Presentation on the "Business Value of Agile Testing: Using Test Driven Development, Continuous Integration, Continuous Delivery, & DevOps," which are highly-disciplined contemporary new product development (NPD) approaches for rapidly building high-quality information technology-intensive systems. Identifies the motivation for agile methods, provide a brief introduction to agile methods, describe the fundamental mechanics of agile methods, and a brief survey of the benefits of agile methods as reported by major industry studies (including rarely seen, late-breaking economic data and results from the top consulting firms). Defines agile testing and introduce basic and advanced agile testing practices, strategies, metrics, outcomes, costs & benefits, cost of quality, and statistical performance data. Introduces basic and advanced agile scaling practices, case studies of enterprise-level agile testing, Continuous Delivery, and DevOps at major Internet firms, and common agile testing tools and automation suites. Closes with a summary of agile testing adoption rates, common barriers to agile testing, organizational change models for agile testing, and a summary of the benefits of agile testing.
Business Value of Agile Testing: Using TDD, CI, CD, & DevOps
1. Business Value of
Agile Testing
Using TDD, CI, CD & DevOps
Dr. David F. Rico, PMP, CSEP, FCP, FCT, ACP, CSM, SAFe
Twitter: @dr_david_f_rico
Website: http://www.davidfrico.com
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidfrico
Agile Capabilities: http://davidfrico.com/rico-capability-agile.pdf
Agile Resources: http://www.davidfrico.com/daves-agile-resources.htm
Agile Cheat Sheet: http://davidfrico.com/key-agile-theories-ideas-and-principles.pdf
2. Author Background
Gov’t contractor with 32+ years of IT experience
B.S. Comp. Sci., M.S. Soft. Eng., & D.M. Info. Sys.
Large gov’t projects in U.S., Far/Mid-East, & Europe
2
Career systems & software engineering methodologist
Lean-Agile, Six Sigma, CMMI, ISO 9001, DoD 5000
NASA, USAF, Navy, Army, DISA, & DARPA projects
Published seven books & numerous journal articles
Intn’l keynote speaker, 130 talks to 12,000+ people
Specializes in metrics, models, & cost engineering
Cloud Computing, SOA, Web Services, FOSS, etc.
Adjunct at five Washington, DC-area universities
4. Software in U.S. DoD Systems
Kennedy, M. P., & Umphress, D. A. (2011). An agile systems engineering process: The missing link. Crosstalk, 24(3), 16-20.
No. of software-intensive systems is growing
80% of US DoD functions performed in software
Major driver of cost, schedule, & tech. performance
4
5. Software in U.S. DoD Avionics
Blackburn, M. R. (2014). Transforming systems engineering through a holistic approach to model centric engineering. Washington, DC: Stevens Institute of Technology.
Software in U.S. DoD avionics growing exponentially
10x growth from F-16 to F-22 (& another 10x to F-35)
Productivity must grow by 10x for next gen systems
5
6. Traditional Projects
6
Big projects result in poor quality and scope changes
Productivity declines with long queues/wait times
Large projects are unsuccessful or canceled
Jones, C. (1991). Applied software measurement: Assuring productivity and quality. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Size vs. Quality
DEFECTS
0.00
3.20
6.40
9.60
12.80
16.00
0 2 6 25 100 400
SIZE
Size vs. Productivity
PRODUCTIVITY
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
0 2 6 25 100 400
SIZE
Size vs. Change
CHANGE
0%
8%
16%
24%
32%
40%
0 2 6 25 100 400
SIZE
Size vs. Success
SUCCESS
0%
12%
24%
36%
48%
60%
0 2 6 25 100 400
SIZE
7. Global Project Failures
7
Standish Group. (2015). Chaos summary 2015. Boston, MA: Author.
Sessions, R. (2009). The IT complexity crisis: Danger and opportunity. Houston, TX: Object Watch.
Challenged and failed projects hover at 67%
Big projects fail more often, which is 5% to 10%
Of $1.7T spent on IT projects, over $858B were lost
$0.0
$0.4
$0.7
$1.1
$1.4
$1.8
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Trillions(USDollars)
Expenditures Failed Investments
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
28%
34%
29%
35%
32%
33%
27%
28%
29%
49%
51%
53%
46%
44%
41%
56%
55%
52%
23%
15%
18%
19%
24%
26%
17%
17%
19%
2000
2002
2004
2006
2008
2010
2012
2014
2015
Year
Successful Challenged Failed
8. Requirements Defects & Waste
8
Sheldon, F. T. et al. (1992). Reliability measurement: From theory to practice. IEEE Software, 9(4), 13-20
Johnson, J. (2002). ROI: It's your job. Extreme Programming 2002 Conference, Alghero, Sardinia, Italy.
Requirements defects are #1 reason projects fail
Traditional projects specify too many requirements
More than 65% of requirements are never used at all
Other 7%
Requirements
47%
Design
28%
Implementation
18%
Defects
Always 7%
Often 13%
Sometimes
16%
Rarely
19%
Never
45%
Waste
9. What is Agility?
A-gil-i-ty (ә-'ji-lә-tē) Property consisting of quickness,
lightness, and ease of movement; To be very nimble
The ability to create and respond to change in order to
profit in a turbulent global business environment
The ability to quickly reprioritize use of resources when
requirements, technology, and knowledge shift
A very fast response to sudden market changes and
emerging threats by intensive customer interaction
Use of evolutionary, incremental, and iterative delivery
to converge on an optimal customer solution
Maximizing BUSINESS VALUE with right sized, just-
enough, and just-in-time processes and documentation
Highsmith, J. A. (2002). Agile software development ecosystems. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley.
9
10. What are Agile Methods?
10
People-centric way to create innovative solutions
Product-centric alternative to documents/process
Market-centric model to maximize business value
Agile Manifesto. (2001). Manifesto for agile software development. Retrieved September 3, 2008, from http://www.agilemanifesto.org
Rico, D. F., Sayani, H. H., & Sone, S. (2009). The business value of agile software methods. Ft. Lauderdale, FL: J. Ross Publishing.
Rico, D. F. (2012). Agile conceptual model. Retrieved February 6, 2012, from http://davidfrico.com/agile-concept-model-1.pdf
Customer Collaboration
Working Systems & Software
Individuals & Interactions
Responding to Change
valued
more than
valued
more than
valued
more than
valued
more than
Contracts
Documentation
Processes
Project Plans
Frequent comm.
Close proximity
Regular meetings
Multiple comm. channels
Frequent feedback
Relationship strength
Leadership
Boundaries
Empowerment
Competence
Structure
Manageability/Motivation
Clear objectives
Small/feasible scope
Acceptance criteria
Timeboxed iterations
Valid operational results
Regular cadence/intervals
Org. flexibility
Mgt. flexibility
Process flexibility
System flexibility
Technology flexibility
Infrastructure flexibility
Contract compliance
Contract deliverables
Contract change orders
Lifecycle compliance
Process Maturity Level
Regulatory compliance
Document deliveries
Document comments
Document compliance
Cost Compliance
Scope Compliance
Schedule Compliance
Courage
11. Agile World View
“Agility” has many dimensions other than IT
It ranges from leadership to technological agility
Today’s focus is on organizational & enterprise agility
Agile Leaders
Agile Organization Change
Agile Acquisition & Contracting
Agile Strategic Planning
Agile Capability Analysis
Agile Program Management
Agile Tech.
Agile Information Systems
Agile Tools
Agile Processes & Practices
Agile Systems Development
Agile Project Management
11
12. Network
Computer
Operating System
Middleware
Applications
APIs
GUI
How Agile Works
Agile requirements implemented in slices vs. layers
User needs with higher business value are done first
Reduces cost & risk while increasing business success
12Shore, J. (2011). Evolutionary design illustrated. Norwegian Developers Conference, Oslo, Norway.
Agile Traditional
1 2 3 Faster
Early ROI
Lower Costs
Fewer Defects
Manageable Risk
Better Performance
Smaller Attack Surface
Late
No Value
Cost Overruns
Very Poor Quality
Uncontrollable Risk
Slowest Performance
More Security Incidents Seven Wastes
1. Rework
2. Motion
3. Waiting
4. Inventory
5. Transportation
6. Overprocessing
7. Overproduction
MINIMIZES MAXIMIZES
JIT, Just-enough architecture
Early, in-process system V&V
Fast continuous improvement
Scalable to systems of systems
Maximizes successful outcomes
Myth of perfect architecture
Late big-bang integration tests
Year long improvement cycles
Breaks down on large projects
Undermines business success
13. Thousands of Tests
Continuously Executed
No More Late Big
Bang Integration
User needs designed & developed one-at-a-time
Changes automatically detected, built, and tested
System fully tested and deployed as changes occur
13Humble, J., & Farley, D. (2011). Continuous delivery. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
Duvall, P., Matyas, S., & Glover, A. (2006). Continuous integration. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Build
Integration
Server
Version
Control
Server
Build
Scripts
UsesWatches
Build
Status
ProvidesDeveloper A
Developer B
Developer C
Commits
Changes
Commits
Changes
Commits
Changes
Builds
Database
Analysis
Testing
Reporting
Documentation
Deployment
Early, Automated, Fast,
Efficient, & Repeatable
Constant Readiness
State & CM Control
Lean, Waste Free, Low WIP,
No Deadlocked Test Queues
Rapidly & Successfully
Dev. Complex Systems
Basic Agile Mechanics
14. 14
Capability/MMF #1
● Feature 1
● Feature 2
● Feature 3
● Feature 4
● Feature 5
● Feature 6
● Feature 7
Capability/MMF #2
● Feature 8
● Feature 9
● Feature 10
● Feature 11
● Feature 12
● Feature 13
● Feature 14
Capability/MMF #3
● Feature 15
● Feature 16
● Feature 17
● Feature 18
● Feature 19
● Feature 20
● Feature 21
Capability/MMF #4
● Feature 22
● Feature 23
● Feature 24
● Feature 25
● Feature 26
● Feature 27
● Feature 28
Capability/MMF #5
● Feature 29
● Feature 30
● Feature 31
● Feature 32
● Feature 33
● Feature 34
● Feature 35
Capability/MMF #6
● Feature 36
● Feature 37
● Feature 38
● Feature 39
● Feature 40
● Feature 41
● Feature 42
Capability/MMF #7
● Feature 43
● Feature 44
● Feature 45
● Feature 46
● Feature 47
● Feature 48
● Feature 49
1
2 3
4
5 6
7
8 9
10
11 12
13
14 15
16
17 18
19
20 21
Evolving “Unified/Integrated” Enterprise Data Model
“Disparate” LEGACY SYSTEM DATABASES (AND DATA MODELS)
ETL
A A
B C
D E F
G H I J K
A
B C
D E F
A
B C
D E
A
B C
D
A
B C
A
B
“Legacy” MS SQL Server Stovepipes “Inter-Departmental” Linux Blade/Oracle/Java/WebSphere Server
“Leased” DWA/HPC/Cloud Services
Sprint 1 Sprint 2 Sprint 3 Sprint 4 Sprint 5 Sprint 6 Sprint 7
Release
Release
Release
Release
ETL ETL ETL ETL ETL ETL
Bente, S., Bombosch, U., & Langade, S. (2012). Collaborative enterprise architecture: Enriching EA with lean, agile, and enterprise 2.0 practices. Waltham, MA: Elsevier.
(for example, assume 25 user stories per feature, 175 user stories per capability/MMF, and 1,225 user stories total)
Organize needs into capabilities, features, and stories
Prioritize features, group releases, and initiate sprints
Develop minimum set of features with highest value
Agile Systems Development
15. Models of AGILE DEVELOPMENT
15
Agile methods spunoff flexible manufacturing 1990s
Extreme Programming (XP) swept the globe by 2002
Today, over 90% of IT projects use Scrum/XP hybrid
Use Cases
Domain Model
Object Oriented
Iterative Dev.
Risk Planning
Info. Radiators
Planning Poker
Product Backlog
Sprint Backlog
2-4 Week Spring
Daily Standup
Sprint Demo
Feasibility
Business Study
Func. Iteration
Design Iteration
Implementation
Testing
Domain Model
Feature List
Object Oriented
Iterative Dev.
Code Inspection
Testing
Release Plans
User Stories
Pair Programmer
Iterative Dev.
Test First Dev.
Onsite Customer
Cockburn, A. (2002). Agile software development. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Schwaber, K., & Beedle, M. (2001). Agile software development with scrum. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Stapleton, J. (1997). DSDM: A framework for business centered development. Harlow, England: Addison-Wesley.
Palmer, S. R., & Felsing, J. M. (2002). A practical guide to feature driven development. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Beck, K. (2000). Extreme programming explained: Embrace change. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
CRYSTAL METHODS
- 1991 -
SCRUM
- 1993 -
DSDM
- 1993 -
FDD
- 1997 -
XP
- 1998 -
Reflection W/S Retrospective Quality Control Quality Control Continuous Del.
16. Basic SCRUM Framework
Schwaber, K., & Beedle, M. (2001). Agile software development with scrum. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Created by Jeff Sutherland at Easel in 1993
Product backlog comprised of prioritized features
Iterative sprint-to-sprint, adaptive & emergent model
16
17. Models of AGILE PROJECT MGT.
17
Dozens of Agile project management models emerged
Many stem from principles of Extreme Programming
Vision, releases, & iterative development common
Prioritization
Feasibility
Planning
Tracking
Reporting
Review
Visionate
Speculate
Innovate
Re-Evaluate
Disseminate
Terminate
Scoping
Planning
Feasibility
Cyclical Dev.
Checkpoint
Review
Envision
Speculate
Explore
Iterate
Launch
Close
Vision
Roadmap
Release Plan
Sprint Plan
Daily Scrum
Retrospective
Thomsett, R. (2002). Radical project management. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
DeCarlo, D. (2004). Extreme project management: Using leadership, principles, and tools to deliver value in the face of volatility. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Wysocki, R.F. (2010). Adaptive project framework: Managing complexity in the face of uncertainty. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
Highsmith, J. A. (2010). Agile project management: Creating innovative products. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
Layton, M. C., & Maurer, R. (2011). Agile project management for dummies. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley Publishing.
RADICAL
- 2002 -
EXTREME
- 2004 -
ADAPTIVE
- 2010 -
AGILE
- 2010-
SIMPLIFIED
- 2011 -
18. Layton, M. C., & Maurer, R. (2011). Agile project management for dummies. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley Publishing.
Created by Mark Layton at PlatinumEdge in 2012
Mix of new product development, XP, and Scrum
Simplified codification of XP and Scrum hybrid
18
Simplified AGILE PROJECT MGT.
19. 19
Numerous models of agile portfolio mgt. emerging
Based on lean-kanban, release planning, and Scrum
Include organization, program, & project management
Schwaber, K. (2007). The enterprise and scrum. Redmond, WA: Microsoft Press.
Leffingwell, D. (2007). Scaling software agility: Best practices for large enterprises. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
Larman, C., & Vodde, B. (2008). Scaling lean and agile development: Thinking and organizational tools for large-scale scrum. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Ambler, S. W., & Lines, M. (2012). Disciplined agile delivery: A practitioner's guide to agile software delivery in the enterprise. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
Thompson, K. (2013). cPrime’s R.A.G.E. is unleashed: Agile leaders rejoice! Retrieved March 28, 2014, from http://www.cprime.com/tag/agile-governance
Schwaber, K. (2015). The definitive guide to nexus: The exoskeleton of scaled scrum development. Lexington, MA: Scrum.Org
Models of AGILE PORTFOLIO MGT.
ESCRUM
- 2007 -
SAFe
- 2007 -
LESS
- 2007 -
DAD
- 2012 -
RAGE
- 2013 -
SPS
- 2015 -
Product Mgt
Program Mgt
Project Mgt
Process Mgt
Business Mgt
Market Mgt
Strategic Mgt
Portfolio Mgt
Program Mgt
Team Mgt
Quality Mgt
Delivery Mgt
Business Mgt
Portfolio Mgt
Product Mgt
Area Mgt
Sprint Mgt
Release Mgt
Business Mgt
Portfolio Mgt
Inception
Construction
Iterations
Transition
Business
Governance
Portfolio
Program
Project
Delivery
Product Mgt
Program Mgt
Sprint Mgt
Team Mgt.
Integ Mgt.
Release Mgt
20. Scaled Agile Framework (SAFE)
Created by Dean Leffingwell of Rally in 2007
Knowledge to scale agile practices to enterprise
Hybrid of Kanban, XP release planning, and Scrum
20
Leffingwell, D. (2007). Scaling software agility: Best practices for large enterprises. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
21. 21
Agile Performance MeasurementWork(Story,Point,Task)orEffort(Week,Day,Hour)
Time Unit (Roadmap, Release, Iteration, Month, Week, Day, Hour, etc.)
Burndown
Work(Story,Point,Task)orEffort(Week,Day,Hour)
Time Unit (Roadmap, Release, Iteration, Month, Week, Day, Hour, etc.)
Cumulative Flow
Work(Story,Point,Task)orEffort(Week,Day,Hour)
Time Unit (Roadmap, Release, Iteration, Month, Week, Day, Hour, etc.)
Earned Value Management - EVM CPI
SPI
PPC
APC
Work(Story,Point,Task)orEffort(Week,Day,Hour)
Time Unit (Roadmap, Release, Iteration, Month, Week, Day, Hour, etc.)
Earned Business Value - EBV
22. What is Agile Testing?
Traditional testing is a late, manual process
Agile testing is an early and automated process
Goal to deliver early & often and V&V components
22
Rico, D. F. (2012). Agile testing resources. Retrieved Sep. 9, 2012, from http://davidfrico.com/agile-testing-resources.txt
Crispin, L., & Gregory, J. (2009). Agile testing: A practical guide for testers and agile teams. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Grant, T. (2005). Continuous integration using cruise control. Northern Virginia Java Users Group (Novajug), Reston, Virginia, USA.
AGILE TESTING
- Early Incremental Testing -
TRADITIONAL TESTING
- Late Big Bang Integration Testing -
Test Criteria Accompany Stories
Automated Tests Written First
Units Coded-Tested One at Time
Code is Frequently Checked In
Code Automatically Retrieved
Code Automatically Compiled
Tests Automatically Executed
Instant Feedback & Test Reports
Test Criteria Written After Fact
Manual Tests Written Much Later
Units Coded Late All at One Time
Code Checked In Late in Project
Code Manually Submitted to Test
Code Manually Compiled & Built
Tests Manually Executed Late
Late Project Feedback & Reports
Code Automatically DeployedLate Defects Freeze Projects
23. BASIC—Test Driven Development
Term coined by Kent Beck in 2003
Consists of writing all tests before design
Ensures all components are verified and validated
23Beck, K. (2003). Test-driven development: By example. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley.
24. ADVANCED—Continuous Integration
Term coined by Martin Fowler in 1998
Process of automated build/regression testing
Evaluates impact of changes against entire system
24Duvall, P., Matyas, S., & Glover, A. (2006). Continuous integration: Improving software quality and reducing risk. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley.
ALL DEVELOPERS RUN PRIVATE BUILDS
DEVELOPERS COMMIT CODE TO VERSION CONTROL
INTEGRATION BUILDS OCCUR SEVERAL TIMES PER DAY
100% OF SYSTEM TESTS MUST PASS FOR EVERY BUILD
A SHIPPABLE PRODUCT RESULTS FROM EVERY BUILD
FIXING BROKEN BUILDS IS OF THE HIGHEST PRIORITY
REPORTS AUTOMATICALLY GENERATED & REVIEWED
25. Agile testing consists of seven broad practices
Automated build, database, inspection, tests, etc.
Include reporting, documentation, deployment, etc.
25
Practice
Building
Database
Inspections
Testing
Feedback
Documentation
Deployment
Description
Frequently assembling products and services to ensure delivery readiness
Frequently generating/analyzing database schemas, queries, and forms
Frequently performing automated static analysis of product/service quality
Frequently performing automated dynamic product and service evaluation
Frequently generating automated status reports/messages for all stakeholders
Frequently performing automated technical/customer document generation
Frequently performing automated delivery of products/services to end users
Duvall, P., Matyas, S., & Glover, A. (2006). Continuous integration: Improving software quality and reducing risk. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Humble, J., & Farley, D. (2011). Continuous delivery. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
PRACTICES—Continuous Integration
26. Created by Jez Humble of ThoughtWorks in 2011
Includes CM, build, testing, integration, release, etc.
Goal is one-touch automation of deployment pipeline
26
Humble, J., & Farley, D. (2011). Continuous delivery. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
Duvall, P., Matyas, S., & Glover, A. (2006). Continuous integration. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Ohara, D. (2012). Continuous delivery and the world of devops. San Francisco, CA: GigaOM Pro.
CoQ
• 80% MS Tst
• 8/10 No Val
• $24B in 90s
• Rep by CD
• Not Add MLK
ENTERPRISE—Continuous Delivery
27. Created by Patrick Debois of Jedi BVBA in 2007
Collaboration of developers & infrastructure people
Goal to automate the deployment to end-user devices
27
Bass, L., Weber, I., & Zhu, L. (2015). Devops: A software architect's perspective. Old Tappan, NJ: Pearson Education.
Gruver, G., & Mouser, T. (2015). Leading the transformation: Applying agile and devops at scale. Portland, OR: IT Revolution Press.
Humble, J., Molesky, J., & O'Reilly, B. (2015). Lean enterprise: How high performance organizations innovate at scale. Sebastopol, CA: O'Reilly Media.
GLOBAL—Development Operations
28. Agile methods are based on traditional measures
Story points, velocity, and burndown basic metrics
Experts use Agile EVM, test, ROI & portfolio metrics
28Rico, D. F., Sayani, H. H., & Sone, S. (2009). The business value of agile software methods. Ft. Lauderdale, FL: J. Ross Publishing.
AGILE METRICS
1. Agile CODE Metrics
2. Agile PROJECT Metrics
3. Agile TRACKING Metrics
4. Agile TESTING Metrics
5. Agile VALUE Metrics
6. Agile HEALTH Metrics
7. Agile PORTFOLIO Metrics
1. Agile CODE Metrics
Code Size
Code Complexity
Object Oriented
Code Coverage
Code Defects
Relational Design
2. Agile PROJECT Metrics
Software Size
Software Productivity
Software Effort
Software Quality
Software Schedule
Software Success
3. Agile TRACKING Metrics
Story Points
Sprint Burndown
Release Burndown
Velocity
Feature Progress
Agile Earned Value
4. Agile TESTING Metrics
Test Coverage
Test Automation
Integration Builds
Running Tested Features
DevOps Automation
Deployment Frequency
7. Agile PORTFOLIO Metrics
Portfolio Kanban
Epic Progress
Portfolio Radar
Release Train Radar
Lean Portfolio Metrics
Enterprise Scorecard
6. Agile HEALTH Metrics
Teamwork Quality
Collaboration Quality
Agile Process Maturity
Agile Adoption Rate
Degree of Agility
Product Flexibility
5. Agile VALUE Metrics
Total Lifecycle Costs
Total Lifecycle Benefits
Benefit to Cost Ratio
Return on Investment
Net Present Value
Real Options Analysis
Agile Testing Metrics—Taxonomy
29. 29
METRIC DESCRIPTION
TEST COVERAGE Percent or degree to which software source code is tested
TEST AUTOMATION Ratio or degree to which software tests are automated
INTEGRATION BUILDS Frequency of automated software builds and integrations
RUNNING TESTED FEATURES Number of completed and tested features or user stories
DEVOPS AUTOMATION Ratio or degree to which deployments are automated
DEPLOYMENT FREQUENCY Frequency of automated software deployments or deliveries
Software test automation emerged during the 1970s
Reached their height in personal computer (PC) era
Most are FOSS and used by successful agile teams
Duvall, P., Matyas, S., & Glover, A. (2006). Continuous integration: Improving software quality and reducing risk. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Agile Testing Metrics—Definitions
31. 31
Traditional vs. Agile Cumulative Flow
Work(Story,Point,Task)orEffort(Week,Day,Hour)
Time Unit (Roadmap, Release, Iteration, Month, Week, Day, Hour, etc.)
Work(Story,Point,Task)orEffort(Week,Day,Hour)
Time Unit (Roadmap, Release, Iteration, Month, Week, Day, Hour, etc.)
Traditional Cumulative Flow Agile Cumulative Flow
Late big bang integration increases WIP backlog
Agile testing early and often reduces WIP backlog
Improves workflow and reduces WIP & lead times
Anderson, D. J. (2004). Agile management for software engineering. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
Anderson, D. J. (2010). Kanban: Successful evolutionary change for your technology business. Sequim, WA: Blue Hole Press.
Agile Testing—Workflow
32. Fewer integrations leave in higher bug counts
Frequent, early integrations eliminate most defects
Goal is to have as many early integrations as possible
32
Lacoste, F. J. (2009). Killing the gatekeeper: Introducing a continuous integration system. Proceedings of the Agile 2009 Conference, Chicago, Illinois, USA, 387-392.
Number of
Integrations
Less Defects
•More Integrations
•Early IntegrationsMore Defects
•Few Integrations
•Late Integrations
Agile Testing—Economic Drivers
33. Traditional testing finds a defect in about 10 hours
Manual code inspections find a defect in 1 hour
Agile testing finds a defect every 6 minutes
33
Rico, D. F. (2012). The Cost of Quality (CoQ) for Agile vs. Traditional Project Management. Fairfax, VA: Gantthead.Com.
Agile Testing—Economics
34. Agile testing is 10x better than code inspections
Agile testing is 100x better than traditional testing
Agile testing is done earlier “and” 1,000x more often
34
Rico, D. F. (2012). The Cost of Quality (CoQ) for Agile vs. Traditional Project Management. Fairfax, VA: Gantthead.Com.
Agile Testing—Cost of Quality
35. Agile Cost & Benefit Analysis
Costs based on avg. productivity and quality
Productivity ranged from 4.7 to 5.9 LOC an hour
Costs were $588,202 and benefits were $3,930,631
35
Rico, D. F., Sayani, H. H., & Sone, S. (2009). The business value of agile software methods: Maximizing ROI with just-in-time processes and documentation.
Ft. Lauderdale, FL: J. Ross Publishing.
d1 = [ln(Benefits Costs) + (Rate + 0.5 Risk2) Years] Risk Years, d2 = d1 Risk Years
5
1i
36. Benefits of Agile Methods
Analysis of 23 agile vs. 7,500 traditional projects
Agile projects are 54% better than traditional ones
Agile has lower costs (61%) and fewer defects (93%)
Mah, M. (2008). Measuring agile in the enterprise: Proceedings of the Agile 2008 Conference, Toronto, Canada.
Project Cost in Millions $
0.75
1.50
2.25
3.00
2.8
1.1
Before Agile
After Agile
61%
Lower
Cost
Total Staffing
18
11
Before Agile
After Agile
39%
Less
Staff
5
10
15
20
Delivery Time in Months
5
10
15
20
18
13.5
Before Agile
After Agile
24%
Faster
Cumulative Defects
625
1250
1875
2500
2270
381
Before Agile
After Agile
93%
Less
Defects
36
37. Agile vs. Traditional Success
Traditional projects succeed at 50% industry avg.
Traditional projects are challenged 20% more often
Agile projects succeed 3x more and fail 3x less often
Standish Group. (2012). Chaos manifesto. Boston, MA: Author.
37
Agile Traditional
Success
42%
Failed
9%
Challenged
49%
Success
14%
Failed
29%
Challenged
57%
38. Grant, T. (2005). Continuous integration using cruise control. Northern Virginia Java Users Group (Novajug), Reston, Virginia, USA.
Fredrick, J. (2008). Accelerate software delivery with continuous integration and testing. Japanese Symposium on Software Testing, Tokyo, Japan.
Most agile testing tools are “free” open source
Build server costs no more than a commodity PC
10x more efficient/effective than traditional testing
38
Agile Testing—CI Statistics
39. 39
Hewlett-Packard is a major user of CI, CD, & DevOps
400 engineers developed 10 million LOC in 4 years
Major gains in testing, deployment, & innovation
Gruver, G., Young, M. & Fulghum, P. (2013). A practical approach to large-scale agile development. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
TYPE METRIC MANUAL DEVOPS MAJOR GAINS
CYCLE TIME
IMPROVEMENTS
Build Time 40 Hours 3 Hours 13 x
No. Builds 1-2 per Day 10-15 per Day 8 x
Feedback 1 per Day 100 per Day 100 x
Regression Testing 240 Hours 24 Hours 10 x
DEVELOPMENT
COST EFFORT
DISTRIBUTION
Integration 10% 2% 5 x
Planning 20% 5% 4 x
Porting 25% 15% 2 x
Support 25% 5% 5 x
Testing 15% 5% 3 x
Innovation 5% 40% 8 x
Agile Testing—CD Statistics
40. Assembla went from 2 to 45 releases every month
15K Google developers run 120 million tests per day
30K+ Amazon developers deliver 8,600 releases a day
40Singleton, A. (2014). Unblock: A guide to the new continuous agile. Needham, MA: Assembla, Inc.
62x Faster
U.S. DoD
IT Project
3,645x Faster
U.S. DoD
IT Project
Agile Testing—DevOps Statistics
41. Google early adopter of agile methods and Scrum
Google also uses agile testing at enterprise scale
15,000 developers run 120 million tests per day
41
Micco, J. (2013). Continuous integration at google scale. Eclipse Con, Boston, MA.
Whittaker, J., Arbon, J., & Carollo, J. (2012). How google tests software. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
440 billion unique users run 37 trillion searches each year
Single monolithic code tree with mixed language code
Submissions at head – One branch – All from source
20+ code changes/minute – 50% code change/month
5,500+ submissions/day – 120 million tests per day
80,000 builds per day – 20 million builds per year
Auto code inspections – For low defect density
10X programming productivity improvement
$150 million in annual labor savings (ROI as a result)
Agile Testing—Google Statistics
42. Amazon adopted agile in 1999 and Scrum in 2004
Using enterprise-scale continuous delivery by 2010
30,000+ developers deploy over 8,600 releases a day
42
Atlas, A. (2009). Accidental adoption: The story of scrum at amazon.com. Proceedings of the Agile 2009 Conference, Chicago, Illinois, USA, 135-140.
Jenkins, J. (2011). Velocity culture at amazon.com. Proceedings of the Velocity 2011 Conference, Santa Clara, California, USA.
Elisha, S. (2013). Continuous deployment with amazon web services. Proceedings of the AWS Summit 2013, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Software deployment every 11.6 seconds (as of 2011)
24,828 to 86,320 releases per Iteration
161,379 to 561,080 releases per Quarter
645,517 to 2,244,320 releases per Year
Automatic, split-second roll-forward & backward
75-90% reduction in release-caused outages (0.001%)
Millions of times faster (than traditional methods)
4,357,241 to 15,149,160 per traditional release
Thousands of times faster (than manual agility)
161,379 to 561,080 per Scrum/SAFe release
Used agile methods long before U.S. government (1999)
Agile Testing—Amazon Statistics
43. Enables enterprises to be flexible but disciplined
Allows enterprises to distribute project work teams
Ensures distributed project teams are collaborating
43
Agile Tools
“Across the Life Cycle”
Project Management
Requirements
DOORS
Requisite Pro
SLATE
Design
Rhapsody
Telelogic System Architect
Rational System Architect
Coding
Eclipse
Visual Studio
Sun Studio
Testing
JUnit
NUnit
Xunit
CPPUnit
Gtest
Fit
Fitnesse
Selenium
Quality Assurance
CheckStyle
PMD
EMMA
Jdepend
Cobertura
Gcov
Configuration Mgt
Subversion (SVN)
Concurrent Versions Sys.
ClearCase
Build Automation
Ant
NAnt
Maven
Make
Continuous Integ.
Cruise Control
Hudson
BuildBot
Collaboration
WebEx
Skype
MeetMe
Wimba
Wiki
MediaWiki
TracWiki
PhpWiki
Documentation
NDoc
Javadoc
Doxygen
iText
Version One
Rally
Scrum Works
VSTS
Agile Team
Agile Enterprise
Scope Manager
Story Studio
XP Plan It
Iterate
XP Tracker
Agilo
XP CGI
XP Web
Xplanner
Ice Scrum
Project Cards
Target Process
Xtreme Planner
Team System
Community
Enterprise
Mingle
Hansoft
44. There are literally hundreds of agile testing tools
There are tools for building, testing, and deployment
Integration tools monitor repositories and initiate tests
44
Agile Tools
“In-Depth Test Automation”
Smart, J. (2009). Automated deployment with maven and friends: Going the whole nine yards. Proceedings of the Agile 2009 Conference, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
45. Simple example of a DevOps reference architecture
Includes CM, continuous integration, & deployment
Code automatically built/tested/deployed to users
45
Agile Tools
“Simple DevOps Automation”
Morris, B., & Cassatt, C. (2015). Devops for the rest of us. Proceedings of the Agile DC Conference, Washington, DC, USA.
Weeks, D. E. (2014). Devops and continuous delivery reference architectures (volume 1 & 2). Fulton, MD: Sonatype.
46. 46
Agile Tools
“Periodic Table of DevOps Automation”
XeniaLabs. (2016). Periodic table of devops tools. Retrieved April 11, 2016, from https://xebialabs.com/periodic-table-of-devops-tools.
47. 47
Holler, R. (2015). Ninth annual state of agile survey: State of agile development. Atlanta, GA: VersionOne.
VersionOne found 94% using agile methods today
Most are using Scrum with several key XP practices
Lean-Kanban is a rising practice with a 31% adoption
Continuous
Integration
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
Agile Testing—Adoption Statistics
48. Agile test use is low in spite of its age, i.e., 15 years
Many do not understand its utter simplicity and power
Failure to use agile testing undermines project success
48
Kim, D. (2013). The state of scrum: Benchmarks and guidelines. Indianapolis, IN: Scrum Alliance.
Agile Practices
Retrospectives
Refactoring
Done Definition
Test Tools
Test Driven Dev.
CM Tools
Simplicity
Pair Programming
Technical Debt
Agile Testing 13%
Continuous Integrations
Weekly
Daily
2-3 Times
Per Day
Never
2-3
Times
Per
Iteration
Agile Testing—Usage Statistics
49. Agile teams don’t often use TDD, CI, CD & DevOps
Implement independent test teams after Sprints done
Sprint Waterfalling, Scrummerfalling, & Wagile result
49
Heusser, M. (2015). 12 years of agile testing: What do we know now. Proceedings of the Agile Gathering, Grand Rapids, Michigan, USA.
Incorrect
• Phased Testing
• Separate Teams
• Delayed Testing
Correct
• Integrated Testing
• Integrated Teams
• Continuous Testing
Agile Testing—Anti-Patterns
50. Agile testing slows down with very large systems
Slow testing slows integration and increases bugs
Agile testing can speed back up with more attention
50
Kokko, H. (2009). Increase productivity with large scale continuous integration. Proceedings of the Agile 2009 Conference, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
MICRO ADJUSTMENTS
- Focused Impact Tuning-
MACRO ADJUSTMENTS
- Wide Impact Tuning-
Add More CPUs & Memory
Parallelize System Builds
Replace 3rd Party Test Libraries
Reduce or Remove Test Timeouts
Select Different Tests
Refactor Code & Components
Tune Network & Software
Tune Database & Middleware
In-Memory Compilation
Parallelize Test Runs
Pre-Install Test Libraries
Remove Process Randomness
Use Faster Code & Test Tools
Incremental vs. Big Bang Tests
Parallelize Build & Install
Tune & Optimize Build Process
Agile Testing—Scaling Practices
51. Industry very slow in adopting agile testing model
Cost, difficulty, and territorialism are common issues
Developers must take initiative for disciplined testing
51
Technical BarriersOrganizational Barriers
Developers don’t want to test
· Infrequently committing code
· Committing broken code
· Failing to immediately fix builds
· Not writing automated tests
· Not ensuring 100% of tests pass
· Not running private builds
· Resorting to traditional testing
Resistance to change
· Fear of investment costs
· Fear of learning new skills
· Test group territorialism
· Organizational policy conflicts
· Overhead of maintaining CI
· Complexity and scaling
· Not developing a quality culture
··
Duvall, P., Matyas, S., & Glover, A. (2006). Continuous integration: Improving software quality and reducing risk. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Agile Testing—Common Barriers
52. Eliminates big-bang integration in the 11th hour
Creates a repeatable and reliable testing process
Evaluates system-wide changes throughout project
52Maeda, M. K. (2009). Agile testing: Early, often, and smart. Arlington, MA: Cutter Consortium.
What’s the Bottom Line?
“Agile Testing Done Early & Often”
Agile TestingTraditional Testing
Dramatically reduces risks
· Automates manual processes
· Instant verification & validation
· High project visibility
· Greater confidence and morale
· Incremental business value
· 24x7 deployability to users
· Highly quality and reliability
Late defect discovery
· Low quality software
· Poor project visibility
· Lack of deployability
· Late big-bang integration
· Testing is a bottleneck
· Poor customer satisfaction
· Outright project failure
··
53. Conclusion
Agile methods DON’T mean deliver it now & fix it later
Lightweight, yet disciplined approach to development
Reduced cost, risk, & waste while improving quality
53
Rico, D. F. (2012). What’s really happening in agile methods: Its principles revisited? Retrieved June 6, 2012, from http://davidfrico.com/agile-principles.pdf
Rico, D. F. (2012). The promises and pitfalls of agile methods. Retrieved February 6, 2013 from, http://davidfrico.com/agile-pros-cons.pdf
Rico, D. F. (2012). How do lean & agile intersect? Retrieved February 6, 2013, from http://davidfrico.com/agile-concept-model-3.pdf
What How Result
Flexibility Use lightweight, yet disciplined processes and artifacts Low work-in-process
Customer Involve customers early and often throughout development Early feedback
Prioritize Identify highest-priority, value-adding business needs Focus resources
Descope Descope complex programs by an order of magnitude Simplify problem
Decompose Divide the remaining scope into smaller batches Manageable pieces
Iterate Implement pieces one at a time over long periods of time Diffuse risk
Leanness Architect and design the system one iteration at a time JIT waste-free design
Swarm Implement each component in small cross-functional teams Knowledge transfer
Collaborate Use frequent informal communications as often as possible Efficient data transfer
Test Early Incrementally test each component as it is developed Early verification
Test Often Perform system-level regression testing every few minutes Early validation
Adapt Frequently identify optimal process and product solutions Improve performance
54. Dave’s PROFESSIONAL CAPABILITIES
54
Software
Quality
Mgt.
Technical
Project
Mgt.
Software
Development
Methods
Organization
Change
Systems
Engineering
Cost
Estimating
Government
Contracting
Government
Acquisitions
Lean
Kanban
Big Data,
Cloud, NoSQL
Workflow
Automation
Metrics,
Models, & SPC
Six
Sigma
BPR, IDEF0,
& DoDAF
DoD 5000,
TRA, & SRA
PSP, TSP, &
Code Reviews
CMMI &
ISO 9001
Innovation
Management
Statistics, CFA,
EFA, & SEM
Research
Methods
Evolutionary
Design
Valuation — Cost-Benefit Analysis, B/CR, ROI, NPV, BEP, Real Options, etc.
Lean-Agile — Scrum, SAFe, Continuous Integration & Delivery, DevOps, etc.
STRENGTHS – Data Mining Gathering & Reporting Performance Data Strategic Planning Executive & Manage-
ment Briefs Brownbags & Webinars White Papers Tiger-Teams Short-Fuse Tasking Audits & Reviews Etc.
● Data mining. Metrics, benchmarks, & performance.
● Simplification. Refactoring, refinement, & streamlining.
● Assessments. Audits, reviews, appraisals, & risk analysis.
● Coaching. Diagnosing, debugging, & restarting stalled projects.
● Business cases. Cost, benefit, & return-on-investment (ROI) analysis.
● Communications. Executive summaries, white papers, & lightning talks.
● Strategy & tactics. Program, project, task, & activity scoping, charters, & plans.
PMP, CSEP,
FCP, FCT
ACP, CSM,
& SAFE
32 YEARS
IN IT
INDUSTRY
55. Books on Agile Testing
Thousands of textbooks on agile methods
Include requirements, design, coding, test, etc.
Continuous Integration, Delivery, & DevOps best
55
Beck, K. (2003). Test-driven development: By example. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Crispin, L., & Gregory, J. (2009). Agile testing: A practical guide for testers and agile teams. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Gregory, J., & Crispin, L. (2015). More agile testing: Learning journeys for the whole team. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
Duvall, P., Matyas, S., & Glover, A. (2006). Continuous integration: Improving software quality and reducing risk. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Humble, J., & Farley, D. (2011). Continuous delivery: Reliable software releases through build, test, and deployment automation. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
56. Books on ROI of SW Methods
Guides to software methods for business leaders
Communicates the business value of IT approaches
Rosetta stones to unlocking ROI of software methods
http://davidfrico.com/agile-book.htm (Description)
http://davidfrico.com/roi-book.htm (Description)
56