied. IBM shall not be responsible for any damages arising out of the use of, or otherwise related to, these materials. Nothing contained in these materials is intended to, nor shall have the effect of, creating any warranties or representations from IBM or its suppliers or licensors, or altering the terms and conditions of the applicable license agreement governing the use of IBM software. References in these materials to IBM products, programs, or services do not imply that they will be available in all countries in which IBM operates. Product release dates and/or capabilities referenced in these materials may change at any time at IBM s sole discretion based on market opportunities or other factors, and are not intended to be a commitment to future product or feature availability in any way. IBM, the IBM logo, Rational, the Rational logo, and other IBM products and services are trademarks of the International Business Machines Corporation, in the United States, other countries or both. Other company, product, or service names may be trademarks or service marks of others. 30