Shu-Ha-Ri: Measuring Agile Adoption Maturity
 

Shu-Ha-Ri: Measuring Agile Adoption Maturity

on

  • 869 views

Shu-Ha-Ri is the journey that Aikido martial arts students go through to evolve from novice towards eventually achieving mastery. Alistair Cockburn introduced it to the Agile community in 2006 as a ...

Shu-Ha-Ri is the journey that Aikido martial arts students go through to evolve from novice towards eventually achieving mastery. Alistair Cockburn introduced it to the Agile community in 2006 as a metaphor for measuring where an Agile team is on their journey towards achieving Agile Maturity. While the metaphor is helpful, more detail is needed to create something actionable by an organization. Based on our multi-year experience applying the Shu-Ha-Ri metaphor for specific client scenrarios, this presentation describes our assessment framework for various types of Agile journeys associated with distributed enterprise Agile programs. We introduce the basic concepts of Shu-Ha-Ri, then expand on that with in-depth descriptions of this practical assessment framework with some real world examples of how to apply it to measure and improve the overall maturity of your Agile team.

Statistics

Views

Total Views
869
Views on SlideShare
868
Embed Views
1

Actions

Likes
2
Downloads
40
Comments
0

1 Embed 1

https://codex.cognizant.com 1

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

Shu-Ha-Ri: Measuring Agile Adoption Maturity Shu-Ha-Ri: Measuring Agile Adoption Maturity Presentation Transcript

  • Shu-Ha-Ri Measuring Maturity of Agile Teams Dan Fuller May 21, 2014
  • | ©2014, Cognizant Contents 2 1 Introduction(Shu-Ha-Ri) 2 Visualizing the Metaphor 3 Shu (Stage 1) Team Behaviors 4 Ha (Stage 2) Team Behaviors 5 Ri (Stage 3) Team Behaviors 6 Shu-Ha-Ri Applied to Agile Teams 7 Provably Better Agile Teams
  • | ©2014, Cognizant Shu-Ha-Ri 3 • Shu-Ha-Ri is the journey that Aikido martial arts students go through from novice towards mastery. • It is becoming the metaphor the Agile community is using to measure maturity of Agile teams. • This session will explain Cognizant’s implementation of Shu-Ha-Ri to measure Agile Teams… Source: Alastair Cockburn @ http://alistair.cockburn.us/Shu+Ha+Ri
  • | ©2014, Cognizant Visualizing the Metaphor 4 Nascent Teams Follow the Rules Proficient Teams Break the Rules Hyper Performing Teams BE the Rule -Shu (Stage 1) -Ha (Stage 2) -Ri (Stage 3)
  • | ©2014, Cognizant Shu (Stage 1) Team Behaviors 5 -Shu (Stage 1) -Ha (Stage 2) -Ri (Stage 3) • Learning the process basics, & team members • Growing their rapport both professionally and socially • Mimicking the practices • Learning to work together • Following the rules • Learning the process • A collection of skilled individuals learning their roles
  • | ©2014, Cognizant Ha (Stage 2) Team Behaviors 6 -Ha (Stage 2) • Starting to question practices that seemingly may not work for them. -Shu (Stage 1) • Understanding the practices, and the importance of the principles and values. • Coming to a deeper understanding of the art than pure repetitive practice will allow. • Beginning to move beyond a collection of skilled individuals. • Developing their own personalities. • Beginning to break the rules. -Ri (Stage 3)
  • | ©2014, Cognizant Ri (Stage 3) Team Behaviors 7 -Ri (Stage 3) -Ha (Stage 2) • Creating output greater than the sum of the work of the individuals. • Breaking the rules to gain an advantage. • Progressing more through self- discovery than instruction. • Consistently thinking and acting as a unit. • Adjusting with little friction -Shu (Stage 1)
  • Shu-Ha-Ri Applied to Agile Teams
  • | ©2014, Cognizant What do we evaluate… and why? 9 We chose 12 particular dimensions that cover the entire breadth of Agile methods from Product Backlogs to Working Software. Factoring in the roles of Product Owners, Scrum Masters, Developers and Testers Some are Quantitative, others are Qualitative. Let’s take a look at the 12 dimensions…
  • | ©2014, Cognizant Quantitative Dimensions 10 Velocity Story Creation Quality Accuracy of Commitment Accuracy of Estimates Overtime How much working software is being created? How good is the working software? How comfortable are we with creating user stories? Is the team delivering their commitments? How well are we estimating relative size and effort? How sustainable is the pace?
  • | ©2014, Cognizant Qualitative Dimensions 11 Sprint Planning Daily Scrum Release Planning Story Estimation Release Frequency Retrospectives How effective are we conducting our sprint planning sessions? How far out into the future are we planning our work? How effective is the facilitation of the standup? How smooth is the estimation process? How often is working software released? Are we actually doing meaningful process improvement?
  • | ©2014, Cognizant Visualizing the Results 12 • All teams start at Stage 1 (Shu) • To achieve Stage 2 (Ha) you must be at Stage 2 for all 12 dimensions, likewise for Stage 3 (Ri) Think of it like the rings on a tree (Cambia), Sprint Planning Release Planning Daily Scrum Quality Release Frequency Accuracy of Commitments Accuracy of Estimates Overtime Retrospectives Velocity Story Creation Process Effort Estimation 1 2 3 • Stage 3 (Ri) - Outer Ring – Bark • Stage 1 (Shu) - Inner Ring - Pith • Stage 2 (Ha) - Middle Ring - Xylem & Floem
  • | ©2014, Cognizant13 Sprint Planning Stage 1 – Shu : Represented in the center of the chart Team struggles with the process, has trouble defining tasks & duration. Sprint Planning Release Planning Daily Scrum Quality Release Frequency Accuracy of Commitments Accuracy of Estimates Overtime Retrospectives Velocity Story Creation Process Effort Estimation ?
  • | ©2014, Cognizant14 Sprint Planning Stage 2 – Ha : Represented in the 2nd circle of the chart Team is comfortable with the process, is able to do sprint planning in 3-4 hours. Sprint Planning Release Planning Daily Scrum Quality Release Frequency Accuracy of Commitments Accuracy of Estimates Overtime Retrospectives Velocity Story Creation Process Effort Estimation 3 – 4 Hours
  • | ©2014, Cognizant15 Sprint Planning Stage 3 – Ri : Represented in the outer circle of the chart Team is identifying tasks and durations in advance and meeting is fast and efficient Sprint Planning Release Planning Daily Scrum Quality Release Frequency Accuracy of Commitments Accuracy of Estimates Overtime Retrospectives Velocity Story Creation Process Effort Estimation Quick Meeting
  • | ©2014, Cognizant16 Release Planning Stage 1 – Shu : Represented in the center of the chart Team is not sure what it will be doing next sprint Sprint Planning Release Planning Daily Scrum Quality Release Frequency Accuracy of Commitments Accuracy of Estimates Overtime Retrospectives Velocity Story Creation Process Effort Estimation ! !!
  • | ©2014, Cognizant17 Release Planning Stage 2 – Ha : Represented in the 2nd circle of the chart Team knows what it will be working on 2-3 sprints into the future Sprint Planning Release Planning Daily Scrum Quality Release Frequency Accuracy of Commitments Accuracy of Estimates Overtime Retrospectives Velocity Story Creation Process Effort Estimation 2 - 3 Sprints
  • | ©2014, Cognizant18 Release Planning Stage 3 – Ri : Represented in the outer circle of the chart Team knows what it will be working on 3 or more sprints out into the future Sprint Planning Release Planning Daily Scrum Quality Release Frequency Accuracy of Commitments Accuracy of Estimates Overtime Retrospectives Velocity Story Creation Process Effort Estimation >3 Sprints_
  • | ©2014, Cognizant19 Daily Scrum Stage 1 – Shu : Represented in the center of the chart Lots of off-topic discussion, resembles a status meeting Sprint Planning Release Planning Daily Scrum Quality Release Frequency Accuracy of Commitments Accuracy of Estimates Overtime Retrospectives Velocity Story Creation Process Effort Estimation ------ -----
  • | ©2014, Cognizant20 Daily Scrum Stage 2 – Ha : Represented in the 2nd circle of the chart Everyone is participating and the 3 basic questions are being addressed Sprint Planning Release Planning Daily Scrum Quality Release Frequency Accuracy of Commitments Accuracy of Estimates Overtime Retrospectives Velocity Story Creation Process Effort Estimation To Do Accomplished Impediments
  • | ©2014, Cognizant21 Daily Scrum Stage 3 – Ri : Represented in the outer circle of the chart Executed with precision, nothing extraneous, transparency & truth are shining through Sprint Planning Release Planning Daily Scrum Quality Release Frequency Accuracy of Commitments Accuracy of Estimates Overtime Retrospectives Velocity Story Creation Process Effort Estimation
  • | ©2014, Cognizant22 Quality Stage 1 – Shu : Represented in the center of the chart Sprint Planning Release Planning Daily Scrum Quality Release Frequency Accuracy of Commitments Accuracy of Estimates Overtime Retrospectives Velocity Story Creation Process Effort Estimation Defect Density > 25%
  • | ©2014, Cognizant23 Quality Stage 2 – Ha : Represented in the 2nd circle of the chart Sprint Planning Release Planning Daily Scrum Quality Release Frequency Accuracy of Commitments Accuracy of Estimates Overtime Retrospectives Velocity Story Creation Process Effort Estimation Defect Density between 25% and 10% !
  • | ©2014, Cognizant24 Quality Stage 3 – Ri : Represented in the outer circle of the chart Sprint Planning Release Planning Daily Scrum Quality Release Frequency Accuracy of Commitments Accuracy of Estimates Overtime Retrospectives Velocity Story Creation Process Effort Estimation Defect Density < 10%
  • | ©2014, Cognizant25 Estimation Stage 1 – Shu : Represented in the center of the chart Team struggles gaining consensus on story point estimates, meeting takes a long time Sprint Planning Release Planning Daily Scrum Quality Release Frequency Accuracy of Commitments Accuracy of Estimates Overtime Retrospectives Velocity Story Creation Process Effort Estimation
  • | ©2014, Cognizant26 Estimation Stage 2 – Ha : Represented in the 2nd circle of the chart Team is able to estimate about 6 stories per hour Sprint Planning Release Planning Daily Scrum Quality Release Frequency Accuracy of Commitments Accuracy of Estimates Overtime Retrospectives Velocity Story Creation Process Effort Estimation 1Hour / 6 Stories
  • | ©2014, Cognizant27 Estimation Stage 3 – Ri : Represented in the outer circle of the chart Team is able to estimate more than 8 stories per hour. Sprint Planning Release Planning Daily Scrum Quality Release Frequency Accuracy of Commitments Accuracy of Estimates Overtime Retrospectives Velocity Story Creation Process Effort Estimation 1Hour / 8+ Stories
  • | ©2014, Cognizant28 Story Creation Process Stage 1 – Shu : Represented in the center of the chart Unpredictable Story Creation Rate, Story Authors Uncomfortable Sprint Planning Release Planning Daily Scrum Quality Release Frequency Accuracy of Commitments Accuracy of Estimates Overtime Retrospectives Velocity Story Creation Process Effort Estimation
  • | ©2014, Cognizant29 Story Creation Process Stage 2 – Ha : Represented in the 2nd circle of the chart Story Authors starting to become comfortable, story production rate is rising Sprint Planning Release Planning Daily Scrum Quality Release Frequency Accuracy of Commitments Accuracy of Estimates Overtime Retrospectives Velocity Story Creation Process Effort Estimation
  • | ©2014, Cognizant30 Story Creation Process Stage 3 – Ri : Represented in the outer circle of the chart Story Production Rate >= Velocity of Teams Sprint Planning Release Planning Daily Scrum Quality Release Frequency Accuracy of Commitments Accuracy of Estimates Overtime Retrospectives Velocity Story Creation Process Effort Estimation
  • | ©2014, Cognizant31 Velocity Stage 1 – Shu : Represented in the center of the chart Velocity is unpredictable, it’s up, it’s down from sprint to sprint Sprint Planning Release Planning Daily Scrum Quality Release Frequency Accuracy of Commitments Accuracy of Estimates Overtime Retrospectives Velocity Story Creation Process Effort Estimation
  • | ©2014, Cognizant32 Velocity Stage 2 – Ha : Represented in the 2nd circle of the chart Velocity growth trend is increasing for three sprints in a row Sprint Planning Release Planning Daily Scrum Quality Release Frequency Accuracy of Commitments Accuracy of Estimates Overtime Retrospectives Velocity Story Creation Process Effort Estimation
  • | ©2014, Cognizant33 Velocity Stage 3 – Ri : Represented in the outer circle of the chart Velocity growth trends slows, levels off, is consistent & predictable Sprint Planning Release Planning Daily Scrum Quality Release Frequency Accuracy of Commitments Accuracy of Estimates Overtime Retrospectives Velocity Story Creation Process Effort Estimation
  • | ©2014, Cognizant34 Retrospectives Stage 1 – Shu : Represented in the center of the chart Team seems to be going through the motions on the Retro Sprint Planning Release Planning Daily Scrum Quality Release Frequency Accuracy of Commitments Accuracy of Estimates Overtime Retrospectives Velocity Story Creation Process Effort Estimation Collect Data
  • | ©2014, Cognizant35 Retrospectives Stage 2 – Ha : Represented in the 2nd circle of the chart Team has positive discussions aligned with Agile Manifesto themes and values Sprint Planning Release Planning Daily Scrum Quality Release Frequency Accuracy of Commitments Accuracy of Estimates Overtime Retrospectives Velocity Story Creation Process Effort Estimation --- --- -----
  • | ©2014, Cognizant36 Retrospectives Stage 3 – Ri : Represented in the outer circle of the chart Team is instituting meaningful process improvement every sprint Sprint Planning Release Planning Daily Scrum Quality Release Frequency Accuracy of Commitments Accuracy of Estimates Overtime Retrospectives Velocity Story Creation Process Effort Estimation
  • | ©2014, Cognizant37 Overtime Stage 1 – Shu : Represented in the center of the chart Team frequently has to put in overtime to deliver against commitments Sprint Planning Release Planning Daily Scrum Quality Release Frequency Accuracy of Commitments Accuracy of Estimates Overtime Retrospectives Velocity Story Creation Process Effort Estimation ?
  • | ©2014, Cognizant38 Overtime Stage 2 – Ha : Represented in the 2nd circle of the chart Overtime occurs, but is minimal and team is working at a sustainable pace Sprint Planning Release Planning Daily Scrum Quality Release Frequency Accuracy of Commitments Accuracy of Estimates Overtime Retrospectives Velocity Story Creation Process Effort Estimation !
  • | ©2014, Cognizant39 Overtime Stage 3 – Ri : Represented in the outer circle of the chart Overtime is rare, and it is usually the teams choice to overachieve Sprint Planning Release Planning Daily Scrum Quality Release Frequency Accuracy of Commitments Accuracy of Estimates Overtime Retrospectives Velocity Story Creation Process Effort Estimation Sustainable
  • | ©2014, Cognizant40 Accuracy of Estimates Stage 1 – Shu : Represented in the center of the chart Initial Story Point Estimates are frequently revised Sprint Planning Release Planning Daily Scrum Quality Release Frequency Accuracy of Commitments Accuracy of Estimates Overtime Retrospectives Velocity Story Creation Process Effort Estimation
  • | ©2014, Cognizant41 Accuracy of Estimates Stage 2 – Ha : Represented in the 2nd circle of the chart Initial estimates are within 25% of actuals Sprint Planning Release Planning Daily Scrum Quality Release Frequency Accuracy of Commitments Accuracy of Estimates Overtime Retrospectives Velocity Story Creation Process Effort Estimation 0 25 50 75 100
  • | ©2014, Cognizant42 Accuracy of Estimates Stage 3 – Ri : Represented in the outer circle of the chart Initial estimates are within 10% of actuals Sprint Planning Release Planning Daily Scrum Quality Release Frequency Accuracy of Commitments Accuracy of Estimates Overtime Retrospectives Velocity Story Creation Process Effort Estimation 0 25 50 75 100
  • | ©2014, Cognizant43 Accuracy of Commitments Stage 1 – Shu : Represented in the center of the chart Team frequently doesn’t deliver against story point commitments Sprint Planning Release Planning Daily Scrum Quality Release Frequency Accuracy of Commitments Accuracy of Estimates Overtime Retrospectives Velocity Story Creation Process Effort Estimation
  • | ©2014, Cognizant44 Accuracy of Commitments Stage 2 – Ha : Represented in the 2nd circle of the chart Team usually delivers against its sprint commitment but often has adopted work Sprint Planning Release Planning Daily Scrum Quality Release Frequency Accuracy of Commitments Accuracy of Estimates Overtime Retrospectives Velocity Story Creation Process Effort Estimation !
  • | ©2014, Cognizant45 Accuracy of Commitments Stage 3 – Ri : Represented in the outer circle of the chart Team always delivers against its sprint commitment and adopted work is rare Sprint Planning Release Planning Daily Scrum Quality Release Frequency Accuracy of Commitments Accuracy of Estimates Overtime Retrospectives Velocity Story Creation Process Effort Estimation
  • | ©2014, Cognizant46 Release Frequency Stage 1 – Shu : Represented in the center of the chart Team struggles to get working software out the door every sprint Sprint Planning Release Planning Daily Scrum Quality Release Frequency Accuracy of Commitments Accuracy of Estimates Overtime Retrospectives Velocity Story Creation Process Effort Estimation ?
  • | ©2014, Cognizant47 Release Frequency Stage 2 – Ha : Represented in the 2nd circle of the chart Most sprints result in a good build with occasional build issues Sprint Planning Release Planning Daily Scrum Quality Release Frequency Accuracy of Commitments Accuracy of Estimates Overtime Retrospectives Velocity Story Creation Process Effort Estimation
  • | ©2014, Cognizant48 Release Frequency Stage 3 – Ri : Represented in the outer circle of the chart Every sprint results in a good build of working software, no exceptions Sprint Planning Release Planning Daily Scrum Quality Release Frequency Accuracy of Commitments Accuracy of Estimates Overtime Retrospectives Velocity Story Creation Process Effort Estimation
  • | ©2014, Cognizant49 Measure Teams over Time Sprint Planning Release Planning Daily Scrum Quality Release Frequency Accuracy of Commitments Accuracy of Estimates Overtime Retrospectives Velocity Story Creation Process Effort Estimation Sprint Planning Release Planning Daily Scrum Quality Release Frequency Accuracy of Commitments Accuracy of Estimates Overtime Retrospectives Velocity Story Creation Process Effort Estimation Team advanced from Stage 1 to 2 Sprint 10 Sprint 15 Team is at Stage 1 due to Overtime Overtime moved from Stage 1 to 2 Velocity moved from Stage 2 to 3
  • | ©2014, Cognizant50 Data Collection Qualitative data should come from Agile Lifecycle Management tools (ALM) and Integrated Testing Suites, e.g.: • Rally • VersionOne 2 Approaches to Data Collection for Qualitative Dimensions: • Coach Led Interview of Product Owner and Scrum Master (Benefit – Rich conversation results in rich data) • Team Self Reported via Survey (Benefit – Scalable on very large programs) Suggested Interval: • Every Sprint – Ideal if enough Agile Coaching available • Every Release – Minimal recommended interval
  • | ©2014, Cognizant51 Analyzing the Results Team level assessment Warning: This is not intended to determine “good” or “bad” teams. This is a tool teams can use to come up with thoughtful ways during retrospective to improve the way the team works. Compare overall results against goals aligned with overall Agile vision, • Goal is Faster Time to Market BUT teams scoring low on Release Frequency • Goal is more Productivity BUT teams scoring low on Velocity • Goal is higher Quality BUT teams scoring low on Defect Density
  • Provably Better Agile Teams
  • | ©2014, Cognizant53 Becoming Ri (Hyper-Performing, Provably Better) Do Stage 3 Teams Exist? Many factors must come together. These teams typically are: • Stable in terms of staffing over time • Product Owner role cannot change on a project • Team is small; less than 10 people • Empowered to change its process • Incorporates the core values in their work • Bonding via a difficult challenge • Committed to shared success • Hungry to learn • Willing to accept change, and • Eager to experiment with new ideas Caveat: Fewer than 5% of teams achieve Ri (Stage 3), and there is no average timeline for a team to achieve the highest stage.
  • | ©2014, Cognizant54 Stage 2 and 3 Benefits Statistics quoted from QSMA, Rico, and DDJ in Succeeding with Agile, Mike Cohn, Jan 2010 Higher Productivity Lower Costs Faster Time to Market Higher Quality Improved Job Satisfaction Improved Stakeholder Satisfaction 14% 88% 384% 10% 26% 70% 5% 37% 64% 10% 63% 84% 52% 74% 92% 53% 78% 93% Stage2 Stage3
  • | ©2014, Cognizant55 Benefits of Stage 3 “RI” Teams Higher Quality - Fewer defects will result from their work. Predictable and Consistent - Their velocity is well known, consistent, and range-bound, allowing for greater confidence in future delivery estimates. Improved Morale - Members want to work together more for the betterment of the team. Improved Stakeholder Satisfaction - Business sponsors working with these teams will enjoy working with the team. Provably Better - We don’t just think we are outperforming waterfall, we have metrics to prove it. Hyper-productivity - The team will be able to produce quality software at an amazing rate enabling a faster time to market and lower IT costs. Extremely Efficient - The team will efficiently estimate, plan, execute and report progress and impediments.. “Ri” Benefits
  • | ©2014, Cognizant56 Case Study of a Stage 3 (Ri) Team Results • A large enterprise project (56+ developers) run with distributed integrated Scrums was as productive as a small co-located Scrum team • 8X more productive than a parallel project performed with Waterfall, resulting in “…more functionality and higher quality.” • Characteristics • 2-week sprints, with a few use cases, but mostly user stories • Teams in Provo, Utah and St Petersburg, Russia, with a few key individuals working from Seattle, Denver, St Louis and Waterloo, Canada • Used Jira / Greenhopper ALM tool Best Practices • Daily scrum team meetings from multiple sites • Daily meetings of Product Owners • Automated builds from one central repository • No distinction between team members at different sites • Followed sound engineering practices constantly • Seamless integration of some XP practices, refactoring, continuous integration, limited pair programming on most complex technical components SirsiDynix 2005 – Distributed integrated Scrums that achieved a hyper-productive state
  • Thank you! Dan Fuller dan.fuller@cognizant.com May 21, 2014