Nasscom agile methodology-pitneybowe-jai
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
0 likes•404 views
This document discusses how to implement agile practices in engineering portfolio and program management. It outlines challenges with traditional program management approaches and the product lifecycle. Agile principles like focusing on the end state, building capacity, continuous improvement, cross-functional collaboration and governance can help address delivery and business value challenges. Metrics should support the end state rather than be the goal. Maturity models, balanced scorecards, budgeting processes and architecture reviews are discussed to integrate agile into portfolio management.
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Similar to Nasscom agile methodology-pitneybowe-jai
Similar to Nasscom agile methodology-pitneybowe-jai (20)
Nasscom agile methodology-pitneybowe-jai
- 1. Agile Rollout in Engg. Portfolio/Program Management in Product Development (Agile) Environment Jainendra Kumar Director Product Development , WW Engineering CCM India Engineering and Agile & Tools Team 17, Jan, 2013 All content and opinions are mine; not those of PB
- 2. Agenda • Engg. portfolio/program management objectives • Challenges – Product Life Cycle – Other challenges • Agile helping with delivery challenges • Our Story – Focus on End State – People Focus – Capacity Building & Continuous Improvement – Maturity Model for Improvement tracing – Cross Functional Team Collaboration – Governance Process – Budgeting
- 3. Engg. Portfolio/Program Management (PM) Objectives • Provide oversight to support • Exploit economies of scale project-level activity to ensure and reduce coordination the overall program goals are costs and risks met • Align portfolio with business • Manage and organizational strategy risk, issues, requirements, de and objectives sign, solution, Planning, escal ations • Continuously improve program/project • Coordination with upstream management practices to and downstream dependencies improve efficiency, skills and projects in large/complex build additional capacity program • etc. • Focus on end-state result
- 4. Traditional Program Management • Adapt all different kinds of projects and programs to a handful set of program management operational models (CMMi, PCCMi and others) • Focus on Execution & Process • Cost, Controlling & Problem Solving • Metrics obsession – Metrics becomes the goal
- 5. Product Lifecycle & Other Complexity • Portfolio include products in different lifecycle stage – Every stage has it’s unique challenges and needs • Each Product has it’s unique complexity – Technical/Architectural (A) – Market (M) – Competition (C ) Projec Introd Growth Maturity Decline – Tech Debt (Nonfunctional issues) t uction (TD) 1 A, M – Customer Support (CS) – Legal and Compliance (L&C) 2 C, L&C – People (P) 3 TD, A – Resources (R ) 4 C – Venders (V) – …
- 6. Other Challenges • Delivery Challenges – Predictability in software development – Deliver as per market requirement – Ability to handle changing business requirement – Predictability in Quality – Improve capacity • Business & Customer Value – Marketable product – Usability – Improve top line at low cost – Innovate around customer need
- 7. World of a Engg. Portfolio Manager
- 8. Agile helps in delivery and business value challenges Portfolio/Program Level considerations • Continuous improvement of Scrum (Agile) process in every project. • Build Capacity while improving quality of the delivery • Portfolio level Lean/Agile models for cross-functional team collaboration to improve customer & business value • Agile is people centric over process. Collaborative Leadership, Servant Leadership, Trust, People Maturity • End state focus vs. metrics fever
- 9. End-state focus vs. metrics fever Simple Metrics End State Release burn-down chart Velocity chart Customer issue tracking
- 10. People practice Leadership Competencies People progression Stage 1 – Identification Stage 2 – Gap Analysis & training Stage 3 - Role Stage 4 – People responsibilities & Promotion Trust by empowerment Flat Organization Identify, train and mentor portfolio management talent
- 11. Capacity Building & Continuous Improvement Continuous Integration, Test Automation Community Of Practice Communities of practice are linked to organizational performance through the dimensions of social capital Shared Service
- 12. Agile Maturity Survey Agile Program maturity Select the answer that best represents the typical length of sprints for your team: •Does your team decide what to work on in each sprint? •Does your team create stable code with low technical debt at the end of each sprint? •Does your team involve end-users in evaluating the product you create? •Does your team complete their daily standup meeting in 15 minutes or less? •Does your team involve product managers, usability engineers, IT staff, or other external resources in planning and Agile Engineering Maturity working on each iteration? •Does your team conduct 'lessons learned' sessions? •Does your team use test-driven development? •I would recommend that my peers use Agile practices in their work. •Does your team hold demos or review sessions to demonstrate complete and tested software?
- 13. Cross Functional Team Engg - Engg Engg – Product Owner Tech Debt - Philippe Kruchten Engg – Tech Support Value Stream Mapping (Objective: Reduce non value added times)
- 14. Product Management Product Manager & Balanced Score Card Product Owner Agile Balanced Score Card adaptivemarketing Sanjiv Augustine
- 15. Enterprise Architecture & Governance B u s i Architecture Review Business case n Business Review Business e s s Requirement Model & Solution Architecture E A Enterprise Architect Meta Model, Design Constructs, Standards & Guidelines E Enterprise Architecture Tools n g Solution Architect i •Agile Modeling •BDD n •Agile Model Driver Architecture •TDD e •ALM e •CI/CD r i n g Agile Methodologies
- 16. Budgeting Zero-based budgeting (Yearly) Quarterly Business Review and Resource Forecasting (Business and Engineering Interlock)
- 17. Ref. & Contributors “A Disciplined Approach to Adopting Agile Practices: The Agile Adoption Framework” Communities of practice and organizational performance by - E. L. Lesser J. Storck MANAGING AGILE PROJECTS – By Sanjiv Augustine Adaptivemarketing.in
- 18. Q&A Thank You eMail: Jainendra.Kumar@pb.com Tweet : @kumarjainendra0 SMS : +91-9911604466 Skype: kumarjainendra Blog: http://productnation.in/author/jaik/
Editor's Notes
- Traditional approach was to fit all projects in one sizeYou get to see the real state of the project at the very endRework is costly as you tend to find issues late in the development cycle.
- We have realize that in an engineering portfolio we have products spanning from all different stages of product life cycle and they have unique characteristics. Also every projects will have its own set of complexities. My portfolio includes projects in all 2 life cycle stages - Introduction, Growth, Maturity and Decline. And also we have a range from a small application to SaaS to platform to solution with different set of markets – enterprise and SMB. Platform and Solution team has enterprise architecture level complexities and has to follow a organization level governance process whereas product and application follow LOB level governance process.
- These are individual product level challenges. Agile methodologies and Lean thinking addresses most of it. For innovation project Lean Startup concept is tried.
- This is the complex world of engg. portfolio manager where collaboration, tact, negotiation, assertiveness, communication and leadership competencies are put to test every day. We are surrounded by people from business, product leadership, customer support, sales, IT, vendors – all with confining agenda. Focusing on customer and advocating about lean & agile help maneuver through this complex spider web.
- Again, every project is different. So millstones and timelines would be different for different projects. Very simple metrics. Mostly trend analysis. Quality is viewed from outside in prospective.
- People over process. My team is responsible for creating an environment where people are empowered. We give team members the opportunities to solve customers problem, interact with cross functional team, provide them right tools and mentors. We have flexi timing, education assistance program, awards, and stretch goals. Managers are trained in creating a culture of team work by awarding certain behaviors and also disapproving which are not inline with the culture. We take responsibilities of taking a person out of the bus if he/she is not going to the same destination. Managers are given training on leadership qualities and self management. Pitney Bowes have received multiple awards for its people practices.
- CI & Test Automation: We have shared service tools, installer and non functional testing teams.UX is also a shared service directly reporting to Global WW Engg VP.CoP:It is through the process of sharing information and experiences with the group that the members learn from each other, and have an opportunity to develop themselves personally and professionally.We have it locally where people with common interest come together to share ideas, thoughts and help each other. Similar communities have got created on Pitney Bowes social media and collaboration sites. e.g: During portfolio rationalization process a big revenue generating project was put into maintenance mode hence the resources where redirected to other new growth programs. CoP around that domain expertise comes to rescue of the support team whenever there is a customer escalation. It has helped us retain our customers hence maintaining the revenue on a cash cow product.
- We regularly survey engineering and cross functional staff on Agile practice parameters. It is a simple metrics to review agile adoption and maturity trend. Nothing fancy. Very simple.
- Technical Debt: Design / Code Debt. This Debt is to be paid –refactoring is required or you pay the interest. Alliance Data and Citi examples. Product Owner: The Product Owner are inward focused product manager. They represents the stakeholders and is the voice of the customer. He or she is accountable for ensuring that the team delivers value to the business. The Product Owner writes customer-centric items (typically user stories), prioritizes them, and adds them to the product backlog. Value Stream Mapping: It is lean methodology to reduce waste. We have used VSM to optimize engineering – tech support interaction and customer support engagement process. This helped us reduced escalations which was earlier because of communication breakdown.
- It’s about creating a delicate balance of shared product management responsibilities between product management, engineering product owner and product marketing teams. No silver bullet rule. It’s based on context and collaboration. Balance Score Card (BSC) that we have worked with are business focus and does not resonate well with development team. Agile Balance Score Card is a metric that an agile development team can relate to. We don’t have engineering metric around BSC. Product Management team is responsible for BSC and KPIs tracking.
- This governance process is followed for enterprise platform and solution development. It’s encompass end to end business case creation, architecture review, business review, budget approval, delivery and updating of enterprise architecture meta models.
- We follow a zero-based budgeting process where each and every line item of LOB budget is reviewed every year. Program Management office has put together a model and provide relevant data points to the LOB to help decision making process. Example: Identify products in product life cycle stage, Return on invested capital (ROIC) etc. Engineering and LOB review plan quarterly and provide forecast data. This allows flexibility to move resources within the LOB as per business need. Pitney Bowes is working on a model that can be applied for enterprise level cross LOB programs.