Downloaded 33 times
![3
[poll: What does it mean to be Agile?]](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/beyondagilewithteamtopologies-211028034354/85/Beyond-Agile-with-Team-Topologies-3-320.jpg)
![5
[poll: What does it mean to be agile?]](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/beyondagilewithteamtopologies-211028034354/85/Beyond-Agile-with-Team-Topologies-5-320.jpg)
![6
agile [ aj-uhl, -ahyl ]
quick and well-coordinated in movement
:an agile leap.
dictionary.com](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/beyondagilewithteamtopologies-211028034354/85/Beyond-Agile-with-Team-Topologies-6-320.jpg)
![7
[poll: Can you name something that is agile?]](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/beyondagilewithteamtopologies-211028034354/85/Beyond-Agile-with-Team-Topologies-7-320.jpg)
![29
Team Cognition: Cognitive Load
(Intrinsic)
] Extraneous [
Germane](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/beyondagilewithteamtopologies-211028034354/85/Beyond-Agile-with-Team-Topologies-29-320.jpg)
More Related Content
Similar to Beyond Agile with Team Topologies
Beyond Agile with Team Topologies
- 1. 1 Beyond Agile with TeamTopologies Don’t just “do” Agile, be agile Richard Allen
- 2. 2 Richard Allen Head ofconsulting at Conjurer Solutions Founder of leavewizard.com Founder of devsouthcoast.com Experience: • More than 20 years developing software Team Topologies Experience: • Involved with one of the first implementations at PureGym • Further developed the Team-Shape-Templates • Crafted the infographics • Developed and delivered guided discovery workshops
- 3. 3 [poll: What doesit mean to be Agile?]
- 4. 4 Individuals and interactionsover processes and tools Working software over comprehensive documentation Customer collaboration over contract negotiation Responding to change over following a plan Agile Manifesto 2001
- 5. 5 [poll: What doesit mean to be agile?]
- 6. 6 agile [ aj-uhl,-ahyl ] quick and well-coordinated in movement :an agile leap. dictionary.com
- 7. 7 [poll: Can youname something that is agile?]
- 8.
- 9.
- 10. 10 What do batsand humans have in common?
- 11.
- 12.
- 13.
- 14.
- 15. 15 18 Years Later… September2019, IT Revolution Press
- 16. 16 “We must shiftour thinking from treating teams as collections of interchangeable individuals that will succeed as long as they follow the “right” process and use the “right” tools, to treating people and technology as a single human/computer carbon/silicon socio-technical ecosystem” Team Topologies, Matthew Skelton and Manuel Pais
- 17. 17 Aim to achievebusiness agility via: • Rapid flows of change and fast feedback • High situational awareness • Loosely coupled, autonomous teams • Loosely-coupled, autonomous services & applications (architecture) • High domain context at multiple levels • Healthy, evolvable codebase • Engaged Teams • People incentivised for long-term product health, not “features”
- 18. 18 Team-first: the Agileof organization design?
- 19. 19 Team-first Thinking TEAM SIZE TEAMLIFESPAN TEAM INTERACTIONS TEAM COGNITION
- 20. 20 Team Lifespan: Smalllong-lived teams TEAM = • Stable (not static) group of 5 to 9 people • Work towards a shared goal as a unit • Smallest entity of delivery within an organization
- 21. 21 Team Lifespan: DynamicReteaming
- 22. 22 Team Size: Dunbar’sNumber Trust dynamics can change when crossing a Dunbar boundary. Expect different rules & non-linear effects
- 23. 23 Team Interactions: Conway’sLaw “Organizations which design systems…are constrained to produce designs which are copies of the communication structures of these organizations” - Mel Conway
- 24. 24 Team Interactions: InverseConway Manoeuvre “change your team structure to get a loosely coupled architecture”
- 25.
- 26. 26 Team Cognition: CognitiveLoad “Software that fits in your head” - Daniel Terhorst-North
- 27. 27 Team Cognition: CognitiveLoad “Cognitive load is the total amount of mental effort being used in the working memory” - John Sweller
- 28. 28 Team Cognition: CognitiveLoad Intrinsic (skills) Extraneous: (mechanism) Germane: (domain focus)
- 29. 29 Team Cognition: CognitiveLoad (Intrinsic) ] Extraneous [ Germane
- 30. 30 Team Cognition: BusinessDomains Cynefin Framework, Dave Snowden
- 31. 31 Team Cognition: FracturePlanes Business Domain Bounded Context Regulatory Compliance Change Cadence Team Location Risk Performance Isolation Technology User Personas
- 32.
- 33. 33 Four Fundamental TeamTypes Stream-aligned team Platform team Enabling team Complicated Subsystem team
- 34. 34 Stream-aligned teams Stream-aligned team Platformteam Enabling team Complicated Subsystem team
- 35. 35 Enabling teams Stream-aligned team Platformteam Enabling team Complicated Subsystem team
- 36. 36 Complicated Subsystem teams Stream-alignedteam Platform team Enabling team Complicated Subsystem team
- 37. 37 Platform teams Stream-aligned team Platformteam Enabling team Complicated Subsystem team
- 38.
- 39.
- 40.
- 41.
- 42. 42 Typical Team InteractionModes Collaboration X-as-a-Service Facilitation Stream-aligned Typical Typical Occasional Enabling Occasional Typical Complicated-subsystem Occasional Typical Platform Occasional Typical
- 43. 43 Team Interaction Patterns Complicated Subsystem team Stream-aligned Stream-aligned Platformteam Enabling team Flow of change
- 44. 44 Differences from thebook Complicated Subsystem team Stream-aligned Stream-aligned Platform team Enabling team https://github.com/TeamTopologies/Team-Shape-Templates
- 45. 45 Becoming a “sensing”organization
- 46. 46 Listening for awkwardinteractions
- 47. 47 Organizational Sensing forEvolution Stream-aligned team Flow of change LIVE Rapid Feedback
- 48. 48 “Team Topologies: Thedomain specific language (DSL) of organization design”
- 49.
- 50.
- 51. 51 •Launched 2009 •260+ gymsin the UK •> 1.1 million members •Largest operator in the UK •Second largest operator in Europe •2015-2020 Huge growth in members
- 52. 52 Modern Software DeliveryPractices Continuous Delivery Continuous Integration 8 Deployments per day Scrum
- 53. 53 Steady Growth withShort-lived Project Teams Project D Project E Small Changes Project F Projects BAU Project G Project H Bugs GSD Handover
- 54. 54 Trigger: Rapid TeamGrowth to 40+ Bugs & Small Change Project G Project H Project I Project J Project K Projects BAU GSD Handover
- 55. 55 The Monolith Site Project G ProjectH Project I Project J BAU Vendor API Reseller API Mobile App Mobile Team Customer API Membership Management System Single repository
- 56. 56 “Short-lived project teamswith handovers to BAU teams is not scalable, how can we change this?”
- 57. 57 Breaking the Monolith Gyms Site ClassListings Members Area Payments Help Centre Class Booking Join Process PT Profiles Gift Cards Landing Pages Project G Project H Project I Project J BAU Group Training Time Tables Blog Live Chat Kiosks …
- 58. 58 Other Payments Retention Acquisition Team GymTeam Re-defining Teams Join Process Landing Pages … Time Tables Gyms … Reconcilliation Join Payments … Members Areaa CRM … … Streams Enabling Mobile? Platform Membership Management Gateway (MMG) Developer Experience SRE
- 59. 59 Gym Team Payments Retention Acquisition Team Mobile? MMG DevExSRE High Collaboration Phase
- 60. 60 Mobile? Using Facilitation andDeveloping X as a Service Gym Retention Acquisition Membership Management Gateway SRE Payments Dev Ex * * * * * * Flow of change
- 61. 61 Mobile? Gym Retention Acquisition Continuous Collaboration andFacilitation Membership Management Gateway SRE Payments Dev Ex * * * * * * * * Flow of change
- 62. 62 Simple Team APIs TeamType: Acquisition Owns a prospects journey before they have joined. Responsibilities: Join Process Steps 1 to 3 Gym Pages and Reviews Banner management Resellers Team Presence: Tech Lead: Joe Bloggs Product Owner: Jeremy Clarkson Business Analyst: Don Johnson Jira Board: https://ajiraboard.com Jira Label: team-acquisition Members: Joe Bloggs Frankie Boyle Clare Balding
- 63. 63 Gym Acquisition Membership Management Gateway Retention DevEx/SRE Communitiesof Practice (Chapters) Front End CMS and Content DevOps Security Tech Leads
- 64. 64 “Team Topologies helpedus to evaluate the relationships between our teams and business strategy, to increase team efficiency, and evolve away from a monolith” John Kilmister Principal Software Architect, PureGym
- 65. 65 Key Concepts ‘Fracture Planes’for splitting code Cognitive Load for boundaries Interaction Modes for clarity Team Types for purpose
- 66. 66 Results Projects + BAU-> Streams Separation of services More business-responsive
- 67. 67 Results Balanced ownership ofservices Improved team morale Better long-term architecture
- 68. 68 Could Team Topologieshelp you?
- 69. 69 Disengaged Teams? Pushing against Conway’sLaw? Teams pulled in many directions? Flow is blocked? Painful re-org every few years? Software too big for teams?
- 70.
- 71.
- 72. 72 •Healthy organizational culture •Goodengineering practices •Healthy funding and financial practices •Avoid CapEx/OpEx split in IT •Project driven deadlines •Large-batch budgeting •Clarity of business vision Team Topologies may not be enough
- 73. 73 How do youget started?
- 74.
- 75.
- 76.