This presentation shows an easier possible way for starting the aplication of maturity models (light), coming back to the original Crosby\'s idea. It presents some possible ways to apply LMM to Agile projects/organizations

1. VALOIR 2011
1° Workshop on Managing the Client Value
Creation Process in Agile Projects
Torre Canne (BA) – Italy, June 20 2011
Light Maturity Models (LMM) An Agile Application
Luigi Buglione, Ph.D.
Buglione
Process Improvement & Measurement Specialist
Industry Business Unit
Engineering.IT
www.eng.it

2. Engineering At a glance
_ The first Italian ICT player
_ more than 730 M/€ revenues Research and PA & HC Finance Industry TELCO Utilities
Development
_ 1000 clients
_ 6,300 IT specialists System Int. &
Consultancy
% 46 70 54 80 80
Outsourcing % 35 10 27 10
Software
% 19 20 19 10 20
ERP IT Security ECM
Plant Management
Managed Operations Broadband & Media
System
www.eng.it
www.eng.it

3. LMM & Agile Goals of the presentation
 G1. Introduce the ‘maturity’ issue in Agile context, observing its
own maturity level against other ‘domains’
 G2. Analyze the current AMMs structures and content
 G3. Propose a ‘Light Maturity Model’ (LMM) architecture and
rationale for applying it
 G4. Show some possible applications in an Agile context
3 VALOIR 2011 – Torre Canne (BA), June 20, 2011– © 2011 L.Buglione

4. LMM & Agile Agenda
• Introduction
– A bit of humour…
– Some initial questions
• Related Works
– Agile Maturity Models (AMM): some experiences
• Light Maturity Models (LMM)
LMM
– Requirements & Constraints (RC)
– Attention Points
• LMMs for Agile
– Main drivers for ‘old’ AMM
– Build your own AMM
• Conclusions & Next Steps
• Q&A
4 VALOIR 2011 – Torre Canne (BA), June 20, 2011– © 2011 L.Buglione

5. Introduction A bit of humour…
URL: http://www.enagility.com
5 VALOIR 2011 – Torre Canne (BA), June 20, 2011– © 2011 L.Buglione

6. Introduction Some initial questions...
Since Agile born to focus more on the software
primary processes, how to catch an agile maturity?
What is a proper ‘Agile Maturity Model’?
How to convince a SME/VSE to adopt a whatever
AMM instead of continuing only with ISO audits?
Could the same practices be scaled to a large
organization?
6 VALOIR 2011 – Torre Canne (BA), June 20, 2011– © 2011 L.Buglione

7. LMM & Agile Agenda
• Introduction
– A bit of humour…
– Some initial questions
• Related Works
– Agile Maturity Models (AMM): some experiences
• Light Maturity Models (LMM)
LMM
– Requirements & Constraints (RC)
– Attention Points
• LMMs for Agile
– Main drivers for ‘old’ AMM
– Build your own AMM
Conclusions & Next Steps
• Q&A
7 VALOIR 2011 – Torre Canne (BA), June 20, 2011– © 2011 L.Buglione

8. Related Works Agile Maturity Models (AMM)
AMM
Model Year ML Entity of Interest Repr. Level of
Depth
Agile Maturity Model 2003 5 (0-4) Org./Project Staged Low
(AMM) [9]
Agile Maturity Model [36] 2006 7 (-1/5) Org./Project (5 Staged Low
dimensions)
Agile Maturity Model [24] 2008 7 Project (9 dimensions) Staged Medium
Agile Maturity Model [37] 2008 6 (-1/3+) Org./Project (10 Staged Low
dimensions)
Agile Scaling Model 2009 3 Org./Project (8 scaling Staged Medium
(ASM) [5][6] (initially aka factors)
as APMM - Agile Process MM)
Agile Maturity Model 2010 5 (1-5) Org./Project Staged Low
(AMM) [7]
Different # of MLs All Staged
No High Depth
8 VALOIR 2011 – Torre Canne (BA), June 20, 2011– © 2011 L.Buglione

9. Related Works Agile Maturity Models (AMM)
AMM
9 VALOIR 2011 – Torre Canne (BA), June 20, 2011– © 2011 L.Buglione

10. Related Works Agile & CMMI
10 VALOIR 2011 – Torre Canne (BA), June 20, 2011– © 2011 L.Buglione

11. LMM & Agile Agenda
• Introduction
– A bit of humour…
– Some initial questions
• Related Works
– Agile Maturity Models (AMM): some experiences
• Light Maturity Models (LMM)
LMM
– Requirements & Constraints (RC)
– Attention Points
• LMMs for Agile
– Main drivers for ‘old’ AMM
– Build your own AMM
• Conclusions & Next Steps
• Q&A
11 VALOIR 2011 – Torre Canne (BA), June 20, 2011– © 2011 L.Buglione

12. Light Maturity Models Requirements & Constraints (RC)
• Q1: How could we achieve better business results adopting agile methods
and techniques and measure their level of adoption?
• Q2: Which could be an evolutionary path for a continual (agile) process
improvement initiative?
• RC1: Appraisal(s) needed but should be cheap, quick and sufficiently detailed
for writing effective improvement plans
• RC2: Appraisal method(s) should be simply to be understood and produce short
reports for management, showing in 1 slide what is going on and where to
intervene for improving results
• RC3: A clear definition of most relevant drivers for improvement should be
done and shared across the organization/team
• RC4: A series of ‘best practices’ for each of the selected drivers must be chosen
as basis for describing the ‘roadmap’ to be followed
12 VALOIR 2011 – Torre Canne (BA), June 20, 2011– © 2011 L.Buglione

13. Light Maturity Models RC1-2: Process Appraisal – “MM style”
Special cause
(GP.2.2 @ OT)
• Source www.sqi.gu.edu.au/AppraisalAssistant/indexFrameset.html
Source:
Common cause (GP.2.9 @
+PA)
13 VALOIR 2011 – Torre Canne (BA), June 20, 2011– © 2011 L.Buglione

14. Light Maturity Models RC1-3-4: Process Appraisal – Light Maturity
Models (LMM)
LMM




• Source: ISO/IEC 9004:2009, App.A
Source
14 VALOIR 2011 – Torre Canne (BA), June 20, 2011– © 2011 L.Buglione

15. Light Maturity Models Attention Points
• A1: Define the drivers (dimensions/scaling factors) in a clear,
non-ambiguous and measurable way
 V&V that definitions for drivers are commonly accepted and shared
 Apply GQM-like approach for deriving measures from informative goals
• A2: Link the drivers to 1+ preferred PRM practices
 In ISO models, drivers are ‘requirements’
 Create/use mappings with ‘full’ maturity & capability models (MCM)
 It will represent a bridge for moving from an early to a full MCM
• A3: Create an evolutionary, harmonic path toward higher
capability levels by each driver
 Validate the balancing of contents between to subsequent cells
 Create a constant and not too challenging path towards higher levels
EM3 (Energy Management Maturity Model) was a first adoption of such
LMM concept
15 VALOIR 2011 – Torre Canne (BA), June 20, 2011– © 2011 L.Buglione

16. LMM & Agile Agenda
• Introduction
– A bit of humour…
– Some initial questions
• Related Works
– Agile Maturity Models (AMM): some experiences
• Light Maturity Models (LMM)
LMM
– Requirements & Constraints (RC)
– Attention Points
• LMMs for Agile
– Main drivers for ‘old’ AMM
– Build your own AMM
• Conclusions & Next Steps
• Q&A
16 VALOIR 2011 – Torre Canne (BA), June 20, 2011– © 2011 L.Buglione

17. LMM for Agile Main drivers – ‘Old’ AMMs
AMM [36] Petit AMM [24] – Gujral et AMM [37] – Petit ASM/APMM [6][5] -
al. Ambler
Org./Project Project Org./Project Org./Project
(5 dimensions) (9 dimensions) (10 dimensions) (8 scaling factors)
Testing Testing Testing Team Size
Collective code Source Code Mgmt Requirements Geographical Distrib.
ownership
Collaboration Collective code Build Regulatory Compliance
ownership
Assurance/Governance Collaboration Shared Domain Complexity
Responsibility
Simplicity Responsiveness to Governance Org. Distribution
Business
Assurance/Governance Communication Tech. Complexity
Story Formation Config. Mgmt Org. Complexity
Design Simplicity Simplicity Enterprise Discipline
Build Process Assurance
Responsiveness
17 VALOIR 2011 – Torre Canne (BA), June 20, 2011– © 2011 L.Buglione

18. LMM for Agile Build your own AMM – An example (1)
A2. Link drivers to PRMs
Drivers ML1 ML2 ML3 ML4 ML5
Reactive Proactive Flexible Innovative Sustainable
Not organized Typical of a good QMS Effective and Agile Capability to realize Capable to sustain
customer-oriented improvements and improve its
based on learning own performance in
and innovation the long term
D1. Testing
D2. Collective code
ownership
D3. Collaboration
D4.
Assurance/Governance
D5. Simplicity
A3. Harmonic and regular
A1. Assign clear and ‘distance’ between levels
shared definitions
18 VALOIR 2011 – Torre Canne (BA), June 20, 2011– © 2011 L.Buglione

19. LMM for Agile Build your own AMM – An example (2)
The 12 principles from the ‘Agile Manifesto’
Drivers ML1 ML2 ML3 ML4 ML5
Reactive Proactive Flexible Innovative Sustainable
Not organized Typical of a good QMS Effective and Agile Capability to realize Capable to sustain
customer-oriented improvements and improve its
based on learning own performance in
and innovation the long term
1. Satisfy the customer
through early &
continuous delivery
2. Welcome changing
requirements, even late in
development
3. Deliver working
software frequently
4. Business people and
developers work together
daily
…
(add some quantitative measures
(know the cause-effect linked to PRMs for better scaling and
relationships among drivers) classifying amongst levels
19 VALOIR 2011 – Torre Canne (BA), June 20, 2011– © 2011 L.Buglione

20. LMM & Agile Agenda
• Introduction
– A bit of humour…
– Some initial questions
• Related Works
– Agile Maturity Models: some experiences
• Light Maturity Models (LMM)
LMM
– Requirements & Constraints (RC)
– Attention Points
• LMMs for Agile
– Main drivers for ‘old’ AMM
– Build your own AMM
• Conclusions & Next Steps
• Q&A
20 VALOIR 2011 – Torre Canne (BA), June 20, 2011– © 2011 L.Buglione

21. LMM & Agile Conclusions & Perspectives
• Maturity & Capability Models (MCM)
 MCM represent an evolutionary way to achieve goals, scaled by levels
 Two different represenations (staged; continuous)
 Origin in the ’70s (Philip Crosby and other organizational studies)  diffusion in the ’80s for ICT
• Something-else-agile and MCMs
 ‘Agile’ is one of the most used buzzwords during last 15 years, series of techniques and
methods
 At least to be classified in terms of ASD (Agile Sw Development) and APM (Agile Project Mgmt)
 Question: how to evaluate the level of adoption of agile practices within an organization?
 Several (early) tailorings of a Maturity Model for Agile (AMMs)
 CMMI & Agile: Love & Marriage?
 Process Appraisals and Light Maturity Models (LMMs)
 Question: which differences between ISO 19011 audit style vs the typical MCM style?
 Light Maturity Models (LMM) [grid-based] can represent a bridge between Audits and Appraisals
 Easier and faster also for SME/VSE
 Several possibilities for building your own AMM, according to your viewpoint on ‘Agile’
 To be linked possibly to a complete model and its PRM, finding also measures for a better
monitoring & control of those processes
 Some lessons learned
 Skill people on processes and in creating measures by a GQM-like approach
 Run RCA on a continual basis at all organizational levels
Simplicity is prerequisite for reliability
(Edsger Dijkstra, Mathematician)
21 VALOIR 2011 – Torre Canne (BA), June 20, 2011– © 2011 L.Buglione

22. LMM & Agile What is (should be) Agile?
22 VALOIR 2011 – Torre Canne (BA), June 20, 2011– © 2011 L.Buglione

23. LMM & Agile Q&A
Grazie per l’attenzione!
Thanks for your attention!
23 VALOIR 2011 – Torre Canne (BA), June 20, 2011– © 2011 L.Buglione

24. LMM & Agile Contacts
We care of your problems and we have in mind a solution
Luigi Buglione
Industry & Service Dept
Process Improvement & Measurement Specialist
Via R. Morandi 32 Tel. +39 - 06.8307.4472
00148 Roma Fax +39 - 06.8307.4200
Cell. +39 - 335.1214813
www.eng.it luigi.buglione@eng.it
24 VALOIR 2011 – Torre Canne (BA), June 20, 2011– © 2011 L.Buglione

25. Further readings… Misurare il software
Misurare il software
Quantità, qualità, standard e
miglioramento di processo nell’Information
& CommunicationTechnology
Franco Angeli, 2008 – 3a edizione
Collana: Informatica ed Organizzazioni
pp. 380 -Volume 724.20
ISBN 978-88-464-9271-5
Luigi Buglione
www.semq.eu/leng/booksms.htm
Part of copyrights are donated to
FISM (Fondazione Italiana Sclerosi Multipla)
25 VALOIR 2011 – Torre Canne (BA), June 20, 2011– © 2011 L.Buglione