scrummaster
responding
change
time-box
prioritize
acceptance
burn-down user stories
roles
servant leader team
inspect
collaboration planning
adoption
high value
shippable sprint self-organizing
Agile Software product owner
story points
quality
working software
Development adapt done
incremental xp
impediments
iterative daily stand-up
interactions
commitment manifesto scrum
backlog
estimating
retrospective
velocity release design
review
testing

rusty

rusty

rusty

rusty

stressed

WTF?
stressed

WTF?
stressed

WTF?
stressed

Name: Rusty’s Project
Date: 2/7/2008
COD: Methodology

Name: Rusty’s Project
Date: 2/7/2008
COD: Methodology

Name: Rusty’s Project
Date: 2/7/2008
COD: Methodology

Name: Rusty’s Project
Date: 2/7/2008
COD: Methodology
monster.com

35%
projects completed on-time, within
budget, or delivered on specification
The Standish Group, 2006 Chaos Report

31%
projects cancelled
The Standish Group, 2006 Chaos Report

59¢
software value on the dollar
The Standish Group, 2006 Chaos Report

64%
features rarely or ever used
The Standish Group, 2006 Chaos Report

opme
acklog
manifesto
design
testing

individuals
interactions
and
processes
and tools

working
software
comprehensive
documentation

customer
collaboration
contract
negotiation

responding
change
to
following
plan
a

Ag
uality
incremental
iterative
commitment

iterative
development
Target
System
Project
Check the Fit Itera1on 0 Itera1on 1 Itera1on 2 Itera1on 3 Itera1on n
Incep1on
Establish Business Discovery Set up Project
Incremental delivery in /me‐boxed 2 week itera/ons
Rela/onship Assessment Infrastructure

incremental
delivery
Itera1on
2 Weeks
Product Itera1on
Product
Backlog Backlog
Increment

view
lease
spective
timating
backlog
des
man
test

product
backlog

current
iteration
current
release
future
releases

scrumma
prioritize
user stories
servant leader
boration

conversation
card
confirmation

conversation
card
confirmation

card
As a
freq
Iw uent
ant t
flyer
o re
trip book !
so t a pa
hat
time I sa st!
book ve!
ing t
rips.
!

card
As a
freq
Iw uent
ant t
flyer
o re
trip book !
so t a pa
hat
time I sa st!
book ve!
ing t
rips.
!

conversation
card
confirmation

I WANT THE
TOAST TO POP
UP WHEN IT’S
DONE

THAT’S REALLY EXPENSIVE.
THE POPPING PART IS EASY
—THAT’S JUST A SPRING.
BUT KNOWING WHEN THE
TOAST IS DONE REQUIRES
AN OPTICAL SENSOR—NEW
TECHNOLOGY.

BUT WHAT
ABOUT ALL
THOSE OTHER
TOASTERS OUT
THERE?

OH, THEY USE A
TIMER. THEY DON’T
REALLY KNOW WHEN
THE TOAST IS DONE.
IT’S A KLUDGE.

OUR CUSTOMERS DON’T
WANT A SUPER-TOASTER.
THEY JUST WANT A
REGULAR TOASTER, WITH A
TIMER, LIKE EVERYONE ELSE.

OH, WELL
THAT WON’T
BE EXPENSIVE
AT ALL. COOL.
YEAH, COOL!

change
rioritize
acceptance
er stories
ervant leader team
ation plannin
high va
g

conversation
card
confirmation

confirmation n
s ca
lyer
ent f !
requ tript flyer!
nly f past uen ast!
O
am all
kro p
k freq
1. oo o
rebs a ebon f save!
io
A toler t t I
ec
ant s stha
ips.! past
wlow io !
I Al
p ts p oking mr tch
ta
2. it r
ptr
as
e rbomust dates!
m
tiw t ip for
e t
3. N p, excep
tri

acceptance
chan
team
er
planning
n high value

Product A Product B Product C
Release 1.0 Release 2.0 Release 3.0
Iteration 1 Iteration 2 Iteration 3 Iteration 4 Iteration 5 Iteration 6
Task 1 Task 2 Task 3 Task 4 Task 5
4 hours 6 hours 2 hours 8 hours 2 hours

Dev
and-up
ctions
release
locity
review

SIZE CALCULATION DURATION
VELOCITY = 10 20 ITERATIONS
200 UNITS

Effort
Complexity
Complexity Effort
Doubt
Story 1
Doubt
Effort
Complexity Story 3
Doubt
Story 2

M
Effort
Complexity
XL
Complexity Effort
Doubt
Story 1
Doubt
M
Effort
Complexi
Story 3
ty
Dou
bt
Story 2

5
Effort
Complexity
10
Complexity Effort
Doubt
Story 1
Doubt
5
Effort
Complexi
Story 3
ty
Dou
bt
Story 2

Impediments` daily stand-
e interactio
t velocity

40
35
Mean (Last 8) = 33
30
Mean (Worst 3) = 28
25
20
15
10
5
0
Itera/on Itera/on Itera/on Itera/on Itera/on Itera/on Itera/on Itera/on Itera/on
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

At our slowest velocity we’ll finish here (3X28)
At our average velocity we’ll finish here (3X33)

Will Have
The line of hope (3X28)
Might Have
The line of despair (3X33)
Won’t Have

Ag
uality
cremental
iterative
commitment

teamcapacity
team member capacity this itera1on
Rachel 46
Ronica 60
Ken 54
Mark 62
Total 222

storyone
Task Es1mate Owner
Code the UI 6 Ronica
Code the middle /er 8 Rachel
Create and automate 4 Mark
tests

“can we commit to this?”
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Rachel Ken Ronica Mark

storytwo
task es1mate owner
Code the UI 12 Ronica
Code the middle /er 5 Rachel
Create and automate 6 Mark
tests

“can we commit to this?”
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Rachel Ken Ronica Mark

…storynine
Task Es1mate Owner
Code the UI 8 Ronica
Code the middle /er 6 Rachel
Create and automate 3 Mark
tests

“can we commit to this?”
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Rachel Ken Ronica Mark

storyten
Task Es1mate Owner
Code the UI 8 Ronica
Code the middle /er 6 Rachel
Create and automate 3 Mark
tests

“can we commit to this?”
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Rachel Ken Ronica Mark

go!

analysis

analysis
design

design
analysis
code

design
analysis
code
test

design
analysis
code
test
document

ile Soft
adapt done
daily stand-up
ents
interactions

What did you
work on yesterday?
What are you
working on today?
Do you have any
impediments?

Softw
apt done
D
stand-up

done…
done.

analysis
design
coding
testing
document
user acceptance
pilot
live

analysis
design
coding
testing
document
user acceptance
pilot
live

analysis
design
coding
testing
document
user acceptance
pilot
live

analysis
design
coding
testing
document
user acceptance
pilot
live

c
adoption
shippable
ile So

potentially
shippable

potentially shippable
=
shippable

high quality
tested
complete
done

manifesto
estimating
backlog
retrospective
ease design
view
testing

inspect
adapt
and

time-b
respo
roles
spect
colla
ion

scrum
master

product
owner

team
the

Role Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday
Developer Planning/ Coding Coding/ Coding/ Coding/
Coding Defect Fixes Defect Fixes Defect Fixes
QA/Tester Planning/ Wri/ng UAT QA/Tes/ng QA/Tes/ng QA/Tes/ng
Wri/ng UAT
ScrumMaster Facilitate Impediment Impediment Impediment Impediment
Planning resolu/on resolu/on resolu/on resolu/on
Product Par/cipate in Stakeholder Stakeholder Stakeholder Stakeholder
Owner Planning feedback feedback feedback feedback

Role Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday
Developer Coding/ Coding/ Defect Fixes/ Defect Fixes/ Defect Fixes/
Defect Fixes Defect Fixes Design/Story Design/Story Review/
Development Development Retrospec/ve
QA/Tester QA/Tes/ng QA/Tes/ng QA/Tes/ng QA/Tes/ng/ Final UAT/
Accpetance Review/
Criteria Retrospec/ve
ScrumMaster Impediment Impediment Impediment Impediment Facilitate
resolu/on/ resolu/on/ resolu/on/ resolu/on/ Review/
Look ahead Refine stories Refine stories Acceptance Retrospec/ve
criteria
Product Look ahead/ Refine Refine Acceptance Final UAT/
Owner Acceptance stories/ stories/ criteria/ Par/cipate in
tes/ng Acceptance Acceptance Acceptance Review/
tes/ng tes/ng tes/ng Retrospec/ve

product owner
building the right code
versus
building the code right
the team

scrummaste
responding
time-box
change
prioritize
user stories
roles
servant leader
ect
collaboration
self-organizing

inspe
burn-
adoption
shippable
gile Soft

88%
increased productivity
Agile Methodologies: Survey Results, by Shine Technologies, 2003

93%
increased quality
Agile Methodologies: Survey Results, by Shine Technologies, 2003

83%
increased stakeholder satisfaction
Agile Methodologies: Survey Results, by Shine Technologies, 2003

49%
reduction in costs
Agile Methodologies: Survey Results, by Shine Technologies, 2003

100
80 50
9
60 10
40 4
6
50
50
20
25
0
CMMI 1 CMMI 5 SCRUM
WORK REWORK PROCESS
Sutherland, J., C. Jacobson, et al. (2007). Scrum and CMMI Level 5: A
Magic Po/on for Code Warriors! Agile 2007, Washington, D.C., IEEE.

time 100
market
to
Time to Market (Months)
. . . .
.
. .
. . . . .
. . . .
. . .
. . . .
10
Home Away
ects
. .
l Proj
ona
Tradi/ BMC
CNET
Moody’s
Accuro Healthcare
1
1
10
100
1000
User Stories, Code (KSLOC)
QSMA Slim Database Study, 2008

welcome to
mainstream
the
the world
is here
innovators pragmatists conservatives laggards

agile
adoption
73%
31%
GIS the world
Dr. Dobb’s Journal, Scott Ambler Agile Adoption Survey, 2008
GeoScrum Agile Adoption in GIS Survey, 2008

gis the
help
cross chasm
the world
is here
GIS
is here
innovators pragmatists conservatives laggards

scrummaster
responding
change
time-box
prioritize
acceptance
user stories
burn-down roles
servant leader team
inspect
collaboration planning
adoption
high value
self-organizing
shippable sprint product owner
chris spagnuolo story points
quality
working software
adapt done
incremental
rally software
xp
impediments
iterative daily stand-up
interactions
commitment manifesto scrum
backlog
release
velocity
estimating
retrospective
www.rallydev.com
review
testing