Application Lifecycle Management In Pursuit of Best-of-Breed

Application Lifecycle Management In Pursuit of Best-of-Breed Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) has emerged as an important discipline in application development and maintenance. A myriad of integrated process models and supporting tool-sets are emerging. These are competing with the value proposition that development of applications is better managed from the lifecycle perspective. This may sound similar to conventional project portfolio management, but is actually not. It is about managing relationships between granular and macro processes for end-to-end development, better aligned to the business needs. On the other hand, project portfolio management has limitations because it looks at processes individually with the risk of losing higher level business connections. Today, ALM is at a crossroad: Forrester refers to the current form as ALM 1.0 and the future form as ALM 2.0. This suggests that ALM is an emerging trend, and there are desirable benefits ahead. Consulting firms and software vendors are offering tools and suggesting processes that vary largely in strengths and fall short of one best-of-breed solution. This white paper analyzes ALM challenges, especially from its process perspective. It includes agile and conventional methodologies and suggests a best-of-breed model, which we call the Next Generation Process Framework.

About the Author Dipanjan Munshi Dipanjan Munshi is a senior consultant in Software Process Consulting. He leads the Next Generation Process Framework initiative which aims at optimizing software development based on emerging business needs. Dipanjan has led and executed consulting engagements for a number of large and medium organizations around optimizing software development lifecycles (SDLC) using various models. His areas of interest include conventional Application Development Methodologies, Service Oriented Architecture, and Agile Development. Dipanjan Munshi holds a graduate degree in Physics and Masters in Computer Applications. Praveen Kumar Reddy Research Analyst for Next Generation Process Framework and emerging trends in Application Lifecycle Management, assisted this study 1

Table of Contents 1. Plaguing Project Performances The Genesis of ALM 3 2. High Awareness, but Adoption has just started 3 3. ALM on Agile Development The Balancing Act 5 4. Next Generation Process Framework Best-of-Breed 5 5. An Approach that Supports ALM through Requirementcentric Viewpoints 6 6. Beyond ALM 1.0 8 7. The Message 9 8. References 9 2

Plaguing Project Performances The Genesis of ALM It starts with the realization that no matter how regimented or innovative we are in the management of development projects, success rates and satisfaction levels have been dismally low. British Computer Society (BCS) in their 2004 e-bulletin estimated that the percentage of projects deemed successful was as low as 16%. Another study in 2004 by Standish Group (see figure below) suggests a similar figure. Moreover, the percentage of completed projects with cost and schedule overruns is more than half the number of projects. Amongst these estranged projects only a few meet expected content delivery. 60% 40% 20% 0% Succeeded Failed Challenged Source: Standish Chaos Report: 2004 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 16% 27% 26% 28% 34% 29% 31% 40% 28% 23% 53% 33% 46% 49% 15% 18% 51% 53% The results are demoralizing although standardization and adoption of IT processes like CMMI has been increasing over the years. While more organizations have attained maturity against such benchmarked process standards, results in terms of project success and acceptability of outputs leave a lot to be desired. The quest, then, is to find out a Next Practice a phrase that emerged in quality circles with the realization that getting right things is what transcends getting things right. ALM emerged as a powerful next practice with its approach of looking at the application development lifecycle from an end-to-end perspective. Project management, visibility, and monitoring require continuous sanity check against overarching business needs. Therefore, this elicited the need for looking at project processes and artifacts within their inter-relationships rather than in isolation. This is ideologically reminiscent of the BPR paradigm, conceptualized by Hammer and Champy in the early 90s. The realization behind this is that one can define business processes more effectively than otherwise from an end-to-end perspective, which can bring in radically rewarding results. High Awareness, but Adoption has just started A Forrester study of various ALM tools defines ALM as: The coordination of development lifecycle activities, including requirements, modeling, development, building, and testing, through: Enforcement of processes that span across these activities Management of relationships between development artifacts used or produced by these activities Reporting of progress in development effort as a whole 3

The study is interesting. It suggests that, out of 60% of those aware of the ALM methodology, only 10% planned to pilot it in the coming 12 months (survey taken in August 2006). This reflects that, even after understanding the value proposition, there are many queries regarding how different ALM will be from conventional project portfolio management in practical terms. Moreover, a wide range of ALM suites, each touting different process models and integration capabilities, has added to the confusion. While it is imperative to adopt new methodologies that are more aligned to business requirements, there is evasiveness due to lack of clarity in available solutions. Interested but no plans to adopt 17% Will pilot in next 12 months 10% 40% Not Interested Inclination to Adopt Not Aware 23% Aware 48% 33% Source/Change/ Configuration Management Somewhat Interested 64% 29% Already Using How are the Adopters Using Project Management Information Requirements Management 31% 44% Test Automation Tool 23% Sources: Forrester Survey 2006, Venture Development Corporation, Embedded Software and Tools Bulletin, 2006; TCS Research and Analytics Software Modeling Tool Formal Requirements Management 12% 22% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% ALM Awareness and Adoption Analysis Further adding to the complexity of choosing methodology and tool-sets, we are today in the midst of new development paradigms evolving to make the system more agile. With multiple schemes of agile methodology available today (scrum, extreme programming), an important question arises: How agile can we be without compromising the merits of conventional disciplines? ALM today has to factor agile principles without compromising much on local visibility and predictability, which conventional disciplines (like waterfall) brought in a well-managed environment. For instance, some agile development models prescribe minimum documentation and more tacit exchange of knowledge. The ALM processes and suites should therefore allow workflow processes with low artifact content. 4

ALM on Agile Development The Balancing Act Minimum documentation, low externalization of tacit knowledge, and intense collaboration practices make agile methodology attractive. Application Development and Maintenance (ADM) has seen ceremonious processes with little business alignment and true value delivered in terms of budget compliance and user satisfaction. The skepticism around conventional ADM methodologies has led to agile philosophies gaining ground. Extreme programming is one of the agile methodologies. As the name suggests, it looks at intense collaboration and very low process codification to make deliveries adaptable to changing requirements and business needs. Extreme use of agile principles also has its pitfalls. You can always doubt the amount of visibility you actually have in your projects. A project s transition between phases is overly reliant on tacit channels, which is often volatile due to team turnover and attrition. When projects get larger, managing the portfolio becomes increasingly like a black box. Process maturity is a variable that remains opaque. There have been many realizations in ADM. ADM earlier dwelled in processes that lacked alignment to changing needs. Today we are tempted to adopt agile processes which may also have extreme ramifications. When a portfolio becomes larger, we need best-of-breed practices that balance ritualistic processes and agility. Of course, we need this within changing environments where requirements and overall business needs also change. ALM today is evolving within these realizations. The quest is for a next generation software methodology that adequately balances processes with complementing tools support. Next Generation Process Framework Best-of-Breed It is a common pitfall to rely on integrated ALM tool-sets to recommend processes for ALM. A Forrester report (August 2006) made a study of these software solutions and the finding suggests that each suite has its unique strengths and some critical weaknesses. With this perspective in mind, we suggest the Next Generation Process Framework (NGPF), which takes process as the central entity and provides best-of-breed tools to render the process. It, thereby, creates a requirement-centric end-to-end ALM solution. The process model encapsulates both execution and governance of the development lifecycle. The NGPF framework is built around four dimensions: Tasks: To help define building blocks for processes Tools: To effectively automate various tasks in a seamless manner Techniques: To bring predictable and productive outcomes with less reliance on volatile tacit knowledge Domain: To bolster execution of process, promoting reuse of domain-specific artifacts 5

Move away from monolithic processes to define building blocks called practices Technique Move from point automations to building complete end-to-end vendor-neutral tools Tool Task Domain Reduce dependency on tacit knowledge and enhance performance of practice footprints by creating explicit cutting-edge and industry recognized techniques Reuse and evolve domain knowledge to maximize productivity and promote a service oriented enterprise An Approach that Supports ALM through Requirement-centric Viewpoints The concept is based on TCS requirement-centric agile methodology, MAPAGILE een outcomes, tasks, and artifacts at various checkpoints of the lifecycle. This entails looking at the end-to-end cycle, and drilling down from multiple viewpoints. Each viewpoint focuses on processes for executing and managing the lifecycle of deliveries emerging out of a specific requirement. This, along with tools and techniques, can render those processes optimally. NGPF defines these viewpoints as: Functional requirements viewpoint Focuses on deliverables from functional requirements Functional architecture viewpoint Focuses on deliverables from business services and related aspects Technical architecture viewpoint Focuses on deliverables based on technical requirements including coding and testing Deployment architecture viewpoint Focuses on deliverables during post deployment and production NGPF defines supporting processes called disciplines that enable smooth execution of these viewpoints. On the whole this framework integrates viewpoints in iterative phases of analysis, design, and synthesis of component deliverables. 6

Viewpoints* Functional Requirements Viewpoint Functional Architecture Viewpoint Technical Architecture Viewpoint Deployment Architecture Viewpoint Functional Deliverables Business Service and Component Deliverables Technical Deliverables, Coding and Testing Post Deployment Deliverables Analysis Design Synthesize Project Management Discipline * Viewpoint concept is based on TCS Requirement-centric Agile Methodology, MAPAGILE The benefit parameters addressed in the framework include: Fostering Business Value Maximization a. Enables continuous process improvements b. Benchmarks business processes c. Aligns business with IT goals Minimizing IT Development Costs a. Offers optimal process agility in distributed environments b. Provides reusable services based on context c. Provides collaborative tool capabilities that bring visibility into Application Lifecycle Management d. Offers process automation through efficient interplay of process and tools e. Provides requirements-centric development that ensures building the right product the first time Enabling Business Innovation a. Offers pre-defined activities to maximize benefits through innovation b. Identifies appropriate innovation techniques Minimizing IT Maintenance Costs a. Offers product strategy and alignment, reducing post-deployment defects b. Offers extensive reuse through service orientation c. Optimizes maintenance processes 7

Beyond ALM 1.0 1 ALM 1.0, (as referenced by Forrester ), is the current generation ALM solution. The study suggests that none of these solutions are complete as per all the relevant benefit parameters. It also suggests that a range of ALM 2.0 solutions is desirable, based on both process capabilities and tool-set support. A comparison of Next Generation Process Framework, as the next generation model with conventional ALM solutions is given below. Discipline Significance within ALM ALM 1.0 NGPF Traceability Productivity through faster impact analysis Management of conflicts between artifacts and viewpoints Automated traceability Largely manual tasks of keeping the traceability matrix updated Tools ecosystem for vertical (viewpoints) and horizontal (phases) traceability Dynamic traceability building on updating artifacts Process Automation Reduced time to market/production Heterogeneous toolsets lack of standards and interoperability Available in all-or-none basis. Integrated tools ecosystem for endto-end lifecycle management Capability based multiple-vendor choices bringing best of breed tools and solutions Loose integration making ALM solution vendor neutral Visibility Visibility from multiple perspectives Continuous business sanity check Dashboard-driven visibility of progress Low functional definitions in reporting mechanism Dashboard driven visibility of progress Definition of next generation practices Can be aligned to multiple functional models (like agile and waterfall) Estimation Change of methodology (ex: to agile) making experience-based estimation unreliable Automation of complex estimation calculations Lack of clarity in review timing and benchmarks Model-specific heuristic estimation compliance with multiple models Benchmark-based validations Collaboration, Cooperation and Distribution of Work Leverage distributed development across location and across teams Leveraging multiple communication channels and technologies optimally Collaboration tools like workflows facilitating distributed development Possibility of alignment of collaboration tools with communication channels available and the organization structure Adoptable models based on global delivery network Process Compliance and Improvement Reduction in cost of quality Continuous improvement and innovation. Automated auditing mechanism in some solutions Largely reliant on manual definition of processes Process model based on next generation practices Compliance with benchmark models like CMMI Adaptable to multiple ethodologies like agile and waterfall Built-in mechanism for process improvements based on Six Sigma 8

The Message As practitioners of multiple development methodologies evolved over time, TCS suggests that ALM in its current maturity state is faced with the challenge of bringing out a best-of-breed solution with supporting toolsets. Some toolset driven solutions bring heterogeneous maturity levels at different touch-points in the lifecycle. Embracing and adopting new development methodologies require methods that include best practices learnt from conventional ones. The current need is a model that encompasses the lifecycle perspective, innovates and continuously improves in execution. Next Generation Process Framework provides a set of integrated next practices and supporting tool ecosystem. As a product of our practitioner s approach, it leverages TCS' years of delivery and maintenance experience and delivers a compelling value proposition. References 1. Forrester Research The Changing Face of Application Lifecycle Management, August 2006 2. Standish Group Report 2005 3. Forrester Research What Successful Organizations Know About Project Management, May 2006 4. British Computer Society e-bulletin, 2004 5. Next Generation Process (NGP) - http://www.ivarjacobson.com/about-us/our-vision/the-nextgeneration-process-explained.cfm 6. Standish 2005 - A study conducted by the Standish Group and published in their 2005 report http://www.standishgroup.com/index.php 7. [Forrester 2007] Teleconference: The What, Why, and How of Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) by Carey Schwaber, dated February 27, 2007 8. [Cushing, 2002] Why IT Projects Fail 9. Why IT Projects Fail/? http://www.projectperfect.com.au/info_it_projects_fail.php 10. TCS Research a. Papers Published i. Ghaisas, S., U. Shrotri, and R. Venkatesh. Requirement-centric method for Application Development (Submitted to EMSISE 03 Geneva workshop on Engineering methods to support Information Systems evolution) ii. Ghaisas, S. MAP-WayPointer a smart, agile method for large-scale enterprise application development. in Agile India 2005: Conference on XP and Agile methodologies. 2005. Pune, India. iii. Ghaisas, S., Gaurav Pilay and R Venkatesh. Smarter Knowledge Reuse in Software Development. in TACTiCS-Global 2006, the 3rd, World TCS Technical Architects Conference 2006. TCS-Deccanpark, Hyderabad. b. Patents Filed i. Ghaisas S. and R. Venkatesh., An Apparatus for Requirement-centric Application Development. November 4, 2003. India. ii. A Method of Automation of Business Processes and Apparatus therefore. January 11, 2004. USA. S. Ghaisas and R. Venkatesh. c. Trademark i. MAPAGILE A Generic Requirement-centric Method for Application Development, 2004 d. Copyright i. MasterCraft Agile Process MAP- A MasterCraft specific version of MAPAGILE, 2003 9

About TCS IT Process and Service Management Consulting IT Process and Service Management Consulting partners with organizations to enable IT process improvement aligned to business needs. Leveraging TCS' experience in successfully adopting best-inclass frameworks like CMMI, ISO-9001, ITIL, P-CMM, BS15000, BS7799, and Six Sigma, the consulting group provides services with a practitioner s approach to assessing, defining, improving, and deploying IT processes. CMMI appraisal services and training ITIL deployment and assessment Agile development for distributed environment Six Sigma-based improvements Quality improvement initiatives Digitized enablers which reduce 'Time to Deploy' and sustain productivity for process improvement About Tata Consultancy Services (TCS) Tata Consultancy Services Limited is an IT services, business solutions and outsourcing organization that delivers real results to global businesses, ensuring a level of certainty no other firm can match. TCS offers a consulting-led, integrated portfolio of IT and ITenabled services delivered through its unique Global Network TM Delivery Model, recognized as the benchmark of excellence in software development. A part of the Tata Group, India's largest industrial conglomerate, TCS has over 94,000 of the world's best trained IT consultants in 47 countries. The company generated consolidated revenues of US $4.3 billion for fiscal year ended 31 March 2007 and is listed on the National Stock Exchange and Bombay Stock Exchange in India. For more information, visit us at www.tcs.com global.consulting@tcs.com All content / information present here is the exclusive property of Tata Consultancy Services Limited (TCS). The content / information contained here is correct at the time of publishing. No material from here may be copied, modified, reproduced, republished, uploaded, transmitted, posted or distributed in any form without prior written permission from TCS. Unauthorized use of the content / information appearing here may violate copyright, trademark and other applicable laws, and could result in criminal or civil penalties. Copyright 2007 Tata Consultancy Services Limited www.tcs.com