Roopa Nadkarni, profile picture
Uploaded byRoopa Nadkarni
PDF, PPTX787 views

Agile By The Numbers - Scott Ambler

This document summarizes the results of several surveys on agile software development practices. It finds that the most commonly used and effective agile practices include continuous integration, daily stand-up meetings, developer test-driven development, and iteration planning. The surveys also show that agile approaches have higher success rates than traditional approaches across criteria like functionality, quality, time, and budget. Additionally, the document discusses challenges with agility at scale, adoption rates of agile, practices around estimation and project management, and the use of modeling and documentation in agile projects.

Embed presentation

Download as PDF, PPTX
Agile Software Development by the Numbers: What’s Really Going On Out There Scott W. Ambler Chief Methodologist/Agile scott_ambler@ca.ibm.com
Warning! • You’ll be presented with a lot of information very quickly
Agenda • The Surveys • Agile Practices • Agility@Scale • Adoption and Success Rates • Management • Governance • Development and Quality • Modeling and Documentation • Communication • Parting Thoughts
Agenda • The Surveys • Agile Practices • Agility@Scale • Adoption and Success Rates • Management • Governance • Development and Quality • Modeling and Documentation • Communication • Parting Thoughts
The Surveys • All survey data, original questions, and summary slide decks can be downloaded from www.ambysoft.com/surveys/ – If you can’t look at the original questions and analyze the data yourself, how can you trust the survey results? • Some surveys were done via Dr. Dobb’s Journal (DDJ), a community with a wide range of readers, not just Agilists • Some surveys, the Ambysoft ones, focused on just the agile community • The source survey for each chart is indicated using graphics such as: DDJ 2009 State of the IT Union Ambysoft 2009 Agile Practices Warning: You’ll be presented with a lot of information really quickly!
Agenda • The Surveys • Agile Practices • Agility@Scale • Adoption and Success Rates • Management • Governance • Development and Quality • Modeling and Documentation • Communication • Parting Thoughts
Most Effective Practices: Top 10 (out of 30) Continuous Integration 65% Daily Stand Up Meeting 47% Developer TDD 47% Iteration Planning 44% Code Refactoring 43% Retrospectives 39% Pair Programming 36% Active Stakeholder Participation 35% Potentially Shippable Software 28% Burndown Tracking 26% Ambysoft 2009 Agile Practices
Practices Easiest to Learn: Top 10 (out of 30) Daily Stand Up Meeting 70% Continuous Integration 38% Retrospectives 35% Iteration Demo 32% Iteration Planning 31% Burndown Tracking 27% Pair Programming 25% Release Planning 21% Product Backlog 21% Code Refactoring 21% Ambysoft 2009 Agile Practices
Practices Most Difficult to Learn : Top 10 (out of 30) Developer TDD 37% Aceptance TDD 30% Pair Programming 28% Initial Estimate and Schedule 26% Active Stakeholder Participation 24% Database Refactoring 22% Potentially Shippable Software 20% Executable Specifications 19% Release Planning 18% Continuous Integration 18% Ambysoft 2009 Agile Practices
Practices Tried and Abandoned : Top 8 (out of 30) Pair Programming 24% Burndown Tracking 21% Potentially Shippable Software 17% Daily Stand Up Meetings 14% Executable Specifications 14% Initial Estimate and Schedule 14% Active Stakeholder Participation 11% Retrospectives 10% Ambysoft 2009 Agile Practices
Agenda • The Surveys • Agile Practices • Agility@Scale • Adoption and Success Rates • Management • Governance • Development and Quality • Modeling and Documentation • Communication • Parting Thoughts
What is Agility@Scale? Team size Compliance requirement Under 10 1000’s of Critical, developers developers Low risk Audited Geographical distribution Organization distribution (outsourcing, partnerships) Co-located Global Collaborative Contractual Disciplined Enterprise discipline Agile Technical complexity Project Enterprise Delivery Heterogeneous, focus focus Homogenous Legacy Organizational complexity Flexible Rigid
Largest Team Size Attempted vs. Successful 200+ 101 to 200 51-100 21 to 50 11 to 20 6 to 10 1 to 5 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 Attempt Success DDJ 2008 Agile Adoption
Does your team have to comply to industry regulations? Don't Know 7% Yes 33% No 60% Ambysoft 2009 Agile Practices
Does your team follow a CMMI compliant agile process? Don't Know Yes 13% 9% No 78% Ambysoft 2009 Agile Practices
How distributed were the IT people on your team? Don't Know, 1% Some Very Distant, 29% Co-Located, 42% Within Driving Distance, 13% Same Building, 17% Ambysoft 2009 Agile Practices
Agenda • The Surveys • Agile Practices • Agility@Scale • Adoption and Success Rates • Management • Governance • Development and Quality • Modeling and Documentation • Communication • Parting Thoughts
What percentage of your development teams have adopted agile techniques? 91-100% 4% • 76% of organizations have adopted agile techniques 81-90% 2% • On average, 44% of project 71-80% 11% teams in those are now doing agile 61-70% 1% – In small orgs of 50 or less IT, it’s 53% 51-60% 4% – In larger orgs, it’s 38% 41-50% 8% 31-40% 7% 21-30% 9% 11-20% 18% 1-10% 14% None 24% DDJ State of the IT Union July 2009
Number of Agile Projects Run 51+ 6% 21 to 50 5% 11 to 20 8% 6 to 10 19% 1 to 5 45% Pilot 18% DDJ 2008 Agile Adoption
Criteria to determine if a team is agile Disciplined agile teams: Yes, commonly Produce working software on a regular applied 19% basis. No, Don't See Do continuous regression testing, and Value 11% better yet take a Test-Driven No, Wish We Had Development (TDD) approach. It 26% Work closely with their stakeholders, Planning to ideally on a daily basis. Define 17% Are self-organizing, and disciplined teams work within an appropriate No Agile Projects 23% governance framework. Regularly reflect, and measure, on Don't Know 4% how they work together and then act to improve on their findings in a timely manner. Ambysoft 2009 Governance
Why Agile? Because it Works! DDJ 2008 Agile Adoption
Project success rates 4.9 Iterative Quality 5.0 2.3 0.4 6.0 Functionality 5.6 Agile 1.8 2.7 3.9 Money 3.0 Traditional 0.2 0.8 Agile Iterative 4.4 4.0 Traditional Time 0.8 Ad-Hoc Ad-Hoc 0.8 Bottom Line: Agile teams produce higher quality work, are quicker to deliver, are more likely to deliver the right functionality, and more likely to provide greater ROI than traditional teams DDJ 2008 Project Success
Agile project success rates: the effect of distribution 70% 79% Average Co-Located Near Located 73% Far Located 55% DDJ 2008 Project Success
Agenda • The Surveys • Agile Practices • Agility@Scale • Adoption and Success Rates • Management • Governance • Development and Quality • Modeling and Documentation • Communication • Parting Thoughts
An organization’s typical approach to initial estimates on software development projects Must be "exact" 12% • On average, estimates need to be within a +/- Within 5% range 2% 11% range Within 10% 13% Within 15% 7% Within 20% 16% Within 25% 14% Within 50% 16% No initial estimates 21% DDJ State of the IT Union July 2009
On average, the actual costs of software development projects compared to estimates Within 5% 2% • On average, actuals came in within a +/- 19% Within 10% 7% range Within 15% 5% Within 20% 10% Within 25% 17% Within 50% 14% Within 75% 4% More than 75% 4% No tracking against estimates 39% DDJ State of the IT Union July 2009
Approach to Initial Estimation 9% No initial estimate at all 7% High-level estimate based on traditional estimation technique 27% High-level estimate based on agile estimation technique 38% High-level estimate based on reasonable guess of experienced person(s) 4% Detailed estimate based on traditional estimation technique 6% Detailed estimate based on agile estimation technique 7% Detailed estimate based on reasonable guess 3% Don’t know Ambysoft 2009 Agile Project Initiation: Interim Results
Strategies which project teams use to stay out of trouble or when in trouble to help get them out of it • “Questionable” strategies: – 18% pad the budget – 63% de-scope towards the end of the project to meet deadline – 34% ask for extra funds to complete the projects – 72% extend the schedule to deliver promised scope – 39% avoid scope creep wherever possible via a “change control/management” process – 10% change the original estimate to reflect the actuals – 18% change the original schedule to reflect the actuals • Ethical strategies: – 12% take a “stage gate” approach to funding – 13% have a flexible budget from the beginning of the project – 26% have a flexible schedule from the beginning of the project – 32% have flexible scope from the beginning of the project DDJ State of the IT Union July 2009
How long did it take your project team to get started? (Average: 3.8 weeks) <1 Week 8% 1 Week 10% 2 Weeks 15% 3 Weeks 13% 4 Weeks 18% 5-6 Weeks 10% 7-8 Weeks 3% > 8 Weeks 10% Don't Know 12% Ambysoft 2009 Agile Project Initiation: Interim Results
Justifying Agile Projects Show Technical Feasibility 60% Show Stakeholder Concurrence 59% Estimate ROI 34% Show Operational Feasibility 29% Considered Commercial Packages 17% Considered Offshoring 11% Estimate NPV 7% Ambysoft 2009 Agile Project Initiation: Interim Results
Length of Iterations (% respondents) 82% have iterations between 1 and 4 weeks in length No Iterations 5.6 > 8 Weeks 1.4 7-8 Weeks 1.7 5-6 Weeks 7.2 4 Weeks 22.8 3 Weeks 16.7 2 Weeks 32.8 1 Week 9.2 < 1 Week 3.1 DDJ 2008 Agile Adoption
Agenda • The Surveys • Agile Practices • Agility@Scale • Adoption and Success Rates • Management • Governance • Development and Quality • Modeling and Documentation • Communication • Parting Thoughts
How would you rate your IT governance program? Too early to tell 6% 8% Generally helps 36% Neither helpful nor 19% harmful Generally harmful Don't Know 11% 20% No IT governance Program DDJ State of the IT Union July 2009
Are rights and responsibilities (R&R) defined for various groups within your organization? Defined for Development Teams 56% Defined for Operations and 37% Support Defined for Stakeholders 35% Undefined, but Part of Culture 15% Undefined, and we Need Them 21% Undefined, Don't Need Them 2% Ambysoft 2009 Governance
Do your project teams collect metrics to enable project monitoring by senior management? No 26% Yes, majority 51% manual Yes, majority 19% automated Don't Know 4% Ambysoft 2009 Governance
Agenda • The Surveys • Agile Practices • Agility@Scale • Adoption and Success Rates • Management • Governance • Development and Quality • Modeling and Documentation • Communication • Parting Thoughts
Development Practices • Coding Standards (2.30) • Collective Code Ownership (1.97) • Continuous integration (1.94) • Database standards (1.86) • UI standards (1.65) • Pair programming (-1.34) Ambysoft 2008 Practices and Principles
Ambysoft 2008 Test Driven Development
Quality Practices • Code Refactoring (1.79) • UI Testing (1.54) • Automated Developer Testing (1.08) • TDD (-0.08) • UI Refactoring (-0.22) • Database refactoring (-0.31) • Automated Acceptance Testing (-0.87) • Database regression testing (-1.03) • Executable Specs (-1.43) Ambysoft 2008 Practices and Principles
Which organizational conventions/guidelines do development teams conform to? Coding 71% Security 53% Data 48% User Interface 41% Ambysoft 2009 Governance
Agenda • The Surveys • Agile Practices • Agility@Scale • Adoption and Success Rates • Management • Governance • Development and Quality • Modeling and Documentation • Communication • Parting Thoughts
Initial Modeling • 93% of respondents indicated that their team did some sort of up-front initial requirements modeling. • 90% of respondents indicated that their team did some sort of up-front initial architecture modeling. Ambysoft 2009 Project Initiation: Interim Results
Primary Approach to Modeling No Modeling Ad-Hoc Sketch to Think and Communicate Traditional Sketch and Capture Key Diagrams SBMT for Docs Iterative SBMT to Generate Code Agile SBMT for Full Trip Engineering 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Ambysoft 2008 Test Driven Development
Modeling vs TDD: Primary Strategy for Requirements Specification Is/Was (%) High-Level Diagrams Detailed Diagrams Ad-Hoc Traditional Iterative Detailed Docs Agile Acceptance Tests 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 DDJ 2008 Modeling and Documentation
Ambysoft 2008 Test Driven Development
Modeling vs TDD: Primary Strategy for Arch/Design Specification Is/Was (%) High-Level Diagrams Detailed Diagrams Ad-Hoc Traditional Iterative Detailed Docs Agile Acceptance Tests 0 20 40 60 80 DDJ 2008 Modeling and Documentation
Did you need to produce a vision document (or similar) as part of project initiation? Don't Know 7% No Yes 40% 53% Ambysoft 2009 Project Initiation: Interim Results
Percentage of Teams Creating Deliverable Documentation Ad-Hoc Traditional User manual Training material System Overview doc Iterative Operations doc Agile 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% DDJ 2008 Modeling and Documentation
Agenda • The Surveys • Agile Practices • Agility@Scale • Adoption and Success Rates • Management • Governance • Development and Quality • Modeling and Documentation • Communication • Parting Thoughts
Effectiveness of Communication Strategies
Effectiveness of Communication Strategies (bigger the number the better) Within Team With Stakeholders Face to face (F2F) 4.25 4.06 F2F at Whiteboard 4.24 3.46 Overview diagrams 2.54 1.89 Online chat 2.10 0.15 Overview documentation 1.84 1.86 Teleconference calls 1.42 1.51 Videoconferencing 1.34 1.62 Email 1.08 1.32 Detailed Documentation -0.34 0.16 Ambysoft 2008 Practices and Principles
Agenda • The Surveys • Agile Practices • Agility@Scale • Adoption and Success Rates • Management • Governance • Development and Quality • Modeling and Documentation • Communication • Parting Thoughts
Question the Rhetoric • There appears to be a difference between what people say they are doing and what they are doing • Many of the concerns that the traditional community has regarding agile don’t appear to hold true • There are many unfounded beliefs in both the traditional and the agile communities • In the end, you need to identify what works well for you Every organization is different
Why IBM? • Our integrated tooling based on the Jazz platform enables disciplined agile software development • Our Measured Capability Improvement Framework (MCIF) service offering helps organizations to successfully improve their IT practices in a sustained manner • We are one of the largest agile adoption programs in the world • We understand the enterprise-level issues that you face • We scale from pilot project consulting to full-scale agile adoption • Our Accelerated Solutions Delivery (ASD) practice has years of experience delivering agile projects at scale
DDJ 2006 Agile Adoption • Used Dr. Dobb’s Journal and Software Development mailing lists • 4232 Respondents • March 2006
DDJ 2006 Data Quality • Sent out to ~28,000 people on DDJ mailing list • September 2006 • 1137 respondents: – 51% were developers, 24% were in management – 37% had 10-20 years IT experience, 34% had 20+ years – 78% worked in commercial firms – >98% from North America
DDJ 2007 Agile Adoption • March 2007 • Advertised in Editor’s blog on www.ddj.com • 781 respondents: – 52% were developers, 22% were in management – 40% had 10-20 years IT experience, 33% had 20+ years – 33% worked in orgs of 1000+ people – 85% worked in commercial firms
DDJ 2007 Project Success • August 2007 • Email sent to DDJ mailing list • 586 respondents – 54% were developers/modelers, 30% were in management – 73% had 10+ years in IT – 13% worked in orgs of 1000+ IT people – 84% worked in commercial firms – 69% North American, 18% European • Overall goal was to explore how IT professionals define project success.
DDJ 2008 Process Framework • January 2008 • Email sent to DDJ mailing list and posting in Editor’s blog • 339 respondents – 40% were developers, 20% were in management, 22% architects – 78% had 10+ years in IT – 17% worked in orgs of 1000+ IT people • Overall goal was to explore adoption and success rates of various process frameworks such as CMMI, COBIT, ITIL, …
DDJ 2008 Agile Adoption • February 2008 • Message sent out to DDJ mailing list • 642 respondents: – 54.8% were developers, 29.4% were in management – 41.6% had 10-20 years IT experience, 37.2% had 20+ years – 37.7% worked in orgs of 1000+ people – 71% worked in North America, 17% in Europe, 4.5% in Asia
DDJ 2008 Modeling and Documentation • July 2008 • Message sent out to DDJ mailing list and advertised on www.ddj.com • 279 respondents: – 54.8% were developers, 25.4% were in management – 33.3% had 10-20 years IT experience, 41.6% had 20+ years – 41.7% worked in orgs of 1000+ people – 61.5% worked in North America, 24.5% in Europe, 5.4% in Asia
Ambysoft 2008 Practices and Principles • July 2008 • Message sent out to several agile Yahoo groups mailing lists (extremeprogramming, agilemodeling, agiledatabases, scrumdevelopment, testdrivendevelopment) • 337 respondents: – 36.9% were developers, 36.9% were in management – 42% had 10-20 years IT experience, 17.3% had 21+ years – 31.3% worked in orgs of 1000+ people – 57.3% worked in North America, 22.7% in Europe, 7.2% in Asia
Ambysoft 2008 Test Driven Development • October 2008 • Email sent to testdrivendevelopment@yahoogroups.com and extremeprogramming@yahoogroups.com mailing lists • 121 respondents – 74% were developers/modelers, 15% were in management – 52% had 10+ years in IT – 22% worked in orgs of 1000+ people
DDJ 2008 Project Success • December 2008 • Email sent to DDJ mailing list • 279 respondents – 59% were developers/modelers, 25% were in management – 80% had 10+ years in IT – 16% worked in orgs of 1000+ IT people
Ambysoft 2009 Agile Certification • April 2009 • Email sent to several agile mailing lists • 102 respondents
Ambysoft 2009 Governance • May 2009 • Email sent to the Ambysoft announcements list (ambysoft@yahoogroups.com) which had 895 subscribers at the time • 62 respondents, 53 completed the survey • 41% were developers/modelers/data professionals, 29% were in management • 74% had 10+ years in IT • 27% worked in orgs of 500+ IT people • 52% North American, 27% European • Overall goals were to explore what people thought about IT governance and to find out what was happening in various orgs
Ambysoft 2009 Project Initiation: Interim Results • Warning! Survey still running, so reported results are interim! • August 2008 • Message sent out to several agile Yahoo groups mailing lists (extremeprogramming, agilemodeling, agiledatabases, scrumdevelopment, testdrivendevelopment) • Data, summary, and slides downloadable from www.ambysoft.com/surveys/ • 141 respondents (as of Aug 6): – 21% were developers, 44% were in management or leadership roles – 38% had 10-20 years IT experience, 28% had 21+ years – 57% worked in North America, 28% in Europe, 9% in Asia Pacific – 27% had 3-4 years of agile experience, 27% had 5 or more years
Ambysoft 2009 Agile Practices • July 2009 • Message sent out to several agile Yahoo groups mailing lists (extremeprogramming, agilemodeling, agiledatabases, scrumdevelopment, testdrivendevelopment) • Data, summary, and slides downloadable from www.ambysoft.com/surveys/ • 123 respondents: – 31% were developers, 48% were in management or leadership roles – 43% had 10-20 years IT experience, 29% had 21+ years – 58% worked in North America, 21% in Europe, 12% in Asia Pacific – 27% had 3-4 years of agile experience, 39% had 5 or more years
DDJ State of the IT Union July 2009 • July 2009 • Email sent to DDJ mailing list • Data, summary, and slides downloadable from www.ambysoft.com/surveys/ • 125 respondents – 50% were developers, 19% were in management – 70% had 10+ years in IT – 11% worked in orgs of 1000+ IT people – 93% worked in commercial firms – 58% North American, 26% European, 10% Asia Pacific

More Related Content

PDF
Research on Impediments to Product Development Flow
byKen Power
 
PDF
A 7 year lean journey
byOperae Partners
 
PDF
Effective Product Development Using Agile Methods
byNaresh Jain
 
PDF
Lean Startup: It's Not Just Technology, Lives are at Stake
byKen Power
 
PDF
Identifying and Managing Waste in Complex Product Development Environments
byKen Power
 
PPTX
Lean Principles for Agile Teams
byElizabeth Woodward
 
PDF
Value Stream Manager concept applied to Software Product Development
byKen Power
 
PDF
Empirical Evidence Of Agile Methods
byGrigori Melnik
 
Research on Impediments to Product Development Flow
byKen Power
 
A 7 year lean journey
byOperae Partners
 
Effective Product Development Using Agile Methods
byNaresh Jain
 
Lean Startup: It's Not Just Technology, Lives are at Stake
byKen Power
 
Identifying and Managing Waste in Complex Product Development Environments
byKen Power
 
Lean Principles for Agile Teams
byElizabeth Woodward
 
Value Stream Manager concept applied to Software Product Development
byKen Power
 
Empirical Evidence Of Agile Methods
byGrigori Melnik
 

What's hot

PDF
Identifying and managing waste in software product development
byKen Power
 
PPTX
Measurement Mandate Corp Univ Summit May 2007
byChristine Troianello
 
PDF
Forrester Agile
byRam Srivastava
 
PDF
Lean Principles
byaboobier
 
PDF
Lean IT strategy, lean measurement and organizational design
byOperae Partners
 
PDF
Lean at Cisco: Lessons Learned from Lean Product Development and Lean Startup
byKen Power
 
PDF
Business Value of Lean Thinking
byDavid Rico
 
PDF
The Lean Software Factory by Yves Caseau
byInstitut Lean France
 
PDF
Understanding the Business Case for Agile
bySeapine Software
 
PDF
Lean & Agile Methods & Frameworks: Perspectives on Kanban for IT
byDavid Rico
 
PDF
Lean with distributed teams
byOperae Partners
 
PPTX
Emulex and Enterprise Strategy Group Present Why I/O is Strategic for Virtual...
byEmulex Corporation
 
PDF
Lean & Agile Thinking Principles for Leaders
byDavid Rico
 
PDF
"The myth of Certainty - Is implementation a naughty word?" by Steve Bell
byOperae Partners
 
KEY
Empowering Agile Teams
byAgileDad
 
PDF
Scaled Agile Framework (SAFe) 4.5 Tutorial ...
byDavid Rico
 
PPS
A story of lean IT transformation by Jean Cunningham - European Lean IT Summi...
byInstitut Lean France
 
PDF
Portfolio Management and Organization Flow
byKen Power
 
PPT
Executive Presentation on Agile Project Management by Boardroom Metrics Inc.
byBoardroom Metrics
 
PDF
"Our approach to Kaizen" by J Prochazka and M Chmelar
byOperae Partners
 
Identifying and managing waste in software product development
byKen Power
 
Measurement Mandate Corp Univ Summit May 2007
byChristine Troianello
 
Forrester Agile
byRam Srivastava
 
Lean Principles
byaboobier
 
Lean IT strategy, lean measurement and organizational design
byOperae Partners
 
Lean at Cisco: Lessons Learned from Lean Product Development and Lean Startup
byKen Power
 
Business Value of Lean Thinking
byDavid Rico
 
The Lean Software Factory by Yves Caseau
byInstitut Lean France
 
Understanding the Business Case for Agile
bySeapine Software
 
Lean & Agile Methods & Frameworks: Perspectives on Kanban for IT
byDavid Rico
 
Lean with distributed teams
byOperae Partners
 
Emulex and Enterprise Strategy Group Present Why I/O is Strategic for Virtual...
byEmulex Corporation
 
Lean & Agile Thinking Principles for Leaders
byDavid Rico
 
"The myth of Certainty - Is implementation a naughty word?" by Steve Bell
byOperae Partners
 
Empowering Agile Teams
byAgileDad
 
Scaled Agile Framework (SAFe) 4.5 Tutorial ...
byDavid Rico
 
A story of lean IT transformation by Jean Cunningham - European Lean IT Summi...
byInstitut Lean France
 
Portfolio Management and Organization Flow
byKen Power
 
Executive Presentation on Agile Project Management by Boardroom Metrics Inc.
byBoardroom Metrics
 
"Our approach to Kaizen" by J Prochazka and M Chmelar
byOperae Partners
 

Similar to Agile By The Numbers - Scott Ambler

PDF
Intro Of Agile
bySam Hwang
 
PPTX
Agile mindset
byMohammed Al Assal
 
PPTX
Agile marries itil
byMats Janemalm
 
PDF
PMI Ireland Annual Conference 2012 - Agile First Steps
byColm O'hEocha
 
PPTX
Agile Development Product Delivery For Successful Organizations
byMarc Crudgington, MBA
 
PDF
Rally Fream Work
byvivek jog
 
PDF
The BA role in Agile Development
byAgileee
 
PPTX
Introduction to Agile
byRichard Cheng
 
PDF
Introduction to Lean, Agile, Scrum, & XP
bySi Alhir (Sinan Si Alhir)
 
PDF
Introduction to Agile by David Draper
byValtech UK
 
PDF
Why Agile?
byDaniel van den Hoven
 
PPTX
Agile
byJeff Bollinger
 
PDF
From Waterfall to Agile - from predictive to adaptive methods
byBjörn Jónsson
 
PDF
Agile practice-2012
byVinay H G
 
PPTX
An Introduction to Agile - Prashant Pund, AgileSoft.
byPune OpenCoffee Club
 
PPTX
Transforming your sw development to agile
byAnu Khendry,ACC,SAFe Aglst, PMI-ACP,CSPO,PMP
 
PDF
Lean & agile 101 for Astute Entrepreneurs
byClaudio Perrone
 
PDF
Agile- To Infinity and Beyond
byInnoTech
 
PDF
Mastering scrum
byGeert Theys
 
PDF
Scaling Agile Across the Enterprise
byArmond Mehrabian
 
Intro Of Agile
bySam Hwang
 
Agile mindset
byMohammed Al Assal
 
Agile marries itil
byMats Janemalm
 
PMI Ireland Annual Conference 2012 - Agile First Steps
byColm O'hEocha
 
Agile Development Product Delivery For Successful Organizations
byMarc Crudgington, MBA
 
Rally Fream Work
byvivek jog
 
The BA role in Agile Development
byAgileee
 
Introduction to Agile
byRichard Cheng
 
Introduction to Lean, Agile, Scrum, & XP
bySi Alhir (Sinan Si Alhir)
 
Introduction to Agile by David Draper
byValtech UK
 
Why Agile?
byDaniel van den Hoven
 
Agile
byJeff Bollinger
 
From Waterfall to Agile - from predictive to adaptive methods
byBjörn Jónsson
 
Agile practice-2012
byVinay H G
 
An Introduction to Agile - Prashant Pund, AgileSoft.
byPune OpenCoffee Club
 
Transforming your sw development to agile
byAnu Khendry,ACC,SAFe Aglst, PMI-ACP,CSPO,PMP
 
Lean & agile 101 for Astute Entrepreneurs
byClaudio Perrone
 
Agile- To Infinity and Beyond
byInnoTech
 
Mastering scrum
byGeert Theys
 
Scaling Agile Across the Enterprise
byArmond Mehrabian
 

More from Roopa Nadkarni

PDF
Agile - Monojit basu
byRoopa Nadkarni
 
PDF
New integrations for synergy and change - Sean Innes
byRoopa Nadkarni
 
PDF
Best practices for effective doors implementation-Ashwini Patil
byRoopa Nadkarni
 
PDF
Agile - Monojit Basu
byRoopa Nadkarni
 
PDF
Accelerated test case - Anish bhanu
byRoopa Nadkarni
 
PDF
web 2. 0 performance testing - Dave chadwick
byRoopa Nadkarni
 
PDF
Solving the enterprise security challenge - Derek holt
byRoopa Nadkarni
 
PDF
RTF - Prasad bhatt
byRoopa Nadkarni
 
PDF
RQM in scrum agile testing - Raj kumar
byRoopa Nadkarni
 
PDF
Req Pro - Andreas gschwind
byRoopa Nadkarni
 
PDF
RFT - Ashish Mathur
byRoopa Nadkarni
 
PDF
Extending Rhapsody -Rick boldt
byRoopa Nadkarni
 
PDF
EM overview- - Hayden lindsey
byRoopa Nadkarni
 
PDF
Application security vision - John b
byRoopa Nadkarni
 
PDF
Smarter Products For A Smarter PLanet - Neeraj Chandra
byRoopa Nadkarni
 
PDF
Real Insights Real Results - Steve Robinson
byRoopa Nadkarni
 
PDF
Overcoming Contradictions - Mike O Rourke
byRoopa Nadkarni
 
PDF
Opportunities In Challenging Times - Steve Robinson
byRoopa Nadkarni
 
PDF
How To Make It Real - Hayden Lindsey
byRoopa Nadkarni
 
PDF
Achieving Agility At Scale - Martin Nally
byRoopa Nadkarni
 
Agile - Monojit basu
byRoopa Nadkarni
 
New integrations for synergy and change - Sean Innes
byRoopa Nadkarni
 
Best practices for effective doors implementation-Ashwini Patil
byRoopa Nadkarni
 
Agile - Monojit Basu
byRoopa Nadkarni
 
Accelerated test case - Anish bhanu
byRoopa Nadkarni
 
web 2. 0 performance testing - Dave chadwick
byRoopa Nadkarni
 
Solving the enterprise security challenge - Derek holt
byRoopa Nadkarni
 
RTF - Prasad bhatt
byRoopa Nadkarni
 
RQM in scrum agile testing - Raj kumar
byRoopa Nadkarni
 
Req Pro - Andreas gschwind
byRoopa Nadkarni
 
RFT - Ashish Mathur
byRoopa Nadkarni
 
Extending Rhapsody -Rick boldt
byRoopa Nadkarni
 
EM overview- - Hayden lindsey
byRoopa Nadkarni
 
Application security vision - John b
byRoopa Nadkarni
 
Smarter Products For A Smarter PLanet - Neeraj Chandra
byRoopa Nadkarni
 
Real Insights Real Results - Steve Robinson
byRoopa Nadkarni
 
Overcoming Contradictions - Mike O Rourke
byRoopa Nadkarni
 
Opportunities In Challenging Times - Steve Robinson
byRoopa Nadkarni
 
How To Make It Real - Hayden Lindsey
byRoopa Nadkarni
 
Achieving Agility At Scale - Martin Nally
byRoopa Nadkarni
 

Recently uploaded

PDF
8 LLM Surveys https://tinyurl.com/bdz8e6fp
byBob Marcus
 
PDF
Generative AI in UiPath: Mastering the Generative Extractor for Intelligent D...
byDianaGray10
 
PDF
Decoding the DNA: The Digital Networks Act, the Open Internet, and IP interco...
byCSUC - Consorci de Serveis Universitaris de Catalunya
 
PDF
eResource Scheduler Enterprise Resource Management and Scheduling Software.pdf
byeResource Scheduler
 
PDF
API206-S: Transforming Supply Chains with Amazon Bedrock AgentCore - AWS re:I...
byChris Bingham
 
PDF
Unser Jahresrückblick – MarvelClient in 2025
bypanagenda
 
PDF
The year in review - MarvelClient in 2025
bypanagenda
 
PDF
Top Cybersecurity Threats 2025 Guide by Sureshdas
byPrintersassist
 
PPTX
Ethics in AI - Artificial Intelligence Fundamentals.pptx
byemenyiblessing
 
PDF
Igniting the Future: Copilot trends, agentic transformation and product roadm...
byUni Systems S.M.S.A.
 
PPTX
Basics of Identity Access Management In mordern Infrastructure
byPrinceXavier18
 
PDF
December Patch Tuesday
byIvanti
 
PDF
Recursive Self Improvement vs Continuous Learning
byBob Marcus
 
PDF
ElyriaSoftware — Powering the Future with Blockchain Innovation
byElyria Software
 
PDF
Greetings All Students Update 3 by Mia Corp
by©LDMMIA, ©Reiki Yoga
 
PDF
AI and Computer Architecture: 200 Years Together
byDmitry Zinoviev
 
PDF
Usage Control for Process Discovery through a Trusted Execution Environment
byValerioGoretti
 
PPTX
Combining Induction and Transduction for Abstract Reasoning.pptx
byallen578468
 
PDF
Vibe Coding vs. Spec-Driven Development [Free Meetup]
byHaim Michael
 
PPTX
The Landscape of Computer Software Development Companies
byYash Singh
 
8 LLM Surveys https://tinyurl.com/bdz8e6fp
byBob Marcus
 
Generative AI in UiPath: Mastering the Generative Extractor for Intelligent D...
byDianaGray10
 
Decoding the DNA: The Digital Networks Act, the Open Internet, and IP interco...
byCSUC - Consorci de Serveis Universitaris de Catalunya
 
eResource Scheduler Enterprise Resource Management and Scheduling Software.pdf
byeResource Scheduler
 
API206-S: Transforming Supply Chains with Amazon Bedrock AgentCore - AWS re:I...
byChris Bingham
 
Unser Jahresrückblick – MarvelClient in 2025
bypanagenda
 
The year in review - MarvelClient in 2025
bypanagenda
 
Top Cybersecurity Threats 2025 Guide by Sureshdas
byPrintersassist
 
Ethics in AI - Artificial Intelligence Fundamentals.pptx
byemenyiblessing
 
Igniting the Future: Copilot trends, agentic transformation and product roadm...
byUni Systems S.M.S.A.
 
Basics of Identity Access Management In mordern Infrastructure
byPrinceXavier18
 
December Patch Tuesday
byIvanti
 
Recursive Self Improvement vs Continuous Learning
byBob Marcus
 
ElyriaSoftware — Powering the Future with Blockchain Innovation
byElyria Software
 
Greetings All Students Update 3 by Mia Corp
by©LDMMIA, ©Reiki Yoga
 
AI and Computer Architecture: 200 Years Together
byDmitry Zinoviev
 
Usage Control for Process Discovery through a Trusted Execution Environment
byValerioGoretti
 
Combining Induction and Transduction for Abstract Reasoning.pptx
byallen578468
 
Vibe Coding vs. Spec-Driven Development [Free Meetup]
byHaim Michael
 
The Landscape of Computer Software Development Companies
byYash Singh
 

Agile By The Numbers - Scott Ambler

  • 1.
    Agile Software Developmentby the Numbers: What’s Really Going On Out There Scott W. Ambler Chief Methodologist/Agile scott_ambler@ca.ibm.com
  • 2.
    Warning! • You’ll be presented with a lot of information very quickly
  • 3.
    Agenda • The Surveys • Agile Practices • Agility@Scale • Adoption and Success Rates • Management • Governance • Development and Quality • Modeling and Documentation • Communication • Parting Thoughts
  • 4.
    Agenda • The Surveys • Agile Practices • Agility@Scale • Adoption and Success Rates • Management • Governance • Development and Quality • Modeling and Documentation • Communication • Parting Thoughts
  • 5.
    The Surveys • All survey data, original questions, and summary slide decks can be downloaded from www.ambysoft.com/surveys/ – If you can’t look at the original questions and analyze the data yourself, how can you trust the survey results? • Some surveys were done via Dr. Dobb’s Journal (DDJ), a community with a wide range of readers, not just Agilists • Some surveys, the Ambysoft ones, focused on just the agile community • The source survey for each chart is indicated using graphics such as: DDJ 2009 State of the IT Union Ambysoft 2009 Agile Practices Warning: You’ll be presented with a lot of information really quickly!
  • 6.
    Agenda • The Surveys • Agile Practices • Agility@Scale • Adoption and Success Rates • Management • Governance • Development and Quality • Modeling and Documentation • Communication • Parting Thoughts
  • 7.
    Most Effective Practices:Top 10 (out of 30) Continuous Integration 65% Daily Stand Up Meeting 47% Developer TDD 47% Iteration Planning 44% Code Refactoring 43% Retrospectives 39% Pair Programming 36% Active Stakeholder Participation 35% Potentially Shippable Software 28% Burndown Tracking 26% Ambysoft 2009 Agile Practices
  • 8.
    Practices Easiest toLearn: Top 10 (out of 30) Daily Stand Up Meeting 70% Continuous Integration 38% Retrospectives 35% Iteration Demo 32% Iteration Planning 31% Burndown Tracking 27% Pair Programming 25% Release Planning 21% Product Backlog 21% Code Refactoring 21% Ambysoft 2009 Agile Practices
  • 9.
    Practices Most Difficultto Learn : Top 10 (out of 30) Developer TDD 37% Aceptance TDD 30% Pair Programming 28% Initial Estimate and Schedule 26% Active Stakeholder Participation 24% Database Refactoring 22% Potentially Shippable Software 20% Executable Specifications 19% Release Planning 18% Continuous Integration 18% Ambysoft 2009 Agile Practices
  • 10.
    Practices Tried andAbandoned : Top 8 (out of 30) Pair Programming 24% Burndown Tracking 21% Potentially Shippable Software 17% Daily Stand Up Meetings 14% Executable Specifications 14% Initial Estimate and Schedule 14% Active Stakeholder Participation 11% Retrospectives 10% Ambysoft 2009 Agile Practices
  • 11.
    Agenda • The Surveys • Agile Practices • Agility@Scale • Adoption and Success Rates • Management • Governance • Development and Quality • Modeling and Documentation • Communication • Parting Thoughts
  • 12.
    What is Agility@Scale? Team size Compliance requirement Under 10 1000’s of Critical, developers developers Low risk Audited Geographical distribution Organization distribution (outsourcing, partnerships) Co-located Global Collaborative Contractual Disciplined Enterprise discipline Agile Technical complexity Project Enterprise Delivery Heterogeneous, focus focus Homogenous Legacy Organizational complexity Flexible Rigid
  • 13.
    Largest Team SizeAttempted vs. Successful 200+ 101 to 200 51-100 21 to 50 11 to 20 6 to 10 1 to 5 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 Attempt Success DDJ 2008 Agile Adoption
  • 14.
    Does your teamhave to comply to industry regulations? Don't Know 7% Yes 33% No 60% Ambysoft 2009 Agile Practices
  • 15.
    Does your teamfollow a CMMI compliant agile process? Don't Know Yes 13% 9% No 78% Ambysoft 2009 Agile Practices
  • 16.
    How distributed werethe IT people on your team? Don't Know, 1% Some Very Distant, 29% Co-Located, 42% Within Driving Distance, 13% Same Building, 17% Ambysoft 2009 Agile Practices
  • 17.
    Agenda • The Surveys • Agile Practices • Agility@Scale • Adoption and Success Rates • Management • Governance • Development and Quality • Modeling and Documentation • Communication • Parting Thoughts
  • 18.
    What percentage ofyour development teams have adopted agile techniques? 91-100% 4% • 76% of organizations have adopted agile techniques 81-90% 2% • On average, 44% of project 71-80% 11% teams in those are now doing agile 61-70% 1% – In small orgs of 50 or less IT, it’s 53% 51-60% 4% – In larger orgs, it’s 38% 41-50% 8% 31-40% 7% 21-30% 9% 11-20% 18% 1-10% 14% None 24% DDJ State of the IT Union July 2009
  • 19.
    Number of AgileProjects Run 51+ 6% 21 to 50 5% 11 to 20 8% 6 to 10 19% 1 to 5 45% Pilot 18% DDJ 2008 Agile Adoption
  • 20.
    Criteria to determineif a team is agile Disciplined agile teams: Yes, commonly Produce working software on a regular applied 19% basis. No, Don't See Do continuous regression testing, and Value 11% better yet take a Test-Driven No, Wish We Had Development (TDD) approach. It 26% Work closely with their stakeholders, Planning to ideally on a daily basis. Define 17% Are self-organizing, and disciplined teams work within an appropriate No Agile Projects 23% governance framework. Regularly reflect, and measure, on Don't Know 4% how they work together and then act to improve on their findings in a timely manner. Ambysoft 2009 Governance
  • 21.
    Why Agile? Becauseit Works! DDJ 2008 Agile Adoption
  • 22.
    Project success rates 4.9 Iterative Quality 5.0 2.3 0.4 6.0 Functionality 5.6 Agile 1.8 2.7 3.9 Money 3.0 Traditional 0.2 0.8 Agile Iterative 4.4 4.0 Traditional Time 0.8 Ad-Hoc Ad-Hoc 0.8 Bottom Line: Agile teams produce higher quality work, are quicker to deliver, are more likely to deliver the right functionality, and more likely to provide greater ROI than traditional teams DDJ 2008 Project Success
  • 23.
    Agile project successrates: the effect of distribution 70% 79% Average Co-Located Near Located 73% Far Located 55% DDJ 2008 Project Success
  • 24.
    Agenda • The Surveys • Agile Practices • Agility@Scale • Adoption and Success Rates • Management • Governance • Development and Quality • Modeling and Documentation • Communication • Parting Thoughts
  • 25.
    An organization’s typicalapproach to initial estimates on software development projects Must be "exact" 12% • On average, estimates need to be within a +/- Within 5% range 2% 11% range Within 10% 13% Within 15% 7% Within 20% 16% Within 25% 14% Within 50% 16% No initial estimates 21% DDJ State of the IT Union July 2009
  • 26.
    On average, theactual costs of software development projects compared to estimates Within 5% 2% • On average, actuals came in within a +/- 19% Within 10% 7% range Within 15% 5% Within 20% 10% Within 25% 17% Within 50% 14% Within 75% 4% More than 75% 4% No tracking against estimates 39% DDJ State of the IT Union July 2009
  • 27.
    Approach to InitialEstimation 9% No initial estimate at all 7% High-level estimate based on traditional estimation technique 27% High-level estimate based on agile estimation technique 38% High-level estimate based on reasonable guess of experienced person(s) 4% Detailed estimate based on traditional estimation technique 6% Detailed estimate based on agile estimation technique 7% Detailed estimate based on reasonable guess 3% Don’t know Ambysoft 2009 Agile Project Initiation: Interim Results
  • 28.
    Strategies which projectteams use to stay out of trouble or when in trouble to help get them out of it • “Questionable” strategies: – 18% pad the budget – 63% de-scope towards the end of the project to meet deadline – 34% ask for extra funds to complete the projects – 72% extend the schedule to deliver promised scope – 39% avoid scope creep wherever possible via a “change control/management” process – 10% change the original estimate to reflect the actuals – 18% change the original schedule to reflect the actuals • Ethical strategies: – 12% take a “stage gate” approach to funding – 13% have a flexible budget from the beginning of the project – 26% have a flexible schedule from the beginning of the project – 32% have flexible scope from the beginning of the project DDJ State of the IT Union July 2009
  • 29.
    How long didit take your project team to get started? (Average: 3.8 weeks) <1 Week 8% 1 Week 10% 2 Weeks 15% 3 Weeks 13% 4 Weeks 18% 5-6 Weeks 10% 7-8 Weeks 3% > 8 Weeks 10% Don't Know 12% Ambysoft 2009 Agile Project Initiation: Interim Results
  • 30.
    Justifying Agile Projects Show Technical Feasibility 60% Show Stakeholder Concurrence 59% Estimate ROI 34% Show Operational Feasibility 29% Considered Commercial Packages 17% Considered Offshoring 11% Estimate NPV 7% Ambysoft 2009 Agile Project Initiation: Interim Results
  • 31.
    Length of Iterations(% respondents) 82% have iterations between 1 and 4 weeks in length No Iterations 5.6 > 8 Weeks 1.4 7-8 Weeks 1.7 5-6 Weeks 7.2 4 Weeks 22.8 3 Weeks 16.7 2 Weeks 32.8 1 Week 9.2 < 1 Week 3.1 DDJ 2008 Agile Adoption
  • 32.
    Agenda • The Surveys • Agile Practices • Agility@Scale • Adoption and Success Rates • Management • Governance • Development and Quality • Modeling and Documentation • Communication • Parting Thoughts
  • 33.
    How would yourate your IT governance program? Too early to tell 6% 8% Generally helps 36% Neither helpful nor 19% harmful Generally harmful Don't Know 11% 20% No IT governance Program DDJ State of the IT Union July 2009
  • 34.
    Are rights andresponsibilities (R&R) defined for various groups within your organization? Defined for Development Teams 56% Defined for Operations and 37% Support Defined for Stakeholders 35% Undefined, but Part of Culture 15% Undefined, and we Need Them 21% Undefined, Don't Need Them 2% Ambysoft 2009 Governance
  • 35.
    Do your projectteams collect metrics to enable project monitoring by senior management? No 26% Yes, majority 51% manual Yes, majority 19% automated Don't Know 4% Ambysoft 2009 Governance
  • 36.
    Agenda • The Surveys • Agile Practices • Agility@Scale • Adoption and Success Rates • Management • Governance • Development and Quality • Modeling and Documentation • Communication • Parting Thoughts
  • 37.
    Development Practices • Coding Standards (2.30) • Collective Code Ownership (1.97) • Continuous integration (1.94) • Database standards (1.86) • UI standards (1.65) • Pair programming (-1.34) Ambysoft 2008 Practices and Principles
  • 38.
    Ambysoft 2008 TestDriven Development
  • 39.
    Quality Practices • Code Refactoring (1.79) • UI Testing (1.54) • Automated Developer Testing (1.08) • TDD (-0.08) • UI Refactoring (-0.22) • Database refactoring (-0.31) • Automated Acceptance Testing (-0.87) • Database regression testing (-1.03) • Executable Specs (-1.43) Ambysoft 2008 Practices and Principles
  • 40.
    Which organizational conventions/guidelinesdo development teams conform to? Coding 71% Security 53% Data 48% User Interface 41% Ambysoft 2009 Governance
  • 41.
    Agenda • The Surveys • Agile Practices • Agility@Scale • Adoption and Success Rates • Management • Governance • Development and Quality • Modeling and Documentation • Communication • Parting Thoughts
  • 42.
    Initial Modeling • 93% of respondents indicated that their team did some sort of up-front initial requirements modeling. • 90% of respondents indicated that their team did some sort of up-front initial architecture modeling. Ambysoft 2009 Project Initiation: Interim Results
  • 43.
    Primary Approach toModeling No Modeling Ad-Hoc Sketch to Think and Communicate Traditional Sketch and Capture Key Diagrams SBMT for Docs Iterative SBMT to Generate Code Agile SBMT for Full Trip Engineering 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
  • 44.
    Ambysoft 2008 TestDriven Development
  • 45.
    Modeling vs TDD:Primary Strategy for Requirements Specification Is/Was (%) High-Level Diagrams Detailed Diagrams Ad-Hoc Traditional Iterative Detailed Docs Agile Acceptance Tests 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 DDJ 2008 Modeling and Documentation
  • 46.
    Ambysoft 2008 TestDriven Development
  • 47.
    Modeling vs TDD:Primary Strategy for Arch/Design Specification Is/Was (%) High-Level Diagrams Detailed Diagrams Ad-Hoc Traditional Iterative Detailed Docs Agile Acceptance Tests 0 20 40 60 80 DDJ 2008 Modeling and Documentation
  • 48.
    Did you needto produce a vision document (or similar) as part of project initiation? Don't Know 7% No Yes 40% 53% Ambysoft 2009 Project Initiation: Interim Results
  • 49.
    Percentage of TeamsCreating Deliverable Documentation Ad-Hoc Traditional User manual Training material System Overview doc Iterative Operations doc Agile 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% DDJ 2008 Modeling and Documentation
  • 50.
    Agenda • The Surveys • Agile Practices • Agility@Scale • Adoption and Success Rates • Management • Governance • Development and Quality • Modeling and Documentation • Communication • Parting Thoughts
  • 51.
  • 52.
    Effectiveness of CommunicationStrategies (bigger the number the better) Within Team With Stakeholders Face to face (F2F) 4.25 4.06 F2F at Whiteboard 4.24 3.46 Overview diagrams 2.54 1.89 Online chat 2.10 0.15 Overview documentation 1.84 1.86 Teleconference calls 1.42 1.51 Videoconferencing 1.34 1.62 Email 1.08 1.32 Detailed Documentation -0.34 0.16 Ambysoft 2008 Practices and Principles
  • 53.
    Agenda • The Surveys • Agile Practices • Agility@Scale • Adoption and Success Rates • Management • Governance • Development and Quality • Modeling and Documentation • Communication • Parting Thoughts
  • 54.
    Question the Rhetoric • There appears to be a difference between what people say they are doing and what they are doing • Many of the concerns that the traditional community has regarding agile don’t appear to hold true • There are many unfounded beliefs in both the traditional and the agile communities • In the end, you need to identify what works well for you Every organization is different
  • 55.
    Why IBM? • Our integrated tooling based on the Jazz platform enables disciplined agile software development • Our Measured Capability Improvement Framework (MCIF) service offering helps organizations to successfully improve their IT practices in a sustained manner • We are one of the largest agile adoption programs in the world • We understand the enterprise-level issues that you face • We scale from pilot project consulting to full-scale agile adoption • Our Accelerated Solutions Delivery (ASD) practice has years of experience delivering agile projects at scale
  • 57.
    DDJ 2006 AgileAdoption • Used Dr. Dobb’s Journal and Software Development mailing lists • 4232 Respondents • March 2006
  • 58.
    DDJ 2006 DataQuality • Sent out to ~28,000 people on DDJ mailing list • September 2006 • 1137 respondents: – 51% were developers, 24% were in management – 37% had 10-20 years IT experience, 34% had 20+ years – 78% worked in commercial firms – >98% from North America
  • 59.
    DDJ 2007 AgileAdoption • March 2007 • Advertised in Editor’s blog on www.ddj.com • 781 respondents: – 52% were developers, 22% were in management – 40% had 10-20 years IT experience, 33% had 20+ years – 33% worked in orgs of 1000+ people – 85% worked in commercial firms
  • 60.
    DDJ 2007 ProjectSuccess • August 2007 • Email sent to DDJ mailing list • 586 respondents – 54% were developers/modelers, 30% were in management – 73% had 10+ years in IT – 13% worked in orgs of 1000+ IT people – 84% worked in commercial firms – 69% North American, 18% European • Overall goal was to explore how IT professionals define project success.
  • 61.
    DDJ 2008 ProcessFramework • January 2008 • Email sent to DDJ mailing list and posting in Editor’s blog • 339 respondents – 40% were developers, 20% were in management, 22% architects – 78% had 10+ years in IT – 17% worked in orgs of 1000+ IT people • Overall goal was to explore adoption and success rates of various process frameworks such as CMMI, COBIT, ITIL, …
  • 62.
    DDJ 2008 AgileAdoption • February 2008 • Message sent out to DDJ mailing list • 642 respondents: – 54.8% were developers, 29.4% were in management – 41.6% had 10-20 years IT experience, 37.2% had 20+ years – 37.7% worked in orgs of 1000+ people – 71% worked in North America, 17% in Europe, 4.5% in Asia
  • 63.
    DDJ 2008 Modelingand Documentation • July 2008 • Message sent out to DDJ mailing list and advertised on www.ddj.com • 279 respondents: – 54.8% were developers, 25.4% were in management – 33.3% had 10-20 years IT experience, 41.6% had 20+ years – 41.7% worked in orgs of 1000+ people – 61.5% worked in North America, 24.5% in Europe, 5.4% in Asia
  • 64.
    Ambysoft 2008 Practicesand Principles • July 2008 • Message sent out to several agile Yahoo groups mailing lists (extremeprogramming, agilemodeling, agiledatabases, scrumdevelopment, testdrivendevelopment) • 337 respondents: – 36.9% were developers, 36.9% were in management – 42% had 10-20 years IT experience, 17.3% had 21+ years – 31.3% worked in orgs of 1000+ people – 57.3% worked in North America, 22.7% in Europe, 7.2% in Asia
  • 65.
    Ambysoft 2008 TestDriven Development • October 2008 • Email sent to testdrivendevelopment@yahoogroups.com and extremeprogramming@yahoogroups.com mailing lists • 121 respondents – 74% were developers/modelers, 15% were in management – 52% had 10+ years in IT – 22% worked in orgs of 1000+ people
  • 66.
    DDJ 2008 ProjectSuccess • December 2008 • Email sent to DDJ mailing list • 279 respondents – 59% were developers/modelers, 25% were in management – 80% had 10+ years in IT – 16% worked in orgs of 1000+ IT people
  • 67.
    Ambysoft 2009 AgileCertification • April 2009 • Email sent to several agile mailing lists • 102 respondents
  • 68.
    Ambysoft 2009 Governance • May 2009 • Email sent to the Ambysoft announcements list (ambysoft@yahoogroups.com) which had 895 subscribers at the time • 62 respondents, 53 completed the survey • 41% were developers/modelers/data professionals, 29% were in management • 74% had 10+ years in IT • 27% worked in orgs of 500+ IT people • 52% North American, 27% European • Overall goals were to explore what people thought about IT governance and to find out what was happening in various orgs
  • 69.
    Ambysoft 2009 ProjectInitiation: Interim Results • Warning! Survey still running, so reported results are interim! • August 2008 • Message sent out to several agile Yahoo groups mailing lists (extremeprogramming, agilemodeling, agiledatabases, scrumdevelopment, testdrivendevelopment) • Data, summary, and slides downloadable from www.ambysoft.com/surveys/ • 141 respondents (as of Aug 6): – 21% were developers, 44% were in management or leadership roles – 38% had 10-20 years IT experience, 28% had 21+ years – 57% worked in North America, 28% in Europe, 9% in Asia Pacific – 27% had 3-4 years of agile experience, 27% had 5 or more years
  • 70.
    Ambysoft 2009 AgilePractices • July 2009 • Message sent out to several agile Yahoo groups mailing lists (extremeprogramming, agilemodeling, agiledatabases, scrumdevelopment, testdrivendevelopment) • Data, summary, and slides downloadable from www.ambysoft.com/surveys/ • 123 respondents: – 31% were developers, 48% were in management or leadership roles – 43% had 10-20 years IT experience, 29% had 21+ years – 58% worked in North America, 21% in Europe, 12% in Asia Pacific – 27% had 3-4 years of agile experience, 39% had 5 or more years
  • 71.
    DDJ State ofthe IT Union July 2009 • July 2009 • Email sent to DDJ mailing list • Data, summary, and slides downloadable from www.ambysoft.com/surveys/ • 125 respondents – 50% were developers, 19% were in management – 70% had 10+ years in IT – 11% worked in orgs of 1000+ IT people – 93% worked in commercial firms – 58% North American, 26% European, 10% Asia Pacific