by Craig Larman and Bas Vodde Version 1.2



Similar documents
Lean and Agile Development With Scrum (Part 2) Lucio Davide Spano

When agile is not enough

Chapter Introduction to Feature Teams 154 Avoid Single-function teams 161 Avoid Component teams 161 Try Feature teams 180 Transition 195

Executive Guide to SAFe 24 July An Executive s Guide to the Scaled Agile Framework.

When is Agile the Best Project Management Method? Lana Tylka

Scrum vs. Kanban vs. Scrumban

Agile and lean methods for managing application development process

The Structure of a Software Development Team

Process Methodology. Wegmans Deli Kiosk. for. Version 1.0. Prepared by DELI-cious Developers. Rochester Institute of Technology

Introduction to Enterprise Agile Frameworks

SCALING AGILE. minutes

Agile and lean methods for managing application development process

Agile Training Portfolio

Applying Lean on Agile Scrum Development Methodology

Frank Cervone Vice Chancellor for Information Services and Chief Information Officer Purdue University Calumet January 17, 2012 CARLI Anatomy of a

Automated Acceptance Testing of High Capacity Network Gateway

Course Title: Planning and Managing Agile Projects

Table of contents. Performance testing in Agile environments. Deliver quality software in less time. Business white paper

SCRUM 1. Upon what type of process control is Scrum based? a. Empirical b. Hybrid c. Defined d. Complex

Course Title: Managing the Agile Product Development Life Cycle

Agile Projects 7. Agile Project Management 21

AGILE vs. WATERFALL METHODOLOGIES

MTAT Software Engineering

Agile Systems Engineering: What is it and What Have We Learned?

Introduction to Scrum for Managers and Executives

Scrum in a Large Project Theory and Practice

No one has to change. Survival is optional. - W. Edwards Deming - Continue your Beyond Budgeting Journey with help from Agile, Lean and Scrum

Case Study on Critical Success Factors of Running Scrum *

The Agile Business Analyst: Eyes for Waste By Ellen Gottesdiener Copyright EBG Consulting, Inc., 2009 EBG Consulting, Inc.:

Handling Requirements in Agile: BA vs. PO. April 14 th, Agile NYC Pecha Kucha Presentation By Gene Gendel, PMP, CSM, CSP

The Basics of Scrum An introduction to the framework

White paper: Scrum-ban for Project Management

Introduction to Agile and Scrum

Agile So)ware Development

Leading Continuous Improvement in Established Agile Organizations

The traditional project management uses conventional methods in software project management process.

Lean Agile Scrum Business Value Development and Delivery using Agility. Brenden McGlinchey Software Done Right, Inc.

Getting to Done The Secret Sauce of High Performing Teams

The Agile Manifesto is based on 12 principles:

Agile vs. Waterfall. Why not both. Arnold Okkenburg PMP

Scrum: A disciplined approach to product quality and project success.

Scrum, User Stories, and More! CSCI 5828: Foundations of Software Engineering Lecture 22 11/06/2014

Quality Assurance in an Agile Environment

Lean Software Development

Defect Tracking Best Practices

A Viable Systems Engineering Approach. Presented by: Dick Carlson

Scale agile throughout the enterprise A PwC point of view

Topics covered. Agile methods Plan-driven and agile development Extreme programming Agile project management Scaling agile methods

agenda AGILE AT SCALE

A Comparison of Issues and Advantages in Agile and Incremental Development between State of the Art and an Industrial Case

Agile Development and Software Architecture: Understanding Scale and Risk

Agile Engineering Introduction of a new Management Concept

Agile Requirements Definition and Management (RDM) How Agile requirements help drive better results

Agile Software Development and Service Science

Agile Testing. What Students Learn

Agile Software Development with Scrum. Jeff Sutherland Gabrielle Benefield

When User Experience Met Agile: A Case Study

When to use Agile/Scrum

Basic Trends of Modern Software Development

Certified Scrum Master Workshop

What is meant by the term, Lean Software Development? November 2014

Capstone Agile Model (CAM)

Scale your product NOT your Scrum

J-Curve effect, 38, JIT. See Just-in-Time Inventory Just Enough Design Initially (JEDI), 6, 283

Answered: PMs Most Common Agile Questions

Introduction to Agile Scrum

Agile in a Safety Critical world

Agile Software Project Management with Scrum

Bottlenecks in Agile Software Development Identified Using Theory of Constraints (TOC) Principles

Agile support with Kanban some tips and tricks By Tomas Björkholm

Applying Agile Project Management to a Customized Moodle Implementation

SOFTWARE LOCALIZATION FOR AGILE, WATERFALL, AND HYBRID DEVELOPMENT

THE BUSINESS VALUE OF AGILE DEVELOPMENT

Agile Software Development and Service Science

Agile Project Management By Mark C. Layton

Gothenburg 2015 Jan Marek com CA Technologies Introducing Agile development methodologies to Session S601 mainframe development teams

Agile Beyond The Team 1

JOURNAL OF OBJECT TECHNOLOGY

Scrum and CMMI Level 5: The Magic Potion for Code Warriors

Agile Project Management

Making Sense of. Agile Project Management. Traditional. Project Management. 1/19/ Breakthrough Solutions, Inc. 1

Introduction to Agile Practices

TSG Quick Reference Guide to Agile Development & Testing Enabling Successful Business Outcomes

Nova Software Quality Assurance Process

Scaling Spotify

Lean Software Development and Kanban

Transcription:

FEAURE EAM PRIMER by raig Larman and Bas Vodde Version 1.2 Feature s and Requirement Areas are key elements of scaling lean and agile development. hey are analyzed in depth in the Feature eam and Requirement Area chapters of Scaling Lean & Agile Development: hinking and Organizational ools for Large Scale Scrum. his short paper summarizes a few key ideas and can also be found in Practices for Scaling Lean & Agile Development: Large, Multisite, and Offshore Development with Large-Scale Scrum. INRODUION O FEAURE EAMS A, shown in Figure 1, is a long-lived, 1 cross-functional, cross-onent that letes many end-to-end customer s one by one. Figure 1 Feature Backlog customercentric Feature : - stable and long-lived - cross-functional - cross-onent potentially shippable product increment eam has the necessary knowledge and skills to lete an end-to-end customer-centric. If not, the is expected to learn or acquire the needed knowledge and skill. 1. Feature s stay together for years, implementing many s. 1 www.primer.org opyright (c) 2010 raig Larman and Bas Vodde

Feature eam Primer he characteristics of a are listed below:. Feature eam long-lived the stays together so that they can jell for higher performance; they take on new s over time cross-functional and cross-onent ideally, co-located work on a lete customer-centric, across all onents and disciplines (analysis, programming, testing, ) osed of generalizing specialists in Scrum, typically 7 ± 2 people Applying modern engineering practices especially continuous integration is essential when adopting s. ontinuous integration facilitates shared code ownership, which is a necessity when multiple s work at the same time on the same onents. A common misunderstanding: every member of a needs to know the whole system. Not so, because he as a whole not each individual member requires the skills to implement the entire customer-centric. hese include onent knowledge and functional skills such as test, interaction design, or programming. But within the, people still specialize preferably in multiple areas. Features are not randomly distributed over the s. he current knowledge and skills of a are factored into the decision of which works on which s. Within a organization, when specialization becomes a constraintlearning happens. A organization exploits speed benefits from specialization, as long as requirements map to the skills of the s. But when requirements do not map to the skills of the s, learning is forced, breaking the overspecialization constraint. Feature s balance specialization and flexibility. 2 www.primer.org

Feature eam Primer able 1 and Figure 2 show the differences between s and more traditional onent s. able 1 s vs. onent s onent optimized for delivering the maximum customer value a focus on high-value s and system productivity (value throughput) responsible for lete customer-centric modern way of organizing s b avoids onway s law leads to customer focus, visibility, and smaller organizations minimizes dependencies between s to increase flexibility focus on multiple specializations shared product code ownership shared responsibilities supports iterative development exploits flexibility; continuous and broad learning requires skilled engineering practices effects are broadly visible provides a motivation to make code easy to maintain and test seemingly difficult to implement optimized for delivering the maximum number of lines of code focus on increased individual productivity by implementing easy lower-value s responsible for only part of a customer-centric traditional way of organizing s follows onway s law c leads to invented work and a forever-growing organization dependencies between s leads to additional planning d focus on single specialization individual/ code ownership clear individual responsibilities results in waterfall development exploits existing expertise; lower level of learning new skills works with sloppy engineering practices effects are localized contrary to belief, often leads to low-quality code in onent seemingly easy to implement a. he different optimization often makes the feel slower from the local view. b. Relatively modern as s have a long history in large-scale development, for example, Microsoft and Ericsson. c. Mel onway observed this undesirable structure in 1968, he did not recommended it in fact, quite the opposite. d. his additional planning is visible in more release planning meetings or release trains and more management overhead. 3 www.primer.org

Feature eam Primer Figure 2 vs. onent s omponent s Feature s system system Item 1 Item 2 Item 3 Item 4 A eam B eam A B Item 1 Item 2 Item 3 Item 4 eam Wei eam Shu A B eam eam Wu Work from multiple s is required to finish a customer-centric. hese dependencies cause waste such as additional planning and coordination work, hand-offs between s, and delivery of low-value items. Work scope is narrow. Every letes customer-centric items. he dependencies between s are related to shared code. his simplifies planning but causes a need for frequent integration, modern engineering practices, and additional learning. Work scope is broad. he table below summarizes the differences between s and conventional project or groups. able 2 Feature s vs projects stable that stays together for years and works on many s shared responsibility for all the work self-managing results in a simple single-line organization (no matrix!) members are dedicated 100% allocated to the group or project temporary group of people created for one or project individual responsibility for their part based on specialization controlled by a project manager results in a matrix organization with resource pools members are part-time on many projects because of specialization Most drawbacks of onent s are explored in the Feature eams chapter of Scaling Lean & Agile Development, Figure 3 summarizes some of these. 4 www.primer.org

Feature eam Primer Figure 3 some drawbacks of onent s Iteration 1 Iteration 2 (probably later) Analysis Iterations 3-5 (probably later and more) At least iteration 6 (probably later) Backlog Item 1 Backlog Item 2 Item 1 Analyst Design not available until the analyst is finished System Engineer Implementation not all s start Item 1 at the same iteration; they are multitasking on multiple s omp A eam est system testers cannot start immediately on Item 1; they are multitasking on multiple s requirement details for Item 1 'backlog' by onent omp B eam omp eam code System esters omponent s lead to a sequential life cycle with handoff, queues, and single-specialist groups and not true cross-functional s without handoff. What is sometimes not seen is that a onent structure reinforces sequential development (a waterfall or V-model), with many queues with varying-sized work packages, high levels of WIP, many handoffs, and increased multitasking and partial allocation. hoose omponent eams or Feature eams? A pure organization is ideal from the value-delivery and organizationalflexibility perspective. Value and flexibility, however, are not the only criterion for organizational design, and many organizations therefore end up with a hybrid especially during a transition from onent to s. aution: hybrid models have the drawbacks from both worlds and can bepainful. A frequently expressed reason in favor of a hybrid organization is the need to build infrastructure, construct reusable onents, or clean up code work traditionally 5 www.primer.org

Feature eam Primer done within onent s. But these activities can also be done in a pure organization without establishing permanent onent s. How? By adding infrastructure, reusable onents, or cleanup work to the Backlog and giving it to an existing as if it were a customer-centric. he temporarily for as long as the wishes does such work and then returns to building customer-centric s. ransitioning to Feature eams Different organizations require different transition strategies when changing from onent to s. We have experience with many strategies that workedand failed in a different context. A safe but slow transitioning strategy is to establish one within the existing onent organization. After this performs well, a second is formed. his continues gradually at the speed the organization is comfortable with. his is shown in Figure 4. Figure 4 gradual transitioning from to onent s Feature eam Red contains ex-members from onent s A, B, and, and from analysis, architecture, and testing groups system Item 1 Item 2 Item 3 Item 4 tasks for A tasks for B tasks for A tasks for B tasks for A tasks for omp A eam omp B eam omponent A omponent B omp eam omponent 6 www.primer.org

Feature eam Primer INRODUION O REQUIREMEN AREAS Feature s scale nicely, but when their number goes above ten s about a hundred people additional structure is needed. Requirement areas provide this structure and lement the concepts behind s. A requirement area is a categorization of the requirements leading to different views of the Backlog. he (PO) groups every Backlog item under exactly one requirement category its requirements area. After this, he generates different views on the overall Backlog called an Area Backlog. he Area Backlogs are prioritized by an Area who specialiszes in part of the product from a customer perspective. Each Requirement Area has several s working from the Area Backlog, as shown in Figure 5. Figure 5 requirement areas performance area s Area Backlog Backlog Item 1 Performance Backlog Items 1 Backlog Items 2 Protocols Backlog Item 3 Backlog Item 4 Area protocols area s Requirement areas are scaled-up s. Scaling up by structuring s according to the product s architecture is called development areas. able 3 summarizes the differences. 7 www.primer.org

Feature eam Primer able 3 requirement areas vs. development areas Requirement Area organized around customer-centric requirements no subsystem code ownership temporary in nature; should change over the lifetime of the product, but not at every iteration focus on the customer, using customer language Development Area organized around product s architecture code ownership per subsystem tends to be more fixed over the lifetime of the product focus on the architecture, using technology language Finally, an Area is different than a supporting someone that works with one or two s to help a busy overall. An Area has different responsibilities and focus, and works with (probably) at least four s, not just with one. his avoids local optimization toward the activities of one. ONLUSION Feature s are stable s that are given lete customer-centric s. hese s resolve local optimizations and extra coordination overhead caused by onent organizations. However, s are not without challenges themselves. Requirement areas scale the concept by creating customer-centric views on the overall Backlog and thus creating a structure that allows s to be scaled up to any size. 8 www.primer.org

Feature eam Primer REFERENES hapters: Introduction Systems hinking Lean Queueing heory False Dichotomies Be Agile Featurea eams eams Requirement Areas Organization Large-Scale Scrum hapters: 9 Large-Scale Scrum est Management Planning oordination Requirements Design Legacy ode ontinuous Integration Inspect & Adapt Multisite Offshort ontracts www.primer.org