This is a presentation on "Lean & Agile Enterprise Frameworks: For Managing Large U.S. Government Cloud Computing Projects," which are emerging models for managing high-risk, time-sensitive R&D-oriented new product development (NPD) projects with demanding customers and fast-changing market conditions (at the enterprise, portfolio, and program levels). It establishes the context, provide a definition, and describe the value-system for lean and agile program and project management. It provides a brief survey and comparative analysis of the pros and cons of emerging lean and agile frameworks such as Enterprise Scrum, LeSS, DaD, SAFe, and RAGE. Then it describes the Scaled Agile Academy's Scaled Agile Framework (SAFe) in greater detail (which is the de facto international standard for scaling the use of agile methods to the enterprise, portfolio, and program levels for both systems and software development). SAFe is hybrid model best known for "blending" megatrends such as lean and agile principles into a single unified framework, establishing an authoritative foundation for scaling agile methods to large-scale private and public sector programs, and unifying East (lean) and West (agile) into a common language for systems and software development that is both lean "and" agile. In addition to SAFe case studies, late-breaking developments on the use of "Continuous Delivery," "DevOps," and bleeding-edge "Unstructured Web Databases" at Google and Amazon to automate large sections of the enterprise value stream will be discussed (which has been successfully used by some of the world's largest firms to boost organizational productivity by one or two orders of magnitude). This briefing has been warmly received by multiple U.S. government agencies, contractors, and PMI audiences throughout Baltimore-Washington, DC.
Call Now Pooja Mehta : 7738631006 Door Step Call Girls Rate 100% Satisfactio...
Lean & Agile Enterprise Frameworks: For Managing Large U.S. Government Cloud Computing Projects
1. Lean & Agile
Enterprise Frameworks
For Managing Large U.S. Gov’t
Cloud Computing Projects
Dr. David F. Rico, PMP, CSEP, ACP, CSM, SAFe
Twitter: @dr_david_f_rico
Website: http://www.davidfrico.com
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidfrico
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/david.f.rico.9
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, 100+ talks to 11,000 people
Adjunct at GWU, UMBC, UMUC, Argosy, & NDMU
Specializes in metrics, models, & cost engineering
Cloud Computing, SOA, Web Services, FOSS, etc.
3. Lean & Agile FRAMEWORK?
Frame-work (frām'wûrk') A support structure, skeletal
enclosure, or scaffolding platform; Hypothetical model
A multi-tiered framework for using lean & agile methods
at the organization, program, and project levels
An approach embracing values and principles of lean
thinking, product development flow, & agile methods
Adaptable framework for collaboration, prioritizing
work, iterative development, & responding to change
Tools for agile scaling, rigorous and disciplined planning
& architecture, and a sharp focus on product quality
Maximizes BUSINESS VALUE of organizations, programs,
& projects with lean-agile values, principles, & practices
Leffingwell, D. (2011). Agile software requirements: Lean requirements practices for teams, programs, and the enterprise. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
3
4. How do Lean & Agile INTERSECT?
4
Agile is naturally lean and based on small batches
Agile directly supports six principles of lean thinking
Agile may be converted to a continuous flow system
Womack, J. P., & Jones, D. T. (1996). Lean thinking: Banish waste and create wealth in your corporation. New York, NY: Free Press.
Reinertsen, D. G. (2009). The principles of product development flow: Second generation lean product development. New York, NY: Celeritas.
Reagan, R. B., & Rico, D. F. (2010). Lean and agile acquisition and systems engineering: A paradigm whose time has come. DoD AT&L Magazine, 39(6).
Economic View
Decentralization
Fast Feedback
Control Cadence
& Small Batches
Manage Queues/
Exploit Variability
WIP Constraints
& Kanban
Flow PrinciplesAgile Values
Customer
Collaboration
Empowered
Teams
Iterative
Delivery
Responding
to Change
Lean Pillars
Respect
for People
Continuous
Improvement
Customer Value
Relationships
Customer Pull
Continuous Flow
Perfection
Value Stream
Lean Principles
Customer relationships, satisfaction, trust, and loyalty
Team authority, empowerment, and resources
Team identification, cohesion, and communication
Lean & Agile Practices
Product vision, mission, needs, and capabilities
Product scope, constraints, and business value
Product objectives, specifications, and performance
As is policies, processes, procedures, and instructions
To be business processes, flowcharts, and swim lanes
Initial workflow analysis, metrication, and optimization
Batch size, work in process, and artifact size constraints
Cadence, queue size, buffers, slack, and bottlenecks
Workflow, test, integration, and deployment automation
Roadmaps, releases, iterations, and product priorities
Epics, themes, feature sets, features, and user stories
Product demonstrations, feedback, and new backlogs
Refactor, test driven design, and continuous integration
Standups, retrospectives, and process improvements
Organization, project, and process adaptability/flexibility
5. 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 needed features
Sprint-to-sprint, iterative, adaptive emergent model
5
6. Basic SCRUM-XP Hybrid
Augustine, S. (2008). Certified scrum master training: Not just how, buy why. Herndon, VA: LitheSpeed.
Created by Sanjiv Augustine of Lithespeed in 2008
Release planning used to create product backlog
Extends Scrum beyond Sprint-to-sprint planning
Initial Planning Sprint Cycle
Discovery Session
Agile Training
Project Discovery
Process Discovery
Team Discovery
Initial Backlog
Release Planning
Business Case
Desired Backlog
Hi-Level Estimates
Prioritize Backlog
Finalize Backlog
Product Backlog
Prioritized Requirements
Sprint Planning
Set Sprint Capacity
Identify Tasks
Estimate Tasks
Sprint Review
Present Backlog Items
Record Feedback
Adjust Backlog
Daily Scrum
Completed Backlog Items
Planned Backlog Items
Impediments to Progress
Sprint Backlog
List of Technical Tasks Assigned to a Sprint
Potentially Shippable Product
Working Operational Software
Sprint
Select Tasks and Create Tests
Create Simple Designs
Code and Test Software Units
Perform Integration Testing
Maintain Daily Burndown Chart
Update Sprint Backlog
Sprint Retrospective
6
7. 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
Simple codification of common XP-Scrum hybrid
7
Simplified AGILE PROJECT MGT F/W
8. Agile ENTERPRISE FRAMEWORKS
8
Dozens of Agile project management models emerged
Many stem from principles of Extreme Programming
All include product, project, & team 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
eScrum
- 2007 -
SAFe
- 2007 -
LeSS
- 2007 -
DaD
- 2012 -
RAGE
- 2013 -
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
9. Enterprise Scrum (ESCRUM)
Schwaber, K. (2007). The enterprise and scrum. Redmond, WA: Microsoft Press.
Created by Ken Schwaber of Scrum Alliance in 2007
Application of Scrum at any place in the enterprise
Basic Scrum with extensive backlog grooming
9
10. 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
10Leffingwell, D. (2007). Scaling software agility: Best practices for large enterprises. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
11. Large Scale Scrum (LESS)
Created by Craig Larman of Valtech in 2008
Scrum for larger projects of 500 to 1,500 people
Model to nest product owners, backlogs, and teams
11Larman, C., & Vodde, B. (2008). Scaling lean and agile development: Thinking and organizational tools for large-scale scrum. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Product OwnerProduct Backlog Area
Product Owner
Area
Product Backlog
Sprint
Backlog
Daily Scrum
15 minutes
Product Backlog Refinement
5 - 10% of Sprint
2 - 4 Week Sprint
1 Day
Feature Team +
Scrum Master
Sprint Planning II
2 - 4 hours
Sprint
Planning I
2 - 4 hours
Potentially Shippable
Product Increment
Sprint
Review
Joint
Sprint
Review
Sprint Retrospective
12. Disciplined Agile Delivery (DAD)
Created by Scott Ambler of IBM in 2012
People, learning-centric hybrid agile IT delivery
Scrum mapping to a model-driven RUP framework
12Ambler, S. W., & Lines, M. (2012). Disciplined agile delivery: A practitioner's guide to agile software delivery in the enterprise. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
13. Recipes for Agile Governance (RAGE)
Created by Kevin Thompson of cPrime in 2013
Agile governance model for large Scrum projects
Traditional-agile hybrid of portfolio-project planning
13Thompson, 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
14. Agile Enterprise F/W COMPARISON
Numerous lean-agile enterprise frameworks emerging
eScrum & LeSS were 1st (but SAFe & DaD dominate)
SAFe is the most widely-used (with ample resources)
14Rico, D. F. (2014). Scaled agile framework (SAFe) comparison. Retrieved June 4, 2014 from http://davidfrico.com/safe-comparison.xls
Factor eScrum SAFe LeSS DaD RAGE
Simple
Well-Defined
Web Portal
Books
Measurable
Results
Training & Cert
Consultants
Tools
Popularity
International
Fortune 500
Government
Lean-Kanban
15. SAFe REVISITED
Proven, public well-defined F/W for scaling Lean-Agile
Synchronizes alignment, collaboration, and deliveries
Quality, execution, alignment, & transparency focus
15Leffingwell, D. (2014). Scaled agile framework (SAFe). Retrieved June 2, 2014 from http://www.scaledagileframework.com
Portfolio
Team
Program
16. SAFe—Scaling at PORTFOLIO Level
Vision, central strategy, and decentralized control
Investment themes, Kanban, and objective metrics
Value delivery via epics, streams, and release trains
16Leffingwell, D. (2007). Scaling software agility: Best practices for large enterprises. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
AGILE PORTFOLIO MANAGEMENT
● Decentralized decision making
● Demand-based continuous flow
● Lightweight epic business cases
● Decentralized rolling wave planning
● Objective measures & milestones
● Agile estimating and planning
Strategy
Investment
Funding
Governance
Program
Management
17. SAFe—Scaling at PROGRAM Level
Product and release management team-of-team
Common mission, backlog, estimates, and sprints
Value delivery via program-level epics and features
17Leffingwell, D. (2007). Scaling software agility: Best practices for large enterprises. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
AGILE RELEASE TRAINS
● Driven by vision and roadmap
● Lean, economic prioritization
● Frequent, quality deliveries
● Fast customer feedback
● Fixed, reliable cadence
● Regular inspect & adapt CI
Alignment Collaboration
Synchronization
Value
Delivery
18. SAFe—Scaling at TEAM Level
Empowered, self-organizing cross-functional teams
Hybrid of Scrum PM & XP technical best practices
Value delivery via empowerment, quality, and CI
18Leffingwell, D. (2007). Scaling software agility: Best practices for large enterprises. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
AGILE CODE QUALITY
● Pair development
● Emergent design
● Test-first
● Refactoring
● Continuous integration
● Collective ownership
Product
Quality
Customer
Satisfaction
Predictability Speed
19. SAFe BENEFITS
19Leffingwell, D. (2014). Scaled agile framework (SAFe) case studies. Denver, CO: Leffingwell, LLC.
Rico, D. F. (2014). Scaled agile framework (SAFe) benefits. Retrieved June 2, 2014, from http://davidfrico.com/safe-benefits.txt
Cycle time and quality are most notable improvement
Productivity on par with Scrum at 10X above normal
Data shows SAFe scales to teams of 1,000+ people
Benefit Nokia SEI Telstra BMC
Trade
Station
Discount
Tire
Valpak Mitchell
John
Deere
Spotify Comcast Average
App Maps Trading DW IT Trading Retail Market Insurance Agricult. Cable PoS
Weeks 95.3 2 52 52 52 52 51
People 520 400 75 300 100 90 300 800 150 120 286
Teams 66 30 9 10 10 9 60 80 15 12 30
Satis 25% 29% 15% 23%
Costs 50% 10% 30%
Product 2000% 25% 10% 678%
Quality 95% 44% 50% 50% 60%
Cycle 600% 600% 300% 50% 300% 370%
ROI 2500% 200% 1350%
Morale 43% 63% 10% 39%
20. SAFe CASE STUDIES
Most U.S. Fortune 500 companies adopting SAFe
Goal to integrate enterprise, portfolios, and systems
Capital One going through end-to-end SAFe adoption
20
John Deere Spotify Comcast
• Agricultural automation
• 800 developers on 80 teams
• Rolled out SAFe in one year
• Transitioned to open spaces
• Field issue resolution up 42%
• Quality improvement up 50%
• Warranty expense down 50%
• Time to production down 20%
• Time to market down 20%
• Job engagement up 10%
• Television cable/DVR boxes
• Embedded & server-side
• 150 developers on 15 teams
• Cycle time - 12 to 4 months
• Support 11 million+ DVRs
• Design features vs. layers
• Releases delivered on-time
• 100% capabilities delivered
• 95% requirements delivered
• Fully automated sprint tests
• GUI-based point of sale sys
• Switched from CMMI to SAFe
• 120 developers on 12 teams
• QA to new feature focus
• Used Rally adoption model
• 10% productivity improvement
• 10% cost of quality reduction
• 200% improved defect density
• Production defects down 50%
• Value vs. compliance focus
Leffingwell, D. (2014). Scaled agile framework (SAFe) case studies. Denver, CO: Leffingwell, LLC.
Rico, D. F. (2014). Scaled agile framework (SAFe) benefits. Retrieved June 2, 2014, from http://davidfrico.com/safe-benefits.txt
21. SAFe SUMMARY
Lean-agile frameworks & tools emerging in droves
Focus on scaling agility to enterprises & portfolios
SAFe emerging as the clear international leader
21
Rico, D. F. (2014). Dave's Notes: For Scaling with SAFe, DaD, LeSS, RAGE, ScrumPLoP, Enterprise Scrum, etc. Retrieved March 28, 2014 from http://davidfrico.com
SAFe is extremely well-defined in books and Internet
SAFe has ample training, certification, consulting, etc.
SAFe leads to increased productivity and quality
SAFe is scalable to teams of up to 1,000+ developers
SAFe is preferred agile approach of Global 500 firms
SAFe is agile choice for public sector IT acquisitions
SAFe cases and performance data rapidly emerging
22. Dave’s PROFESSIONAL CAPABILITIES
22
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.
● Action-oriented. Do first (talk about it later).
● Data-mining/analysis. Collect facts (then report findings).
● Simplification. Communicating complex ideas (in simple terms).
● Git-r-done. Prefer short, high-priority tasks (vs. long bureaucratic projects).
● Team player. Consensus-oriented collaboration (vs. top-down autocratic control).
PMP, CSEP,
ACP, CSM,
& SAFE
32 YEARS
IN IT
INDUSTRY
23. 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)
23
25. Agile for EMBEDDED SYSTEMS
1st-generation systems used hardwired logic
2nd-generation systems used PROMS & FPGAs
3rd-generation systems use APP. SW & COTS HW
25
Pries, K. H., & Quigley, J. M. (2010). Scrum project management. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
Pries, K. H., & Quigley, J. M. (2009). Project management of complex and embedded systems. Boca Raton, FL: Auerbach Publications.
Thomke, S. (2003). Experimentation matters: Unlocking the potential of new technologies for innovation. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
● Short Lead
● Least Cost
● Lowest Risk
● 90% Software
● COTS Hardware
● Early, Iterative Dev.
● Continuous V&V
● Moderate Lead
● Moderate Cost
● Moderate Risk
● 50% Hardware
● COTS Components
● Midpoint Testing
● “Some” Early V&V
● Long Lead
● Highest Cost
● Highest Risk
● 90% Hardware
● Custom Hardware
● Linear, Staged Dev.
● Late Big-Bang I&T
AGILE
“Software Model”
- MOST FLEXIBLE -
NEO-TRADITIONAL
“FPGA Model”
- MALLEABLE -
TRADITIONAL
“Hardwired Model”
- LEAST FLEXIBLE -
GOAL – SHIFT FROM LATE HARDWARE TO EARLIER SOFTWARE SOLUTION
RISK
Embedded
Systems
More HW
Than SW
STOP
Competing
With HW
START
Competing
With SW
Iterations,Integrations,&Validations
26. SAFe rapidly evolving & adapting to market needs
A “draft” version was made for “systems engineering”
SoS, Lean, Kanban, and continuous flow system focus
26Leffingwell, D. (2014). Scaled agile framework (SAFe). Retrieved April 8, 2015 from http://www.scaledagileframework.com
Agile for SYSTEMS ENGINEERING
SoS
System
Sub-Sys
27. 27
Kovacs, K. (2015). Comparison of nosql databases. Retrieved on January 9, 2015, from http://kkovacs.eu
Sahai, S. (2013). Nosql database comparison chart. Retrieved on January 9, 2015, from http://www.infoivy.com
DB-Engines (2014). System properties comparison of nosql databases. Retrieved on January 9, 2015, from http://db-engines.com
Rank Database Year Creator Firm Goal Model Lang I/F Focus Example User Rate KPro
2007
Steve
Francia
10gen
Gener-
ality
Document C++ BSON
Large-scale
Web Apps
CRM Expedia 45% 48
2008
Avinash
Lakshman
Facebook
Relia-
bility
Wide
Column
Java CQL
Fault-tolerant
Data Stores
Mission
Critical Data
iTunes 20% 15
2009
Salvatore
Sanfilippo
Pivotal Speed Key Value C Binary
Real-time
Messaging
Instant
Messaging
Twitter 20% 14
2007
Mike
Carafella
Powerset Scale
Wide
Column
Java REST
Petabyte-size
Data Stores
Image
Repository
Ebay 10% 8
2004
Shay
Banon
Compass Search Document Java REST
Full-text
Search
Information
Portals
Wiki-
media
5% 7
Real-time, Distributed, Multi-tenant, Document-based, Schema-free, Persistence, Availability, etc.
8
Redis10
HBase14
Rapid-prototyping, Queries, Indexes, Replication, Availability, Load-balancing, Auto-Sharding, etc.
Distributed, Scalable, Performance, Durable, Caching, Operations, Transactions, Consistency
Real-time, Memory-cached, Performance, Persistence, Replication, Data structures, Age-off, etc.
Scalable, Performance, Data-replication, Flexible, Consistency, Auto-sharding, Metrics, etc.
16
Elastic
Search
MongoDB5
Cassandra
3 - $10M
•Gen App
•Reliable
•Low Cplx
2 - $100M
•Schema
•Dist P2P
•Med Cplx
1 - $1B
•Limited
•Sin PoF
•High Cplx
Agile Scaling w/CLOUD COMPUTING
1st-generation systems used HPCs & Hadoop
2nd-generation systems used COTS HW & P2P
3rd-generation systems use APP. SW & COTS HW
28. AWS is most popular cloud computing platform
Scalable service with end-to-end security & privacy
AWS is compliant & certified to 30+ indiv. S&P stds.
28
Barr, J. (2014). AWS achieves DoD provisional authorization. Retrieved January 12, 2015, from http://aws.amazon.com
Dignan, L. (2014). Amazon web services lands DoD security authorization. Retrieved January 12, 2015, from http://www.zdnet.com
Amazon.com (2015). AWS govcloud earns DoD CSM Levsl 3-5 provisional authorization. Retrieved January 12, 2015, from http://aws.amazon.com
Analytics Database
SSAE
Cross
Service
Compute &
Networking
SOC
Application
Services
Deployment &
Management
Storage &
Content Del.
DoD CSM DIACAP FedRAMP FIPSCOBIT CSAAICPA
FISMAGLBAHITECH
SAS
ITAR ISO/IEC ISAE HIPAANIST MPAAPCI
NoSQL Sols
• MongoDB
• Cassandra
• HBase
Agile Scaling w/AMAZON WEB SVCS
29. Created by Jez Humble of ThoughtWorks in 2011
Includes CM, build, testing, integration, release, etc.
Goal is one-touch automation of deployment pipeline
29
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
Agile Scaling w/CONTINUOUS DELIVERY
30. Goal of continuous delivery is releases vs. build/tests
Market-driven releases creates rapid business value
Assembla went from 2 to 45 monthly releases w/CD
30Singleton, 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 Scaling at ASSEMBLA
31. 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
31
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 Scaling at GOOGLE
32. 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
32
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 Scaling at AMAZON
33. Agile LEADERSHIP Models
Rico, D. F. (2013). Agile coaching in high-conflict environments. Retrieved April 11, 2013 from http://davidfrico.com/agile-conflict-mgt.pdf
Rico, D. F. (2013). Agile project management for virtual distributed teams. Retrieved July 29, 2013 from http://www.davidfrico.com/rico13m.pdf
Rico, D. F. (2013). Agile vs. traditional contract manifesto. Retrieved March 28, 2013 from http://www.davidfrico.com/agile-vs-trad-contract-manifesto.pdf 33
Personal Project Enterprise
• Don't Be a Know-it-All
• Be Open & Willing to Learn
• Treat People Respectfully
• Be Gracious, Humble, & Kind
• Listen & Be Slow-to-Speak
• Be Patient & Longsuffering
• Be Objective & Dispassionate
• Don't Micromanage & Direct
• Exhibit Maturity & Composure
• Don't Escalate or Exacerbate
• Don't Gossip or be Negative
• Delegate, Empower, & Trust
• Gently Coach, Guide, & Lead
• Customer Communication
• Product Visioning
• Distribution Strategy
• Team Development
• Standards & Practices
• Telecom Infrastructure
• Development Tools
• High-Context Meetings
• Coordination & Governance
• F2F Communications
• Consensus Based Decisions
• Performance Management
• Personal Development
• Business Value vs. Scope
• Interactions vs. Contracts
• Relationship vs. Regulation
• Conversation vs. Negotiation
• Consensus vs. Dictatorship
• Collaboration vs. Control
• Openness vs. Adversarialism
• Exploration vs. Planning
• Incremental vs. All Inclusive
• Entrepreneurial vs. Managerial
• Creativity vs. Constraints
• Satisfaction vs. Compliance
• Quality vs. Quantity
Power & authority delegated to the lowest level
Tap into the creative nuclear power of team’s talent
Coaching, communication, and relationships key skills
34. Agile ORG. CHANGE Models
Heath, C., & Heath, D. (2010). Switch: How to change things when change is hard. New York, NY: Random House.
Patterson, K., et al. (2008). Influencer: The power to change anything: New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Pink, D. H. (2009). Drive: The surprising truth about what motivates us. New York, NY: Riverhead Books.
Heath, C., & Heath, D. (2013). Decisive: How to make better choices in life and work. New York, NY: Random House.
Change, no matter how small or large, is difficult
Smaller focused changes help to cross the chasm
Shrinking, simplifying, and motivation key factors
34
SWITCH
Follow the bright spots
Script the critical moves
Point to the destination
Find the feeling
Shrink the change
Grow your people
Tweak the environment
Build habits
Rally the herd
Direct the Rider
Motivate the Elephant
Shape the Path
INFLUENCER
Create new experiences
Create new motives
Perfect complex skills
Build emotional skills
Recruit public personalities
Recruit influential leaders
Utilize teamwork
Enlist the power of social capital
Use incentives wisely
Use punishment sparingly
Make it easy
Make it unavoidable
Make it Desirable
Surpass your Limits
Harness Peer Pressure
Find Strength in Numbers
Design Rewards
Change Environment
DRIVE
Purpose
Autonomy
Mastery
Purpose and profit equality
Business and societal benefit
Share control of profits
Delegate implementation
Culture and goal alignment
Remake society and globe
Be accountable to someone
Self-selected work tasks
Self-directed work tasks
Self-selected timelines
Self-selected teams
Self-selected implementation
Experimentation and innovation
Align tasks to abilities
Continuously improve abilities
Elevate learning over profits
Create challenging tasks
Establish high expectations
DECISIVE
Villains of Good Decisions
Narrow framing
Confirmation bias
Short term emotion
Over confidence
Widen Your Options
Avoid a narrow frame
Multi-track
Find someone who solved problem
Reality Test Assumptions
Consider the opposite
Zoom out & zoom in
Ooch
Attain Distance
Overcome short-term emotion
Gather more info & shift perspective
Self-directed work tasks
Prepare to be Wrong
Bookend the future
Set a tripwire
Trust the process
35. Agile ACQUISITION-CONTRACT Model
Rico, D. F. (2011). The necessity of new contract models for agile project management. Fairfax, VA: Gantthead.Com.
Rico, D. F. (2013). Agile vs. traditional contract manifesto. Retrieved March 28, 2013 from http://www.davidfrico.com
35
Dynamic Value Performance Based Target Cost Optional Scope Collaborative
Business & Mission Value OVER Scope, Processes, & Deliverables
Personal Interactions OVER Contract, Auditor, & Legal Interactions
Conversations and Consensus OVER Contract Negotiations & Control
Collaboration & Co-Dependency OVER Methodology & Adversarialism
Exploration, Evolution, & Emergence OVER Forecasting & Control
Early Continuous Quality Solutions OVER Late, Long-Term Deliveries
Entrepreneurialism & Openness OVER Compliance & Self-Interest
Customer Satisfaction and Quality OVER Policies & Governance
Communication, cooperation, and interaction key
Shared responsibility vs. blame and adversarialism
Needs greater focus on collaboration vs. legal terms
36. Key Agile SCALING POINTERS
One must think and act small to accomplish big things
Slow down to speed up, speed up ‘til wheels come off
Scaling up lowers productivity, quality, & business value
36
Rico, D. F. (2014). Dave's Notes: For Scaling with SAFe, DaD, LeSS, RAGE, ScrumPLoP, Enterprise Scrum, etc. Retrieved March 28, 2014 from http://davidfrico.com
EMPOWER WORKFORCE - Allow workers to help establish enterprise business goals and objectives.
ALIGN BUSINESS VALUE - Align and focus agile teams on delivering business value to the enterprise.
PERFORM VISIONING - Frequently communicate portfolio, project, and team vision on continuous basis.
REDUCE SIZE - Reduce sizes of agile portfolios, acquisitions, products, programs, projects, and teams.
ACT SMALL - Get large agile teams to act, behave, collaborate, communicate, and perform like small ones.
BE SMALL - Get small projects to act, behave, and collaborate like small ones instead of trying to act larger.
ACT COLLOCATED - Get virtual distributed teams to act, behave, communicate and perform like collocated ones.
USE SMALL ACQUISITION BATCHES - Organize suppliers to rapidly deliver new capabilities and quickly reprioritize.
USE LEAN-AGILE CONTRACTS - Use collaborative contracts to share responsibility instead of adversarial legal ones.
USE ENTERPRISE AUTOMATION - Automate everything with Continuous Integration, Continuous Delivery, & DevOps.