P. 1
Agile Software Development

Agile Software Development

|Views: 54|Likes:
Published by nsplatha
Agile Software Development
Agile Software Development

More info:

Published by: nsplatha on Sep 26, 2013
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

07/25/2015

pdf

text

original

time-box responding scrummaster

burn-down

roles inspect adoption
shippable

user stories

quality

velocity release

review

retrospective estimating backlog

iterative daily stand-up interactions commitment

impediments

incremental

Agile Software Development
product owner story points
working software

collaboration sprint
self-organizing

servant leader

acceptance

prioritize

change

team planning
high value

adapt done

xp

manifesto scrum design testing

rusty

rusty

rusty .

rusty .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

stressed .

WTF? stressed .

WTF? stressed .

WTF? stressed .

Name: Rusty’s Project Date: 2/7/2008 COD: Methodology .

Name: Rusty’s Project Date: 2/7/2008 COD: Methodology .

Name: Rusty’s Project Date: 2/7/2008 COD: Methodology .

Name: Rusty’s Project Date: 2/7/2008 COD: Methodology monster.com .

2006 Chaos Report . or delivered on specification The Standish Group.35% projects completed on-time. within budget.

31% projects cancelled The Standish Group. 2006 Chaos Report .

59¢ software value on the dollar The Standish Group. 2006 Chaos Report .

2006 Chaos Report .64% features rarely or ever used The Standish Group.

acklog lopme manifesto design testing .

individuals interactions and processes and tools .

working software comprehensive documentation .

customer contract collaboration negotiation .

responding change to following a plan .

quality iterative commitment incremental Ag .

iterative development Project
 Incep1on
 Discovery
 Assessment
 Check
the
Fit
 Establish
Business
 Rela/onship
 Itera1on
0
 Set
up
Project
 Infrastructure
 Itera1on
1
 Itera1on
2
 Itera1on
3
 Itera1on
n
 Target
 System
 Incremental
delivery
in
/me‐boxed
2
week
itera/ons
 .

incremental delivery Itera1on
 2
Weeks
 Product
 Backlog
 Itera1on
 Backlog
 Product
 Increment
 .

spective timating backlog man des test elease eview .

product backlog .

current iteration current release future releases .

scrumm aboration prioritize user stories servant leader .

card conversation confirmation .

card conversation confirmation .

card As a freq I w uent ant t flyer o re trip b ! ook so t a pa hat time st! I book save ! ing t rips. ! .

card

As a freq I w uent ant t flyer o re trip b ! ook so t a pa hat time st! I book save ! ing t rips. !

card

conversation confirmation

I WANT THE TOAST TO POP UP WHEN IT’S DONE

. BUT KNOWING WHEN THE TOAST IS DONE REQUIRES AN OPTICAL SENSOR—NEW TECHNOLOGY.THAT’S REALLY EXPENSIVE. THE POPPING PART IS EASY —THAT’S JUST A SPRING.

BUT WHAT ABOUT ALL THOSE OTHER TOASTERS OUT THERE? .

THEY USE A TIMER. THEY DON’T REALLY KNOW WHEN THE TOAST IS DONE. IT’S A KLUDGE. .OH.

WITH A TIMER. THEY JUST WANT A REGULAR TOASTER.OUR CUSTOMERS DON’T WANT A SUPER-TOASTER. . LIKE EVERYONE ELSE.

WELL THAT WON’T BE EXPENSIVE AT ALL. YEAH. COOL! . COOL.OH.

acceptance prioritize ser stories servant leader chang ration ng team plannin high va .

card conversation confirmation .

  k a m o o oa f k r bs o f re o n b ! o e i e A t r v c a e o s l t e s I t n t w a a ! o . l w h l s t ! st A p s I i a o p r p i 2. trip .confirmation an c s r e y l f t n e ! u r q e e ! y r l pt f in f r t y ! l t n t e s s O a l a l prequ p a 1.  t s r t h g p c t i n t i r s a k a m pt o t o s b ! s u e e m t m a d tiw trip r o f e t p N e c 3.  x e .

cha acceptanc on der team planning high value .

0 Release 2.Product A Product B Product C Release 1.0 Iteration 1 Iteration 2 Iteration 3 Iteration 4 Iteration 5 Iteration 6 Task
1
 4
hours
 Task
2
 6
hours
 Task
3
 2
hours
 Task
4
 8
hours
 Task
5
 2
hours
 .0 Release 3.

tand-up actions release elocity review Dev .

SIZE CALCULATION DURATION 200 UNITS VELOCITY = 10 20 ITERATIONS .

Complexity
 Effort
 Complexity
 Doubt
 Effort
 Story 1 Doubt
 Effort
 Complexity
 Doubt
 Story 3 Story 2 .

M Complexity
 Effort
 Doubt
 Story 1 Complexi ty
 M Effort
 Dou bt
 XL Complexity
 Effort
 Doubt
 Story 3 Story 2 .

Complexity
 5 Doubt
 Effort
 Story 1 Complexi ty
 5 Effort
 Dou bt
 10 Complexity
 Doubt
 Effort
 Story 3 Story 2 .

Impediments` ve nt daily standinteractio velocity .

40
 35
 30
 25
 20
 15
 10
 5
 0
 Itera/on
 Itera/on
 Itera/on
 Itera/on
 Itera/on
 Itera/on
 Itera/on
 Itera/on
 Itera/on
 1
 2
 3
 4
 5
 6
 7
 8
 9
 Mean (Worst 3) = 28 Mean (Last 8) = 33 .

At our slowest velocity we’ll finish here (3X28) At our average velocity we’ll finish here (3X33) .

Will Have The line of hope (3X28) Might Have The line of despair (3X33) Won’t Have .

quality ncremental iterative commitment Ag .

teamcapacity team
member
 Rachel
 Ronica
 Ken
 Mark
 Total
 capacity
this
itera1on
 46
 60
 54
 62
 222
 .

storyone Task
 Code
the
UI
 Code
the
middle
/er
 Create
and
automate
 tests
 Es1mate
 6
 8
 4
 Owner
 Ronica
 Rachel
 Mark
 .

“can we commit to this?” 70
 60
 50
 40
 30
 20
 10
 0
 Rachel
 Ken
 Ronica
 Mark
 .

storytwo task
 Code
the
UI
 Code
the
middle
/er
 Create
and
automate
 tests
 es1mate
 12
 5
 6
 owner
 Ronica
 Rachel
 Mark
 .

“can we commit to this?” 70
 60
 50
 40
 30
 20
 10
 0
 Rachel
 Ken
 Ronica
 Mark
 .

…storynine Task
 Code
the
UI
 Code
the
middle
/er
 Create
and
automate
 tests
 Es1mate
 8
 6
 3
 Owner
 Ronica
 Rachel
 Mark
 .

“can we commit to this?” 70
 60
 50
 40
 30
 20
 10
 0
 Rachel
 Ken
 Ronica
 Mark
 .

storyten Task
 Code
the
UI
 Code
the
middle
/er
 Create
and
automate
 tests
 Es1mate
 8
 6
 3
 Owner
 Ronica
 Rachel
 Mark
 .

“can we commit to this?” 70
 60
 50
 40
 30
 20
 10
 0
 Rachel
 Ken
 Ronica
 Mark
 .

go! .

analysis .

analysis design .

analysis design code .

analysis design code test .

design code test document analysis .

.

ents gile Soft adapt done daily stand-up interactions .

What did you work on yesterday? What are you working on today? Do you have any impediments? .

e Softw dapt done y stand-up D .

done… done. .

analysis design coding testing document user acceptance pilot live .

analysis design coding testing document user acceptance pilot live .

analysis design coding testing document user acceptance pilot live .

analysis design coding testing document user acceptance pilot live .

adoption shippable gile So c .

potentially shippable .

potentially shippable shippable = .

high quality tested done complete .

.

lease eview retrospective estimating backlog manifesto design testing .

inspect adapt and .

roles nspect tion colla timeresp .

scrum master

product owner

team

the

Role
 Developer
 QA/Tester
 Monday
 Planning/ Coding
 Planning/ Wri/ng
UAT
 Tuesday
 Coding
 Wri/ng
UAT
 Impediment
 resolu/on
 Wednesday
 Coding/ Defect
Fixes
 QA/Tes/ng
 Impediment
 resolu/on
 Stakeholder
 feedback
 Thursday
 Coding/ Defect
Fixes
 QA/Tes/ng
 Impediment
 resolu/on
 Stakeholder
 feedback
 Friday
 Coding/ Defect
Fixes
 QA/Tes/ng
 Impediment
 resolu/on
 Stakeholder
 feedback
 ScrumMaster
 Facilitate
 Planning
 Product
 Owner
 Par/cipate
in
 Stakeholder
 Planning
 feedback
 .

Role
 Developer
 Monday
 Coding/ Defect
Fixes
 QA/Tes/ng
 Tuesday
 Coding/ Defect
Fixes
 QA/Tes/ng
 Wednesday
 Thursday
 Friday
 Defect
Fixes/ Defect
Fixes/ Defect
Fixes/ Design/Story
 Design/Story
 Review/ Development
 Development
 Retrospec/ve
 QA/Tes/ng
 QA/Tes/ng/
 Accpetance
 Criteria
 Final
UAT/ Review/ Retrospec/ve
 Facilitate
 Review/ Retrospec/ve
 Final
UAT/ Par/cipate
in
 Review/ Retrospec/ve
 QA/Tester
 ScrumMaster
 Impediment
 resolu/on/ Look
ahead
 Product
 Owner
 Look
ahead/ Acceptance
 tes/ng
 Impediment
 Impediment
 Impediment
 resolu/on/ resolu/on/ resolu/on/ Refine
stories
 Refine
stories
 Acceptance
 criteria
 Refine
 stories/ Acceptance
 tes/ng
 Refine
 stories/ Acceptance
 tes/ng
 Acceptance
 criteria/ Acceptance
 tes/ng
 .

product owner building the right code versus building the code right the team .

time-box responding scrummast roles pect collaboration self-organizing prioritize user stories servant leader change .

burn- inspe adoption shippable Agile Soft .

by Shine Technologies. 2003
 .88% increased productivity Agile Methodologies: Survey Results.

93% increased quality Agile Methodologies: Survey Results. by Shine Technologies. 2003
 .

by Shine Technologies.increased stakeholder satisfaction Agile Methodologies: Survey Results. 2003
 83% .

by Shine Technologies.49% reduction in costs Agile Methodologies: Survey Results. 2003
 .


J.
et
al.
Washington.100
 80
 60
 40
 20
 0
 CMMI
1
 WORK
 CMMI
5
 REWORK
 SCRUM
 PROCESS
 Sutherland.
Scrum
and
CMMI
Level
5:
A
 Magic
Po/on
for
Code
Warriors!
Agile
2007.
 50
 9
 10
 50
 4
 6
 50
 25
 .
(2007)..
D..
C.
IEEE.C.
Jacobson.


 .
 . 2008 Time to Market (Months) time market to 100 .
 .
 .
 .
 .
 . 
 . Code (KSLOC) QSMA Slim Database Study.
 .
 .
 .
 
.
 .jects
 o r P 
 l ona CNET
 Tradi/ Accuro
Healthcare
 1 10 .
 . 
 .
 .
 .
 Home
Away
 BMC
 Moody’s
 100 1000 10 1 User Stories.
 .
 .
 .
 ..
 .
 .

welcome to mainstream the the world is here innovators pragmatists conservatives laggards .

Scott Ambler Agile Adoption Survey. 2008 .agile adoption 31% GIS 73% the world Dr. Dobb’s Journal. 2008 GeoScrum Agile Adoption in GIS Survey.

help gis cross the world is here GIS is here the chasm innovators pragmatists conservatives laggards .

rallydev.time-box responding scrummaster burn-down roles inspect adoption shippable user stories quality retrospective estimating backlog iterative daily stand-up interactions commitment velocity impediments incremental chris spagnuolo rally software release adapt done working software high value self-organizing sprint product owner story points collaboration servant leader acceptance prioritize change team planning xp review www.com testing manifesto scrum .

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->