Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
PCTY 2012, Developing for Mobile Enterprise Application Platform v. Peter Eibak
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×

Saving this for later?

Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime - even offline.

Text the download link to your phone

Standard text messaging rates apply

PCTY 2012, Developing for Mobile Enterprise Application Platform v. Peter Eibak

1,025
views

Published on

Præsentation fra PCTY v. Peter Eibak

Præsentation fra PCTY v. Peter Eibak

Published in: Technology

0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
1,025
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
22
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide
  • Mobile is an enterprise priority. Mobile data traffic exceeded voice in 2010 - less than five years before that, mobile data traffic made up less than about 15 percent of all total mobile revenue. (http://www.wirelessindustrynews.org/news-aug-2010/2085-082510-win-news.html (August 26, 2010)) Clearly our customers, employees and partners demand mobile. Mobile also provides tremendous opportunity – one study showed 45% increase in employee productivity with mobile apps: (Aberdeen Survey: ipadcto.com/2011/01/05/survey-mobile-apps-increase-enterprise-performance-and-productivity-advantages-top-three-mobile-app-strategies-gain-momentum/) That’s why CIOs have it as a top priority. But mobile isn’t just as easy as download an app and go – it’s a transformation. Some of the top concerns center around security and management, around cost of the development and around integration with cloud..
  • So what’s different about the mobile lifecycle? Consumerization of IT Customers (being enlightened/spoiled by recent advances, particularly from Apple) are having higher expectations of UX from mobile apps Line of Business are responding to that and looking at mobile to drive differentiation and to drive brand As a result – there is more direct involvement from users/stakeholders in the requirements/design domains Fragmentation There is a wider variety of devices, platforms and form-factors in the mobile market, and there continue be high degree of evolution From development perspective, how are you going to share hardware design or common code across these variants? Also adds complexity to testing efforts Pace of innovation/Urgent time-to-market As discussed, mobile is moving at a rapid pace. Also, the perspective of using mobile as a differentiator also drives urgent time-to-market Lots of release – on PC lucky to get a version in 12-18 months, in mobile it is in weeks or days Drives need to have more integrated and efficient lifecycle to reduce inefficiency due to siloes, hand-offs, continuous delivery Market is hungry for guidance and best practices
  • Elastic caching Distributed caching technology to extend performance and scalability of existing applications Elastic caching offers capabilities that can ensure you have an application infrastructure that can support your critical applications. Elastic caching from IBM offers a business-ready, in-memory grid that places the data close to the logic and keeps it there as the business scales up. WebSphere® eXtreme Scale provides distributed object caching essential for elastic scalability and next-generation cloud environments. It helps applications process massive volumes of transactions with extreme efficiency and linear scalability.
  • Making the tie from ALM to CLM and CDM: At the core of Application Lifecycle Management is coordinating the management of project changes, quality and requirements. These capabilities form the foundation of a successful ALM solution. Rational’s core ALM offering is the solution for Collaborative Lifecycle Management and Collaborative Design Management. IBM Rational ALM services and solutions can help your organization reduce the high costs and risks of inefficient, multiplatform software development and are unique in the market as they allow you to unify your infrastructure with a single open, extensible, integrated Jazz platform. Having a single platform across the software delivery lifecycle allows you to extend the software infrastructure investments you have already made while allowing all stakeholders real-time collaboration and transparency in the context of the work at hand, automation and better process control from the initial requirements definition to software change and release management and beyond. End to end traceability that is seamless in all three products. If a tester finds a defect and can trace it to a use case, submit the defect and it will link to all the things associated to it. Thus the developer can see it is blocked and why and its all automatic. Don’t have to ask. Link artifacts and connect the dots so every artifact has the proper upstream and downstream relationship Send links to artifacts that lead to current artifact versions and sets the related artifact context including reviews and comments from other team members Link critical project artifacts so that the entire team have access to the latest version of the truth When organizations fail to deliver quality software on time and on budget, it is typically not because any individual is dysfunctional, but because the entire team or organization is misaligned. End-to-end visibility enables organizations to proactively steer projects to success based on real-time information.    The second imperative, End-to-end lifecycle traceability is a perquisite for meaningful insight into project status, issues and risks. For example, the question, “Are we ready to release?” requires knowledge that can only be gathered by correlating requirements, code, build, and test information—data that potentially resides in four different repositories. The ideal environment will allow teams to easily link related assets and maintain those linkages as assets evolve.   Traceability is the ability to gain an end-to-end view across your project lifecycle. When your software is delivered to the customer, you should be able to identify all the activities associated with the software. You should be able to answer all of the stakeholder questions on this slide. And you should be able to state with confidence that the software includes this specific requirement, included in this software build, validated by this test case and with this test result. Anything less, and you really don’t know what you are delivering and whether what you are delivering will meet your quality requirements. --------------- Traceability isn’t simply one of those “nice to have” capabilities in the software development  lifecycle. Traceability helps you understand what everyone else on the team is doing. For example, while the requirements analyst knows very well what requirements she has written, she still needs to know whether a given requirement will be addressed during a specific development iteration and, if so, which one. Or she wants to know if the implementation of that requirement has been tested and with what result. An ALM solution that allows for lifecycle artifact traceability helps teams to answer the hard questions about requirements and risk management. By linking related artifacts, teams are better equipped to answer questions such as “which requirements are affected by defects?” and “which work items are ready for test?”   It is important to understand how requirements, test and development are linked by projects and tasks. DON’T Do traceability for traceability sake. Identify a few meaningful questions or set one goal and institute a “just enough” approach for linking related artifacts. For example, link requirements and test cases, link test cases and development work items. Try one and get good at it before doing more. DON’T Rely on reports that go stale after you’ve created them. Practice continuous traceability: Leverage a system that shows the traceability links directly on the plan, or that uses queries that identify gaps, such as “Plan items without requirements” and “Plan items without test cases”, and “Defects blocking test.” DON’T Ignore, hide from or hope to pass regulatory audits Invest in an ALM solution that makes traceability easy to do, maintain and report against. DON’T: Work in disconnected project repositories, or cobble together a disparate set of tools. Seek products built with open interfaces. Seek vendors who understand and support the ALM integration challenges. Invest in tools with a longer-term integration roadmap in mind. DON’T: Enter links manually after the fact, it’s easy to forget, hard to enforce. Integrated tools make it easy to establish as the project executes. See image of linked Defect in upcoming slide DON’T: Build your own integration based on proprietary API’s. Choose a solution with open services (OSLC) for linking data across the lifecycle. DON’T: Choose a one-size-fits-no-one solution. Invest in a loosely coupled, integrated ALM solution that is built to scale and support open and flexible integrations. A single ALM repository will not scale to fit your needs over time. Times change, new products emerge; your ALM solution needs to be flexible enough to move with the times. Do you really want to face that data migration challenge? Many tools, document formats and repositories create “information islands”, making it hard to find, relate and use this information as requirements artifacts as well as use use it to inform downstream lifecycle activities Hard to relate it together, keep it coherent, and maintain those relationships. Team members undertake heroic measures to consolidate it understand, monitor status, and make decisions based on this information. These manual processes often don’t scale and introduce errors This leads to .. Wasted team effort due to duplication and lack of version control / change management … “Which version of that document should I be looking at?” Challenges in scaling current practices and making them repeatable Too many project surprises due to poor or missed requirements Information overload: challenges finding, using, and reusing information Slide Source: Carolyn Pampino
  • With Rational: Rational Collaborative Lifecycle Management implements ALM best practices that accelerate mobile application development. By providing traceability across the entire project lifecycle from inception to delivery, customers can break down siloes between the different practitioner domains (e.g. requirement analysts, developers and testers). This improves collaboration, reduces errors that occur during hand-offs, reduces rework and improves the velocity of progress. With real-time planning that is consistently accurate and up-to-date, customers gain visibility and intelligence into the actual state of project health. This facilitates decision making and allows remedial actions to be identified and implement as soon as possible. These and other lifecycle capabilities such as in-context collaboration and continuous improvement are integrated with mobile development tools both from existing IBM capabilities and Worklight. Indeed, Worklight provides a “Ready for Rational”-certified integration before the acquisition. Customers can store their code on centralized code repositories and perform distributed builds targeting different mobile platforms remotely. In addition, the integration to IBM’s existing test management system can help manage test suites and test cases to ensure the quality of the development applications.
  •   For organizations seeking a turnkey ALM solution for project teams – featuring the latest technology based on the Jazz platform – we offer the Rational solution for Collaborative Lifecycle Management. The Rational CLM solution provides the highest level of ALM interoperability in one easy-to-install and easy-to-use solution that can be optimized for Agile or traditional teams. The intention with CLM is to make it easy for customers to implement an ALM solution that meets the vast majority of their needs. Organizations requiring additional capabilities can extend the solution with other Rational tools.   Rational Team Concert (RTC)   RTC provides these major capabilities: project planning, change management (work items), software configuration management (SCM), and build management. Teams can deliver software solutions using RTC’s features, and they can also use Jazz-based connectors to access enterprise-scale capabilities and assets in Rational ClearCase, ClearQuest, Synergy, Change, and Build Forge.     In the area of project management, RTC 3.0 provides formal project planning, scheduling, time tracking, and resource management functions, such as Gantt Charts and risk management artifacts. This is in addition to the existing support for agile project planning, including plan risk assessment, support for developer taskboards, release planning, and Web-based access to project iteration plans and permissions.   Within a project, business users and customers can access the repository and project dashboards directly. Thus there may be little or no need for custom management reports—customers can see the project work items and dashboards, understand the status of the project, and directly add their own issues or change requests. However, this also means that customers can closely monitor a team’s progress and potentially scrutinize decisions made within the team. Rational product teams leverage this increased customer involvement to build stronger relationships and demonstrate their quality work through frequent releases. As customers become accustomed to releases that are weeks rather than months apart, they become more engaged and flexible. They learn that with short iterations, issues that are not resolved in a particular iteration may be delivered in the next one, only a few short weeks away.   In the dashboard, RTC now supports the OpenSocial standard as well as IBM iWidgets. This means that any tool that supports this standard can be incorporated into an RTC dashboard, and tools like Gmail™ and iGoogle™ can incorporate RTC dashboard gadgets into their homepages. Rational Quality Manager (RQM) RQM is Rational’s Web-based test management portal built to the Jazz architecture. RQM helps teams drive quality from a business perspective and better align development, testing, and delivery teams’ activities.   Focused on addressing the needs of business analysts and QA professionals, RQM employs a test plan-centric view of testing assets. It provides the ability to use different perspectives for accessing and viewing testing assets, based on the user’s role. For example, managers can review timelines and status reports for testing cycles, while business analysts can concentrate on test coverage for business requirements. In addition, test planning assets can be related to specific testing executables stored in Rational functional and load testing tools.   Extending the value of Rational Quality Manager, Rational offers Rational Test Lab Manager, a solution for test lab management. Users are able to inventory all of their test lab assets (e.g., CPUs, middleware, databases, applications), derive utilization rates for those assets, schedule a specific configuration to use for a testing session, and then physically deploy that configuration. Integration with Rational Quality Manager for testing across multiple platforms DeviceAnywhere is integrated with Rational Quality Manager (RQM), allowing developers to test their applications on real mobile devices from within the Rational environment. All results from tests on mobile devices (script steps, test pass or fail results) are tracked by RQM and available through the RQM interface. This is particularly useful if you develop across different environments – for instance if you have an app with a web and mobile interface. DeviceAnywhere allows users to interact with real mobile handsets, over the internet. There is no emulation or simulation involved; users can remotely press keys, touch screens, open/close flip phones, remove batteries, etc.; anything that can be done with a device in your hand can be done through DeviceAnywhere. All screens and sounds are see and heard on the user's computer screen, and captured for later review. In addition, automation tools are provided that allow users to create scripts and schedule them to run when convenient. The DeviceAnywhere and Rational Quality Manager integration allows companies using RQM as their test management system to test their products on real mobile devices. All results (script steps, test pass/fail results) are tracked by RQM and available through the RQM interface. In addition, launching tests can be done through RQM.   Rational Requirements Composer (RRC) In the area of requirements definition and management, Rational offers new visual tools and provides integration among requirements, SCM, testing, and other ALM tools.   RRC provides graphical modeling, storyboarding, and sketching tools for eliciting and defining requirements, and uses a wiki-like platform for enhanced collaboration among stakeholders and development teams. RRC also includes a Web client with support for review and approval of requirements.   Users can also relate this rich requirements content through RequisitePro to other lifecycle assets, including test cases created in RQM, and thus be able to determine test coverage and traceability for requirements. Over time, Rational intends to evolve its requirements management portfolio to provide a unified set of capabilities based on the Jazz architecture. The Rational Solution for Collaborative Lifecycle Management share common services for dashboarding, Work Items and administrative task like setup, user administration and process definition. For detailed descriptions of RTC’s capabilities, go to http://www-01.ibm.com/software/rational/products/rtc/ For detailed descriptions of RQM’s capabilities go to http://www-01.ibm.com/software/awdtools/rqm/ For detailed descriptions of RRC’s capabilities go to http://www-01.ibm.com/software/awdtools/rrc/
  • Finding new ways to innovate through software is not an easy task. The systems and applications we build today are more powerful and impactful than ever. But they are also more complex - thus harder to build, verify, and manage. This complexity, along with the need for faster delivery driven by today’s competitive markets, makes software-driven innovation very challenging. Approximately 60% of software projects fail to meet the intended schedule. (source is IBM study) There are serious consequences to failure in software and systems delivery. Sometimes catastrophic. Some failures result in significant human harm, others -- like security breaches that undermine businesses, violations of regulations, or product recalls – can have catastrophic brand and business implications. There are also consequences to missing expectations and market windows. So how do we achieve more predictable business outcomes for software and systems delivery projects? Sources: “ 62% of companies have agile projects requiring integration with legacy systems” - DDJ State of the IT Union Survey November 2009, Scott W. Amble, Ambysoft - www.ambysoft.com/scottAmbler.html “ 50% of outsourced projects are expected to under perform” - BusinessWeek Commentary: “Shifting Work Offshore? Outsourcer Beware”: http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/04_02/b3865028.htm “ 49% of budgets suffer overruns and 62% fail to meet their schedule” - Two reasons Why IT Projects Continue To Fail (March 20, 2008) - http://advice.cio.com/remi/two_reasons_why_it_projects_continue_to_fail - Referencing: "TCS have a white paper available on their WEB site called Evolving IT from ‘Running the Business’ to ‘Changing the Business’" “ 62% of software projects fail to meet intended schedules” - IBM CEO Study, 2008, The Enterprise of the Future 2010 Spending in U.S. on governance, risk and compliance was $29.8 billion - Source   http://searchcompliance.techtarget.com/news/article/0,289142,sid195_gci1375707,00.html “ 30% of project costs are due to rework and poor execution of requirements” - Managing Software Requirements By Dean Leffingwell, Don Widrig “And since rework typically consumes 30%-50% of a typical project ... it follows that requirements errors can easily consume 25%— 40% of the total project http://www.stickyminds.com/sitewide.asp?Function=FEATUREDCOLUMN&ObjectType=ARTCOL&ObjectId=12529&btntopic=artcol
  • So what is required to deliver end-to-end visibility across teams, tools and projects? That’s a question that we at IBM – who have been helping customers develop and deliver software for more than 50 years – decided to look at from a fresh perspective. And the question we asked ourselves is – what are the essential criteria that must be met to provide end-to-end visibility across multiple, teams, tools and projects – to overcome the silos we looked at earlier. We wanted to look at this issue from a vendor-agnostic point of view, so that we could advise customers who have amassed an intricate web of ALM tooling and team configurations, and need to find a way to preserve and extend those investments, whether they were with IBM, open source tooling or a third-party vendor. For ALM to be effective, you must adapt its principles to your own unique situation. IBM Rational software developers and consultants have defined these imperatives after more than 20 years of implementing ALM, and they have been proven time and time again. The key to ALM is collaboration and transparency among all of the stakeholders, which is supported by an open, extensible, integrated platform. And the r ight-size solution to meet your team with flexible deployment models and single point of administration Five Imperatives: In-Context Collaboration freeing teams to focus on more creative work Real-time Planning where the plan is always up to date Lifecycle Traceability ensures coverage of requirements, development and test Development Intelligence provides team transparency and for measured improvement Continuous Improvement to adapt and optimize team performance
  • Collaboration increases the value of your software by delivering on stakeholders’ vision. By collaborating with your stakeholders on requirements, designs, work items, test cases, and running software we come to understand their expectations and develop a collective intelligence for what your software should provide. In-Context Collaboration is the ability to collaborate, in real time, on projects in the context of work being done. Many organizations rely on email, spreadsheets or loosely integrated tools as their collaboration infrastructure. These may seem like the most cost-effective solutions, but often result in lower productivity from individual team members as they spend more time searching for and sending emails, populating spreadsheets for status and cutting and pasting data from one tool to another. The Rational solution for CLM captures discussions and chats in the context of work being done, building a collective intelligence of technical and business decisions. Why use In-Context Collaboration? Ensure business objectives are always understood from the context of the stakeholder Collective intelligence emerges with collaborative reviews of the requirements, designs, development plans and test plans, Foster whole team buy-in to improve team trust, efficiency and focus Collaboration often occurs in silos that don’t allow for the collective intelligence to emerge . Consider these common forms of collaboration that produce information silos: Capturing  designs in documents, spreadsheets, or wikis that only some people have access to Making decisions in email threads Only some team members involved in the stakeholder reviews To be in “the know”  for the decisions made on your requirements, designs, work items, source code, builds, and tests do you have to be in the right meeting or see the right email or be in the right hallway? Symptoms that indicate the need for In-Context Collaboration: Not having the right information to do your work Email copies of deliverables to remote team members, never knowing which copy is the most recent Missing important decisions that are undocumented Relying on casual discussions over a cup of coffee or co-located teams, or worse, public social media to share project information and decisions All team members who have a stake in project do not have access to the project artifacts and review tools Inability to collaborate and synchronize across the teams -- need to break down the silos Understanding of the design is limited to the immediate development team; extended team does not understand what the design is. It is difficult to share and collaborate with all stakeholders Not meeting stakeholder needs or expectations due to a lack of review, or lost feedback. Misaligned organizations often fail to deliver quality software on time and on budget Requirements or design reviews are cumbersome and take too long, and worse are avoided all together Potential duplication of effort , conflicting efforts, multiple interpretations & rework. Reinventing the wheel syndrome - rebuild similar solutions due to lack of a central repository for software development artifacts What we can say to position IBM’s In-Context Collaboration capabilities to… Microsoft Incomplete and ineffective because Microsoft ALM solution does not provide unified and equal access to all lifecycle activities from a single UI: VS 2010 IDE, SharePoint Team Portal, Team Web Access, Project Server, MS Excel/Project whereas IBM Rational CLM provides complete transparency for everyone on the team provided by a single hub of information, with customizable dashboards comprised of mash-ups Microsoft ALM solution lacks advanced in-context integration with team presence and instant messaging, targeted comments with notifications. It requires VS 2010 TFS Power Tools whereas IBM Rational CLM integrates with instant messaging and improves collaboration in Eclipse-based IDE by providing context-sensitive URL look-up for referenced artifacts Ineffective collaboration on design in VS 2010 Ultimate and design documents in SharePoint, requirements in SharePoint, project scheduling and planning in MS Excel/project or Project Server and work item estimation and tracking in TFS because of use of separate tools and workflows whereas IBM Rational CLM provides very productive collaboration on design, requirements and project planning for all team roles because all artifacts are linked and accessible from the main tool of each roles in-context of everyone’s everyday activities HP HP ALM is a point to point integration solution and has multiple repositories and makes immediate access to information to all team members difficult. In addition, having that information incorporated into feedback is difficult with multiple sources of truth. IBM Rational CLM tools have blurred the line between these repositories. If you take a look at the CLM 2011 solution, it very difficult to tell where our Rational Team Concert stops and Rational Requirements Composer starts and where Rational Requirements Composer stops and where you’re moving into Rational Quality Manager. Open sources Atlassian JIRA is a multiple point to point integration solution and has multiple repositories which makes immediate access to information to all team members difficult and If you take a look at the CLM 2011 solution, it very difficult to tell where our Rational Team Concert stops and Rational Requirements Composer starts and where Rational Requirements Composer stops and where you’re moving into Rational Quality Manager. ************************************************** Real-Time Planning is linked to project execution. Without this key criteria--for example if you maintain your project plan in a Microsoft project file outside of your ALM environment--plans will inevitably become stale and inaccurate. The Rational solution for CLM integrates planning with execution, enabling organizations to easily manage project resources, onboard new team members and react nimbly to changes introduced by customers or market conditions. Symptom’s that indicate a need for Real-Time Planning: Separate planning efforts that lead to miscommunication, delays and poor quality. Misaligned teams not working towards common goals Lack of visibility/understanding of the overall plan, including milestones/delivery dates Plans only include development tasks; don't give overall picture of total amount of work Uncertainty that everything is covered Practitioners not participating in planning activities because they don't see the value it's burdensome and inaccurate anyway, so why bother? Manual, error-prone plan updates Plans don't reflect the work being done Estimates are inaccurate Plans are disconnected from the day to day tasks, managed separately or not at all Undocumented tasks being worked on Difficult to stay on top of the project Managers / Team leads don't know each team member's workload Uncertain progress and predictability. Never knowing when you are 'done' Planning is only as good as the data behind it. The IBM Rational solution for CLM has real-time planning capabilities allowing practitioners to update status in the course of their daily work, tying the plan to execution. Changes are immediately visible on the plan and status is “collected” without any additional effort. What we can say to position IBM’s Real-Time Planning capabilities to… Microsoft With MS Project we have single plans from all the roles involved in a SDLC (Analyst, Project Manager, Developer, Tester etc) and after sometime these plans become out of date and might result in inaccuracy when collaborating from different sources. MS Project becomes real process heavy to maintain these plans from different stakeholders whereas with IBM’s Jazz platform, sharing planning information in real-time becomes light weight, more accurate and seamless. HP HP has point to point integrations and real time planning in such integration environment becomes a suspect. Difficult to have a central repository, difficult to export data whereas with IBM’s Jazz platform, sharing and planning information in real-time becomes light weight, more accurate and seamless Open sources No release and iterations timeline view. This makes it difficult to plan iterations
  • Lifecycle Traceability is the ability to provide both forward- and backwards visibility across your project lifecycle. The Rational solution for CLM allows you to identify with confidence that the software you are delivering to a customer includes a specific requirement that was developed using a specified process, associated with a specific software build, and validated by a specific set of test cases and test case results. Anything less and you really don’t know what you are delivering and whether what you are delivering will meet your quality or regulatory compliance requirements. Lifecycle Traceability enables teams to answer the hard questions about the status of their project. Establishing relationships between artifacts helps the team identify and close gaps, ensuring coverage across disciplines. At the same time, Lifecycle Traceability delivers transparency which enables everyone to make fully informed decisions based on business priorities It’s well known that addressing problems at the earliest possible moment results in higher quality, on time projects. Lifecycle Traceability gives teams the tools to act immediately on quality inhibitors Symptoms that indicate the need for Lifecycle Traceability: Teams are without awareness of related artifact and the impacted team members, a seemingly small change can ripple across the project potentially causing delays or reducing quality. Teams are unable to assess whether project requirements have been satisfied, and at what degree of quality. (dashboard) If you have a requirement, can you tell me when it gets in a build, has it been tested, did it pass? Also, what if something changes, are all related artifacts updated? Business Analyst - Did a requirement get into a build? Was it tested? Who worked on it? Developer – what tester uncovered this defect? Which build? Which environment? Tester – what’s ready to test? What changed since last build? Requirements would change, no clue how it affected or when it would affect tests. The IBM Rational solution for CLM’s lifecycle traceability capabilities are not limited to views on plans and requirements collections. Out-of-the-box lifecycle queries make it easy to have the information at everyone’s fingertips and on the dashboard What we can say to position IBM’s Lifecycle Traceability capabilities to… Microsoft Microsoft ALM does not provide complete traceability from requirements to development. Traceability from development to Builds at real time is not available out-of-the box. IBM Rational CLM has many traceability reports and views that allow developers link requirements to development and quality management artifacts. RTC also provides complete traceability between builds and development including real time build status notifications Microsoft cannot provide a complete traceability view of project plan from requirements through change management and quality management because requirements management is not part of TFS. Having User Stories treated as requirements for testing is also inadequate. IBM Rational CLM does not require use of desktop applications such as MS Excel/Project because RTC provides integrated with work item management project planning across requirements management, development/change management and quality management with end-to-end traceability HP HP, which is a point-to-point solution, has something called lifecycle traceability across domains – HP to Subversion to Jira to Serena to Blue Print. HP provides an add-on to their ALM tool which enables lifecycle traceability. However, the add-on is only available if the customer has upgraded to HP ALM v11 and it is not available for customers that are on v10 or v11 of just the Quality Center whereas IBM RTC provides integrated work item management and project planning across requirements management, development/change management and quality management with end-to-end traceability IBM has a comprehensive vision for building security in as part of the SDLC -- we call it Secure by Design. IBM continues to build in the direction of a single coherent approach to security analysis and reporting. HP, on the other hand, has continued with primarily point solutions, to the extent that Fortify Software still has an independent presence in the market. This is not indicative of a cohesive, built-in approach to application security. Open sources The association of artifacts in TeamForge requires specifying artifact ID and is a multi-step and cumbersome process whereas IBM RTC provides integrated work item management and project planning across requirements management, development/change management and quality management with end-to-end traceability
  • Development Intelligence ensures teams can respond early in the cycle when risk can be contained so it does not impact ship dates. You should be able to rely on your ALM environment to capture metrics automatically and behind the scenes, minimizing administrative busywork. Next, you need to surface those metrics on demand, at the right level of detail for every stakeholder from executive to practitioner. Without this correlated and “right sized” intelligence, managers spend most of their time asking for information from their teams. By providing customizable dashboards and reporting, the Rational solution for CLM empowers project leaders to spend less time searching for data and more time actively leading and coaching teams to positively influence project outcomes. Dashboards function as “information radiators” – a term coined by Dr. Alistair Cockburn. An information radiator is a large, highly visible display used by software teams to track progress. The IBM Rational solution for CLM provides both p ersonal and mini-dashboards ensure that practitioners have all the information they need to stay on top of breaking news that impacts their ability to deliver. This ensures risks are noticed and contained early. Mini-dashboards are always available. Go to any of the project dashboards on jazz.net to see how we do it.http://jazz.net/jazz/web/projects/Jazz%20Collaborative%20ALM#action=jazz.viewPage&id=com.ibm.team.dashboard Symptoms that indicate a need to improve Development Intelligence: Inability to look at the big picture, see how they are doing over time (the trends) and use that information to make fact-based decisions. Inability to track desired improvements with metrics Developers / testers - Collecting Metrics “sucks”. Means taking time out of my days to collect measurements that don’t seem to matter. Inability to accurately scope and estimate project duration without historical data to rely on, or predict a team's velocity or ability to deliver the amount of work identified on time or on budget Decisions are made based on opinion, fear, uncertainty or doubt. Managing by SWAG. Inability to make fact-based decisions and adjust the plan / steer the team, as needed What we can say to position IBM’s Development Intelligence capabilities to… Microsoft In a base configuration in which TFS integrates with Windows SharePoint Services for its Team Portal, Microsoft ALM does not provide enough metrics for development intelligence. Addition of SharePoint Server and Project Server delivers more dashboards, reports and measurements on product value, cost, etc. IBM Rational solution includes a broad range of reports and dashboards for development intelligence. Customization of the dashboards and reports by the users is limited, more changes are possible but they require involvement of SharePoint developers and administrators. What is available for each user depends on the user role permissions. The users cannot create customized personal dashboards and then share such dashboards with the team whereas with IBM Rational CLM, dashboards and reports are customizable by all user roles and can be either personal or shared with the team. HP No development support and currently only one 3rd party integration. Without a transparent way to build the code how do you confirm you are building the right code? Bolted on integrations compromise and can break traceability across the lifecycle as well as introduce error, adding complexity and inefficiency that is counter-productive to speeding time to market with less risk and cost. Open sources Atlassian JIRA supplies and open social gadget-based dashboard Users can have several dashboards arranged in tabs and Out-of-the-box gadgets include activity streams and charted metrics including burndown whereas RTC dashboard are more configurable and support progressive reveal and drill down CollabNet TeamForge no user customizable dashboards based on widgets/viewlets. The users cannot create customized personal dashboards and then share such dashboards with the team whereas with IBM Rational CLM, dashboards and reports are customizable by all user roles and can be either personal or shared with the team. http://alistair.cockburn.us/Information+radiator) -- Dr. Cockburn -- internationally renowned IT strategist. Helped craft the Agile Development Manifesto among other accolades. Continuous Improvement means the team collaborates on both incremental and breakthrough improvements via retrospectives that can generate a list of improvement areas and actions to take. Some improvements can take multiple steps, like determining new process, implementation and rollout. To be successful, this work should also be tracked and related back to the retrospective. An example of a breakthrough improvement is the use and reuse of project templates. The IBM Rational solution for CLM provides templates that can be modified for your team or project needs to encapsulate your best practices and be re-used in project after project Symptoms that indicate a need for Continuous Improvement: Everyone is “saying” that we adopted a new process, but there are no tools to make it successful, and the team is not willing to chance those that don’t work! Developers – new team in new locations not following the same process. Lots of scrap and rework. Inability to implement workflows or improve process across the many diverse, distributed contributors. Process specifications are created but never enacted, they become "shelf-ware" or something the team 'should' do Testers, Release managers - concerns not heard until later in the development cycle when they are expensive to fix and cause project delays. Need to be part of the TEAM assessment What we can say to position IBM’s Continuous Improvement capabilities to… Microsoft Microsoft VS 2010 TFS has only 3 process templates out-of-the-box for continuous improvement but IBM Rational CLM leverages process templates and allows teams to incrementally change the process, rules, etc. from one iteration to the next based on project metrics Microsoft has some agile aspect but does not support waterfall technology but IBM Rational has the ability to adopt multiple processes like waterfall, agile to support continuous process improvement HP HP has a template for Agile process but not on par with that of IBM IBM wants you to maximize and get the most from your investment in software. We want you to have maximum freedom and flexibility from your investment in Rational software. We do not lock you in with tooling that you do not need; We do not restrict the use of your investment – your license – in IBM Software from Rational. Unlike HP, who restricts your license to a geographical area (for example), we want you to choose a licensing model that works best for you: Authorized/Floating/ Token/Fixed Term/Saas/Cloud. Open sources Atlassian JIRA does not have agile process templates whereas RTC has agile templates like Scrum built in!
  • By leveraging Rational's innovative and unique Jazz technology , you gain an open, extensible, and integrated platform that allows teams to unify and extend their infrastructure to include open source software, packaged and custom applications, and other commercial solutions of choice. Having an integrated but open platform across the software delivery lifecycle enables development teams to benefit from real-time collaboration, project transparency, process automation, traceability and repeatable best practices from initial requirements definition to software change and release management and beyond. Open Services for Lifecycle Collaboration (OSLC) is a community creating open specifications for interactions between tools. IBM Rational’s solution for CLM offerings – Rational Team Concert, Rational Requirements Composer and Rational Quality Manager -- have built-in support for OSLC, but many other ALM tools providers such as HP, Microsoft and others that have not followed the OSLC Standards to date. **Recent Announce** http://www.marketwire.com/press-release/Kovair-Omnibus-Brings-Support-for-IBM-Sponsored-JAZZ-OSLC-1623378.htm SANTA CLARA, CA--(Marketwire - Feb 23, 2012) - Kovair Software www.kovair.com , a leading provider of Integrated Application Lifecycle Management -- ALM -- solutions, announced today the availability of a new OSLC Wrapper product that enables sharing of data through live linking between application lifecycle artifacts originating from multi-vendor ALM tools from HP, Microsoft, Atlassian and others and OSLC standard tools from IBM Rational such as Rational Team Concert - RTC, Rational Quality Manager - RQM and Rational Requirements Composer - RRC. Kovair Omnibus Integration provides an Enterprise Service Bus-based ALM integration platform connecting more than 30 different ALM tools -- and growing -- from major vendors and open source groups. Tools like HP Quality Center and QTP, Microsoft TFS, Atlassian Jira, Perforce, CA Clarity, Subversion and Hudson are integrated through the Kovair Omnibus. 05/22/12
  • Making the tie from ALM to CLM and CDM: At the core of Application Lifecycle Management is coordinating the management of project changes, quality and requirements. These capabilities form the foundation of a successful ALM solution. Rational’s core ALM offering is the solution for Collaborative Lifecycle Management and Collaborative Design Management. IBM Rational ALM services and solutions can help your organization reduce the high costs and risks of inefficient, multiplatform software development and are unique in the market as they allow you to unify your infrastructure with a single open, extensible, integrated Jazz platform. Having a single platform across the software delivery lifecycle allows you to extend the software infrastructure investments you have already made while allowing all stakeholders real-time collaboration and transparency in the context of the work at hand, automation and better process control from the initial requirements definition to software change and release management and beyond. End to end traceability that is seamless in all three products. If a tester finds a defect and can trace it to a use case, submit the defect and it will link to all the things associated to it. Thus the developer can see it is blocked and why and its all automatic. Don’t have to ask. Link artifacts and connect the dots so every artifact has the proper upstream and downstream relationship Send links to artifacts that lead to current artifact versions and sets the related artifact context including reviews and comments from other team members Link critical project artifacts so that the entire team have access to the latest version of the truth When organizations fail to deliver quality software on time and on budget, it is typically not because any individual is dysfunctional, but because the entire team or organization is misaligned. End-to-end visibility enables organizations to proactively steer projects to success based on real-time information.    The second imperative, End-to-end lifecycle traceability is a perquisite for meaningful insight into project status, issues and risks. For example, the question, “Are we ready to release?” requires knowledge that can only be gathered by correlating requirements, code, build, and test information—data that potentially resides in four different repositories. The ideal environment will allow teams to easily link related assets and maintain those linkages as assets evolve.   Traceability is the ability to gain an end-to-end view across your project lifecycle. When your software is delivered to the customer, you should be able to identify all the activities associated with the software. You should be able to answer all of the stakeholder questions on this slide. And you should be able to state with confidence that the software includes this specific requirement, included in this software build, validated by this test case and with this test result. Anything less, and you really don’t know what you are delivering and whether what you are delivering will meet your quality requirements. --------------- Traceability isn’t simply one of those “nice to have” capabilities in the software development  lifecycle. Traceability helps you understand what everyone else on the team is doing. For example, while the requirements analyst knows very well what requirements she has written, she still needs to know whether a given requirement will be addressed during a specific development iteration and, if so, which one. Or she wants to know if the implementation of that requirement has been tested and with what result. An ALM solution that allows for lifecycle artifact traceability helps teams to answer the hard questions about requirements and risk management. By linking related artifacts, teams are better equipped to answer questions such as “which requirements are affected by defects?” and “which work items are ready for test?”   It is important to understand how requirements, test and development are linked by projects and tasks. DON’T Do traceability for traceability sake. Identify a few meaningful questions or set one goal and institute a “just enough” approach for linking related artifacts. For example, link requirements and test cases, link test cases and development work items. Try one and get good at it before doing more. DON’T Rely on reports that go stale after you’ve created them. Practice continuous traceability: Leverage a system that shows the traceability links directly on the plan, or that uses queries that identify gaps, such as “Plan items without requirements” and “Plan items without test cases”, and “Defects blocking test.” DON’T Ignore, hide from or hope to pass regulatory audits Invest in an ALM solution that makes traceability easy to do, maintain and report against. DON’T: Work in disconnected project repositories, or cobble together a disparate set of tools. Seek products built with open interfaces. Seek vendors who understand and support the ALM integration challenges. Invest in tools with a longer-term integration roadmap in mind. DON’T: Enter links manually after the fact, it’s easy to forget, hard to enforce. Integrated tools make it easy to establish as the project executes. See image of linked Defect in upcoming slide DON’T: Build your own integration based on proprietary API’s. Choose a solution with open services (OSLC) for linking data across the lifecycle. DON’T: Choose a one-size-fits-no-one solution. Invest in a loosely coupled, integrated ALM solution that is built to scale and support open and flexible integrations. A single ALM repository will not scale to fit your needs over time. Times change, new products emerge; your ALM solution needs to be flexible enough to move with the times. Do you really want to face that data migration challenge? Many tools, document formats and repositories create “information islands”, making it hard to find, relate and use this information as requirements artifacts as well as use use it to inform downstream lifecycle activities Hard to relate it together, keep it coherent, and maintain those relationships. Team members undertake heroic measures to consolidate it understand, monitor status, and make decisions based on this information. These manual processes often don’t scale and introduce errors This leads to .. Wasted team effort due to duplication and lack of version control / change management … “Which version of that document should I be looking at?” Challenges in scaling current practices and making them repeatable Too many project surprises due to poor or missed requirements Information overload: challenges finding, using, and reusing information Slide Source: Carolyn Pampino
  • Don’t just take it from us. A recent report, ‘Decision Matrix: Selecting an Application Lifecycle Management Vendor,’ from industry analyst Ovum, provides you with the third-party credibility you need to demonstrate to your clients that IBM is the go-to leader for application lifecycle management solutions. Analysts Tony Baer, Chandranshu Singh, and Michael Azoff worked with our Rational team to review numerous written submissions, briefings, and client references. The result? In terms of market impact and technology, they concluded that IBM Rational is the market leader! And they also determined that IBM Rational demonstrates clear leadership in market presence!
  • This slide illustrates some of the common problems that occur today when trying to move applications through various stages and environments. This is done to help frame where DP & A can help. Please note that characters in this slide represent various roles. In a given organization it is entirely possible that the same person will perform multiple roles. (At Start) The solution architect, software engineer and the deployment requirements and implementation artifacts appear. We start with the notion that we have made something to deploy (Click 1) We have a “package” which just represents all the things we need for a successful deployment – the binaries, attributes, settings, config files, etc.. – and we have a desired place we want to put these things. The text here is simply listing cloud specifically. (Click 2) We now show the cloud and various environments in it – Dev, Test, Staging, etc… We also show the systems manager who is making all these environments. Notice that environments is plural – admins today are making many of these and having to manage many at once. (Click 3) We show the deployment engineer who is responsible for getting the package successfully to the target environment. You could talk here about attempts to automate, how hard it is to maintain scripts, etc… (Click 4) We show a banner indicating the key values of the development teams: Agile, Innovation, Speed – here you can talk about the high rate of change and how that produces deployment artifacts with a very high frequency. (Click 5) Now show the key values of operations teams: Uptime, Reliability, Stability – the “if my box is working, don’t touch it” mentality. Talk about how these are vastly different and the impact that has on the ability to deploy with both speed and accuracy. (Click 6) Now we start to show common problems. This click starts with the fact that many deployment efforts today are manual, which causes inconsistencies. There is an explosion sound effect for emphasis. (Click 7) This problem is configuration mismatches – in other words the challenge to ensure you are getting the right package to the right place. Are the contents of the package correct? Are you deploying to the correct environment? Do you have everything you need? Did the environment change? (Click 8) Shows problems in the cloud area – that it is hard to validate initial requirements, that there can be mismatches in the infrastructure that the application was designed for and what is really there and that there are inherent differences between environments themselves. (Click 9) Finally we add problems in the development space – the lack of reuse, the lack of good templates to build off of, the fact that it is hard to discover infrastructure as part of the design process. You could easily talk to the idea of needing to repeat this for each of the various environments in an organization and then point out that if the means you have for doing that is manual (someone has to build the environment, someone has to write a script for deploying, someone has to run the script, etc…) then these kinds of efforts take more time and that means greater cost and risk.
  • DISCOVER: Tivoli Application Dependency Discovery Manager allows clients to visualize interdependencies and relationships between applications, computer systems and network devices through a discovery process. Leverage discovered operational data to expedite new designs in RSA or to evaluate if it matches defined topology PLAN: Rational Software Architect (RSA) allows clients to plan and validate deployment of applications and infrastructure as well as generate and publish workflows to drive automation and the creation of service templates. AUTOMATE: Within Rational Automation Framework (RAF), clients work from the published deployment workflow from RSA, refine it as required, and save it as an asset. Tivoli Service Automation Manager (TSAM) allows clients to import service templates from RSA to define services that are used to provision a full environment including infrastructure, application, and middleware configuration by reusing the automation support published in RAF GOVERN : Rational Asset Manager can manage and govern deployment assets including RSA deployment topologies, TSAM service templates, RAF automation workflows, and standardized deployment templates. Users can search for assets to be used in future deployment solutions.
  • This diagram depicts the complete mobile enterprise architecture as delivered by IBM and the Worklight component within it.
  • Summary of the Presentation: Software is the invisible thread woven through systems, products and services, helping companies bring new – smarter – innovations to market. The convergence of physical devices and information technology opens up the possibility for all types of integrated systems. Numerous market realities and trends impact your ability to be innovative while executing software and systems delivery effectively. A complex and evolving software supply chain compounded with tight budgets require IT teams to rethink their approach to agility. Improve time to delivery, quality, value, and predictability with integrated Application Lifecycle Management combined with best practices for scaling agility. The IBM Rational Collaborative Lifecycle Management Solution coordinates people, processes, and tools for requirements management, development and quality management by providing traceability across lifecycle artifacts, process definition and enactment, and reporting. IBM leverages the CLM solution to drive business results within our own organization – we are true drinkers of our own champagne. Software is integral to business success - the best and brightest companies use software to propel innovation Effective ALM provides the ability to innovate while reducing overhead costs -- whole-team, whole-view approach to the software delivery cycle. The solution for IBM Rational Collaborative Lifecycle Management (CLM) provides capabilities that fully support an effective ALM approach and you can customize or start your ALM journey based on your unique pain points IBM Rational leverages the CLM solution to drive business results its our own organization IBM Rational has the offerings – best practices, tooling and services – that can help you achieve business results About the download: Rational Team Concert , Rational Quality Manager , and Rational Requirements Composer share a common installer that deploys the shared Jazz Team Server plus the "Change and Configuration Management", "Quality Management", and "Requirements Management" applications.
  • Author Note: Mandatory Rational closing slide (includes appropriate legal disclaimer). Graphic is available in English only.
  • Transcript

    • 1. Developing for MobileEnterprise ApplicationPlatformDeveloping Mobile Apps with successBy Peter Eibak, IBM RationalOptimizing the World’s Infrastructure[May 22, 2012, Copenhagen]© 2012 IBM Corporation
    • 2. Agenda4. Wrap Up 1. Developing Mobile Apps Mobile Enterprise Application Platform3. Deployment Planning & 35-40 min 2. Software Delivery ProcessAutomation (DP&A) 2
    • 3. 4. Wrap Up 1. Developing Mobile Apps • Introductionary • Mandates/Challenges • IBM Mobile Foundation Mobile Enterprise Application Platform3. Deployment Planning & 2. Software Delivery ProcessAutomation 3
    • 4. Mobile is both an enterprise mandate and challenge Mobile and Cloud are45% increased top prioritiesproductivity with mobile apps 1 for CIOs2 Top Mobile Adoption Concerns:3 • Security/privacy (53%) • Cost of developing for multiple mobile platforms (52%) • Integrating cloud services to mobile devices (51%) 1 Aberdeen Survey: ipadcto.com/2011/01/05/survey-mobile-apps-increase-enterprise-performance-and-productivity- advantages-top-three-mobile-app-strategies-gain-momentum/ 2 2011 IBM Global CIO Study 3 2011 IBM Tech Trends Report https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/mydeveloperworks/blogs/techtrends/entry/home?lang=en 4
    • 5. Building a mobile application is more than just writing the codeSpecific challenges in building mobile apps:Imperatives from line of business & customers• Strong demand by Line of Business• Customers expect higher quality of user experience with mobile apps• More direct involvement from users/stakeholders in designFragmentation of technology and platforms• Highly fragmented set of mobile devices and platforms• Native programming models not portable across devices.• Very large number of configurations of devices, platforms, How do you align business and carriers, etc. to test development to deliver apps thatUrgent time-to-market, rapid pace of innovation delight users?• Mobile landscape evolves at a much faster pace How do you develop for and test• More frequent releases and updates for apps with more against multiple platforms urgent time-to-market demands effectively?• Lack of best practices guidance on how to deliver mobile applications How do you gain control of your development process and accelerate time to delivery? 55
    • 6. 6 IBM Mobile Foundation Architecture overview Rational Collaborative Lifecycle Management Firewall or Security Gateway IBM End Point IBM Worklight Manager for Mobile Devices CastIron Hypervisor Edition Elastic Caching Mobile threats and IBM Mobile Foundation security SOA & Connectivity (Messaging, ESBs, Cloud Integration, Governance) Business Decision Social Analytics Process Management Management Software Enterprise Apps 6
    • 7. 4. Wrap Up 1. Developing Mobile Apps Mobile Enterprise Application Platform3. Deployment Planning & 2. Software DeliveryAutomation Process • The Big Theme • Challenges • Lifecycle perspectives • 5 imperatives • CLM solution 7
    • 8. Accelerated delivery requires integration across an extended lifecycle 1st 2nd Line gap Software Development gap Operations Customers of Business Development Technology Team Business Partners Partners Lifecycle Integration Open Source, IBM Software, Partners, and Third-party Tools 88
    • 9. IBM Rational’s Core Collaborative Lifecycle ManagementSolution Collaborative Lifecycle Management Optimize your team’s productivity through the 5 ALM Imperatives Rational Team Concert Rational Rational Collaborate across teams and Requirements Quality create deep integrations across Composer Manager the lifecycle Rational Software Architect Design Manager NEW (June 2012) Extend as your needs evolve with role-based licensing Analyst Engineer Developer Unify your infrastructure and protect your current investments with Architect Quality Professional a single, open, extensible platform Deployment Engineer Support heterogeneous development across multiple platforms and technologies 99
    • 10. Rational takes a two-pronged approach to help customers delivermobile applications successfully1. Rational CLM helps customers manage 2. Mobile specific-capabilities helpyour development lifecycle: customers accelerate your development and test: Traceability of development activity across entire  Code construction tool using web-based project lifecycle technology to write multi-platform applications Real-time planning that is consistently accurate  Distributed builds of mobile applications and up-to-date  On-device functional testing of mobile Tightly integrated with mobile code development applications capabilities Centralized code sharing and distributed mobile app build Integrate and manage full range of mobile testing tools and techniques Mobile-specific: Design Code Security Test Traceability across the development lifecycle Open platform for integrated development lifecycle 1010
    • 11. Rational mobile solution architecture Rational solution for mobile application delivery Requirements Management Rational Requirements Composer Quality Software Change & Application Development Management Configuration Management Studio Rational Quality Manager Rational Team Concert + additional tooling On-device testing (partner) Build & Deploy Management Rational Team Concert sold by Rational not sold by Rational 1111
    • 12. Mobile Development Lifecycle Management Individual Developer Workstation Rational Application Developer Rational Team Concert Native Mobile Toolkits Server & Emulators Rational Application Developer RTC Web & Mobile Tools Repository Rational Team Concert Eclipse ClientCentral Team Server Worklight Studio Shared Build Server Eclipse Client Rational Team Concert Team Build Engine Builder RIM Android iOS SDK SDK SDK 12
    • 13. Why CLM? – Trends & ChallengesComplexities in software delivery compounded by market pressures Complex, Multi-platform Increasing Systems and Applications Mandates 62% of companies have agile projects 2010 Spending in U.S. on governance, requiring integration with legacy systems risk and compliance was $29.8 billion Globally Distributed Software Cost and Product Supply Chains Reduction 50% of outsourced projects 70% budget locked in maintenance and are expected to under perform 37% of projects go over budget Unpredictability Changing Requirements in Software Delivery and Time to Market 62% of projects fail to meet 30% of project costs are due to rework intended schedule and poor execution of requirements Source: Numerous sources, see speaker notes for details 1313
    • 14. The essential criterias to provide end-to-end visibility across multiple, teams, tools and projects Five Imperatives for Effective Application Lifecycle Management to improve organizational productivity • Maximize product value with In-Context Collaboration • Accelerate time to delivery with Real-Time Planning • Improve quality with Lifecycle Traceability • Achieve predictability with Development Intelligence • Reduce costs with Continuous Improvement Learn more at ALM Everywhere 1414
    • 15. In-Context Collaboration improves product value Teams can collaborate on and review software development artifacts while incorporating feedback early and often to continuously align delivery with the stakeholders’ vision Provides a single source of truth hosted in a shared repository so team members can collaborate effectively around the globe and build a collective intelligence Makes information immediately accessible to all team members in the context of their work Real-Time Planning accelerates time to delivery Provides a single plan that spans requirements, development, and test, ensuring the whole team understands the overall scope of a project Integrates planning with execution ensuring the entire team understands the true project status Allows everyone to participate in keeping the plan current and accurate Helps teams respond to the unexpected in a timely manner ensuring the team stays on schedule 1515
    • 16. Lifecycle Traceability improves quality Establish relationships between software artifacts Identify and close artifact gaps, ensuring coverage across disciplines Provides visibility into the completeness of planned items by inspecting all related artifacts Provides easy access to related artifacts ensuring everyone shares the same view Delivers transparency which enables everyone to make fully informed decisions based on business priorities Instant access to details from any point in development process Customer Final Product Requirements Initial Idea Build Management Artifacts Environment Supporting 1616 Systems
    • 17. Development Intelligence improves predictability Enable fact-based decision making to communicate status, monitor progress, diagnose problems, identify corrective actions Steer projects and programs to deliver on-time Apply Business Intelligence techniques to software and systems development Measurement Practices Impact Project Success 15% Cancelled 5% Weak measurement practice 40% Late Strong measurement practice 20% 45% On-time 75% Continuous Improvement reduces cost Improve software delivery through the ongoing adoption of best practices and automation to reduce manual, non-creative and error prone tasks Promote incremental improvement of a project when needed Enable breakthrough improvement by capturing best practices and reusing across teams Allow everyone to participate with easy to adopt best practices at your fingertips. Sources: Capers Jones, Measurement, Metrics and Industry Leadership, Copyright © 2002-2007 by Capers Jones LLC Capers Jones, Software Engineering Best Practices, Copyright © 2010 McGraw-Hill 1717
    • 18. Jazz - The Foundation that brings it together Open Choice & Rich Integration. Evolutionary & Incremental Adoption Requirement Test Case Everything is a resource! “I can link any resource to any other resource, regardless Work Item of where they live!” Standard interfaces “Each tool can evolve independently without breaking RRC RQM integrations!” Domain specific standards for the lifecycle “Each domain can create RTC standards without having to wait on the others or get the whole industry to agree!” Vendor agnostic “Each vendor can evolve their tool to exploit the services that Dashboard are valuable to customers like me!” Discovery Process Mgmt User Auth Project Mgmt Open Services for Lifecycle Collaboration Lifecycle integration inspired by the web How does OSLC work? What is OSLC? Community Driven – @ open-services.net Specifications for numerous disciplines  Such as, ALM, PLM and DevOps Inspired by Free to use Changing the web and share the  Defined by scenarios – solution oriented industry Inspired by Internet architecture A different approach to industry-wide proliferation Get involved & contribute! 1818
    • 19. IBM Rational’s Collaborative Lifecycle Management Solution Collaborative Lifecycle Management Rational Team Concert Rational Rational Requirements Quality Composer Manager Rational Software Architect Design Manager NEW (June 2012) Analyst Engineer Developer Quality Architect Professional Deployment Engineer 1919
    • 20. IBM Rational is a recognized leader in ALM Ovum Decision Matrix: Selecting an ALM Vendor Reference Code: OI00068-002 Publication Date: March 2011 Authors: Chandranshu Singh, Tony Baer, Michael Azoff Report Highlights – "IBM has the broadest and arguably the deepest portfolio among all vendors profiled in this report.” – IBM’s Technology Score: 94.3% – IBM’s Market Impact score: 10/10 • The highest score! • All other vendors were ranked relative to IBM – “Furthermore, the vendor has ensured that it stays ahead of the pack by having a good grasp of market demand and meeting it through tool support.” ©Ovum published 3/2011 - This report is a licensed product and is not to be photocopied 2020
    • 21. 4. Wrap up 1. Developing Mobile Apps Mobile Enterprise Application Platform 2. Software Delivery Process3. DeploymentPlanning & Automation• Introductionary• Challenges• The Gap between Dev and Ops• Extending the Lifecycle perspective 21
    • 22. Accelerated delivery requires integration across an extended lifecycle 1st 2nd Line gap Software Development gap Operations Customers of Business Development Technology Team Business Partners Partners Lifecycle Integration Open Source, IBM Software, Partners, and Third-party Tools 2222
    • 23. IT leaders need more from their Software Delivery process What leaders are looking for…. – 65% want more visibility into the process – 64% want more automation – 59% want the process to be more flexible – 50% want to increase speed of deployments…But for most, deployment is anunpredictable manual, inflexible slowprocess – 44% find that very simple deployments take 1+ week 50% of applications put into production are later rolled back (Gartner) 60% - 80% of an average company’s IT budget is spent on maintaining existing applications (Intelligent Enterprise.com) Software related downtime cost industries almost $300 billion annually (CENTS - Comparative Economic NormalizationTechnology Study) 23
    • 24. The gap between Development and Operation versus Development Operation Plan your desired deployment topology and publish automation instructions. Automate infrastructure provisioning, middleware configuration, & application installation to repeatedly setup environments. DP&A Govern and share deployment application artifacts, templates and plans. 24
    • 25. IBM Deployment Planning and Automation Product Mapping Tivoli Change and Configuration Rational Software Management Database (CCMBD) & Plan Architect (RSA) Tivoli Application Dependency Discovery Manager (TADDM) Govern Automate Rational Automation Rational Asset Framework (RAF) Manager (RAM) Tivoli Service Automation Manager (TSAM) 25 25
    • 26. 4. Wrap up 1. Developing Mobile Apps• IBM Mobile Foundation• Get started, CLM Mobile Enterprise Application Platform3. Deployment Planning & 2. Software Delivery ProcessAutomation 26
    • 27. IBM Mobile Foundation A complete enterprise framework for mobile computing Security Gateway (WebSphere DataPower) Rational Elastic Caching Mobile App Platform IBM Endpoint Collaborative (WebSphere eXtreme Scale / Manager for Mobile Lifecycle (Worklight) Devices (Tivoli) WebSphere DataPower XC10) Management WebSphere Application Server SOA & Connectivity (WebSphere Message Broker, WebSphere MQ (MQTT), WebSphere Cast Iron, WebSphere Services Registry and Repository) WebSphere IBM Business Analytics Social Operational Decision Process Software Management Enterprise Apps Management 2727
    • 28. Get Started! Collaborative Lifecycle Management Free Get involved at jazz.net! Interactive White Board Downloads ! Short, simple way to share the  read articles & blogs  listen to podcasts 5 ALM imperatives  view presentations  see a project dashboard ibm.co/alm-everywhere  watch videos  review the release plan Try it out at jazz.net! Role-based Demo 1 Download RTC, RRC or RQM for CLM https://jazz.net/downloads/rational-team-concert/ Sample scenarios for CLM https:// jazz.net/wiki/bin/view/Main/MTM_Lifecycle_Welcome Track our progress at jazz.net! VP of Development, a Business Analyst or We openly develop our software with our own tools! Project Owner, Agile Team Lead, Developer https://jazz.net/projects/clm/ and Test Lead. bit.ly/jazzCLMdemo 2828
    • 29. www.ibm/software/rational© Copyright IBM Corporation 2011. All rights reserved. The information contained in these materials is provided for informational purposes only, and is provided AS IS without warranty of any kind,express or implied. IBM shall not be responsible for any damages arising out of the use of, or otherwise related to, these materials. Nothing contained in these materials is intended to, nor shall havethe effect of, creating any warranties or representations from IBM or its suppliers or licensors, or altering the terms and conditions of the applicable license agreement governing the use of IBMsoftware. References in these materials to IBM products, programs, or services do not imply that they will be available in all countries in which IBM operates. Product release dates and/or capabilitiesreferenced in these materials may change at any time at IBM’s sole discretion based on market opportunities or other factors, and are not intended to be a commitment to future product or featureavailability in any way. IBM, the IBM logo, Rational, the Rational logo, Telelogic, the Telelogic logo, and other IBM products and services are trademarks of the International Business MachinesCorporation, in the United States, other countries or both. Other company, product, or service names may be trademarks or service marks of others. 29 29