This document discusses a Simplified Agile EVM model for managing projects using a combination of agile and earned value management techniques. It begins with background on the presenter and an overview of why traditional and agile approaches can be challenging. It then introduces the SAEVM model which uses metrics like SACPI, SASPI, SARPI and SAQPI to measure cost, schedule, scope and quality performance. The document outlines how to apply the model and presents two case studies where it was used on both project-focused and sprint-focused projects. It concludes that SAEVM can help improve project success by providing enhanced visibility when complementing standard agile practices.

1. Simplified Agile EVM
The Art Of Managing Triple Constraint
Presenter: Dinesh Sharma

2. ABOUT ME
DINESH SHARMA
Delivery Head
Over 26 years of experience in IT Industry with more than 15
years in Project management. Extensive Project, Program and
Delivery Management and more than 10 years into Agile Based
Models.
Worked with a number of organizations both product based and
service based across the globe. Experience working with wide
range of domains and technologies. Exceptional track record of
delivering a high number of projects and programs with 100%
success rate. Authored and published a large number of articles
and whitepapers on many topics in Agile and Project
Management.
Wunderman Thompson
Commerce and Technology
(A WPP Company)

3. AGENDA
INTRODUCTION THE SAEVM
MODEL
CASE STUDIES CONCLUSION

4. Why
Simplified
Agile EVM?
Our Technological environment is rapidly evolving
The Businesses environment is getting excessively competitive
Role of IT increasing yet success rate of IT projects still very low
Need for more innovation – SAEVM a possible solution

5. Why Projects
Fail – Some
Facts
• Change in the organization’s
priorities (39%)
• Change in project objectives
(37%)
• Inaccurate requirements
gathering (35%)
• Inadequate vision (29%)
• Poor communication (29%)
Facts
Success Rate?

6. Traditional Approach Vs Agile Approach – The Challenge
• Inability to change with the dynamic and ever-
changing market requirements
• Remain relevant and to keep up with the competitive
pressures is enormous
• Gain a competitive advantage the Project Management
group must constantly look for innovation, latest tools
and techniques, to gain newness, add value and
customer benefits.
• Adaptability and Change Management sometime being
misunderstood and misused leading to reduced
effectiveness of teams
• Challenge of cost overrun and schedule delays, due to
lack of supporting processes
• Operating with the approach in a non-agile or hybrid
environment, most projects fall in this category
Traditional Approach
Phases are clearly planned before hand; focus on
formal processes; extensive documentation; less
customer involvement
Agile Approach
Projects defined into small tasks; interactive
input system of continuous delivery
The Challenge
Is there a one size that fits all?
The Challenge

7. Choosing the
correct Project
Management
Technique
A PM’s
Dilemma
Selecting the right Project Management
Technique is critical to successfully
deliver projects on time and budget
based on the two Lifecycle models -
Traditional Vs Agile based
From the Traditional to Agile; there are a
wide range of project management
techniques and practices that can be
leveraged to maximize success.

8. A Possible Solution – SAEVM
Model

9. Introduces a new way of working on projects to bring in the power of EVM to the agile
world and help managing triple constraint effectively towards project success
SAEVM Model
SACPI SASPI SARPI SAQPI
Quality
Cost
Scope Time
Quality
It is based on the traditional EVM applied to the projects with an agile context. Although the projects
can be very different and the agile maturity and application also varied, but this model can still be
applicable in most scenarios
Overview

10. SCOPE
What do we have to accomplish?
TIME
How much time do we have?
COST
How much can we spend?
Sizing
Function Points
Use Case Points
Story Points
Complexity Points
Ideal Hours
QUALITY
Any Quality Considerations?
Base Metrics
Don’t Miss this metric
Budget
Effort
Dollar Value
Team Size
Mandatorily Available
Target Date(s)
No. of Days
No. of Sprints
No. of months
Usually Available
No. of weeks
Defects
No. of UAT Defects
No. of Internal Defects
Usually Not Specified
No. of Post Production Defects
Count

11. Cost Performance - SACPI
Planned/Replan
ned Size
(PSP)
Actual
Completed Size
(ASP)
Work
Completed %
(EV [ASP/PSP])
Total Budgeted
Cost
(TBC)
Total Incurred
Cost
(TIC)
Actual Cost
Consumed %
(AC [TIC/TBC])
Offtrack
Cost
Performance
(SACPI [EV/AC])
Slightly
Offtrack
On
Track
1.0
SP/FP/UCP
or Ideal
Hours
Currency
Value or
Person
Days/Hours
1.0

12. Schedule (Time) Performance - SASPI
Planned/Replan
ned Size
(PSP)
Actual
Completed Size
(ASP)
Work
Completed %
(EV [ASP/PSP])
Total Duration
(TST)
Completed
Duration
(CST)
Work Expected
Till Date %
(PV [CST/TST])
Schedule
Performance
(SACPI [EV/PV])
SP/FP/UCP
or Ideal
Hours
Sprints or
Weeks or
Days
1.0
1.0
Offtrack
Slightly
Offtrack
On
Track

13. Scope Performance - SARPI
Planned/Replan
ned Size
(PSP)
In Sprint Scope
Change
(RSP)
Scope Change
%
(SC [RSP/PSP])
Scope
Performance
(SARPI [1 - SC])
SP/FP/UCP
or Ideal
Hours
0.9X
0.9X
1.0
1.0
Offtrack
Slightly
Offtrack
On
Track

14. Quality Performance - SAQPI
Actual
Completed Size
(ASP)
Delivered
Defect Count
(UDC)
Delivered
Defect Density
(DDD
[UDC/ASP])
Quality
Performance
(SAQPI [1 –
DDD/BDD])
SP/FP/UCP
or Ideal
Hours
0.XX
0.XX
Baseline Defect
Density
(BDD)
1.0
1.0
Offtrack
Slightly
Offtrack
On
Track

15. Beyond Agile Metrics and Tools
Burn-down/
Burn-up
Velocity
Sprint Goal
Compliance
Increased Effectiveness and better managed projects

16. SAEVM – Implementation

17. How to Apply?
Project Focused
These are projects where the
expectation is to manage the project
delivery at overall project level.
Sprint/Time Bucket Focused
These are projects where the expectation
is to manage the delivery at sprint or time
bucket level.
Categorise Calculate Analyse Implement

18. How to Apply?
Calculate Derived Metrics
These are Calculated Metrics
and derived from base
metrics
Calculate Base Metrics
These are the data points
to be collected based on
the categorization
Categorise Calculate Analyse Implement
Calculate Core KPIs
These are KPIs for all core
areas – Cost, Time, Scope and
Quality calculated from
derived metrics

19. How to Apply?
Categorise Calculate Analyse Implement
Identify Root Cause
Why the KPIs are showing the
current value, identify
underlying causes
Inference
What does the KPI value
and trend mean
Draw an Action Plan
Identify actions to bring the
KPIs on track if not on track

20. How to Apply?
Repeat last 3 steps
Identify the tracking frequency and
repeat last 3 steps
Implement Actions
Implement the identified actions
Categorise Calculate Analyse Implement

21. SAEVM – Case Study – I
Project Focused

22. This project was for one of our European clients. After a few initial
discussions with the customer, it was understood that the requirements
were very fluid and non-structured.
We started applying SAEVM to the project with two-week sprint cycle and
annual release roadmap with releases spread throughout the year.
The project started with Quality slightly below par, Scope Performance
also slightly below par, other core KPIs completely offset to low value with
SACPI at 0.72 and SASPI at 0.55.
Case Insight
Cost Time Scope Quality

23. Stage III: This was the final stage of the
project. This stage was relatively smooth
as the core project performance was
gradually settling down. All essential
project performance parameters reached
a healthy levels with SACPI at 1.02 and
SASPI at 1.0.
Implementation
Stage I: The initial stage of
the project involved a lot
of struggle. The SASPI and
SACPI clearly indicated
the productivity of the
team was low
Stage II: At mid stage our project
started showing satisfactory cost and
schedule indicators, yet quality
parameters showed no signs of
improvement. The team was augmented
to support our delivery quality.
The project
can be
considered in
three stages
of
performance

24. SAEVM – Case Study – II
Sprint Focused

25. Case Insight
Cost Time Scope Quality
All other core KPIs completely offset with high variations on sprint-on-
sprint basis. SACPI remained around 0.5 and SASPI around 1 with
variation from 0.5 to 2.0.
The project was Driven by a competitive and ever-changing business
landscape, the requirements coming from the customer were extremely
unclear at the start.
The project started with quality maintained at healthy level with one
spike at the initial stage. The scope performance remained at a healthy
level with one spike.

26. Implementation
Stage I: At the initial stage the project
suffered high variation in SASPI and SACPI
which clearly indicated that the predictability
of the sprints were low. The low average
value of SACPI indicated that clearly team
was incurring more efforts than budget
Stage III: This was the
final stage which was
relatively smooth,
previous process
improvements seem to
have paid off
Stage II: At the mid stage,
project showed overall improvement
in SACPI and SASPI variations but
started getting some spikes on SARPI
and SAQPI.
The project
can be
considered in
three stages
of
performance

27. Inference and
Takeaways
• Although the execution of the model was
very different in two different categories but
we could establish effectiveness and overall
performance improvement in both
scenarios.
• The model’s effectiveness lies in the actions
taken based on the measures provided, as
with any other data driven models.
• Since model is heavily dependent on data it
would be crucial to have a good data quality
and care should be taken for the same for
effective implementation and positive results
from the model.

28. CONCLUSION
The rapidly evolving landscape of technology and
business mandates the importance of successful IT
project.
Future-Forward Strategy
Integrating Simplified Agile EVM (Earned Value
Management) can enhance project success,
complementing traditional Agile metrics and tools.

29. Thank You
Your Questions?