Lean & Agile

Enterprise Frameworks
For Managing Large U.S. Gov’t
Cloud Computing Projects
Dr. David F. Rico, PMP, CSEP, ACP, CSM, SAFe
Twitter: @dr_david_f_rico
Website: http://www.davidfrico.com
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidfrico
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/david.f.rico.9
Agile Capabilities: http://davidfrico.com/rico-capability-agile.pdf
Agile Resources: http://www.davidfrico.com/daves-agile-resources.htm
Agile Cheat Sheet: http://davidfrico.com/key-agile-theories-ideas-and-principles.pdf
 Author BACKGROUND
 Gov’t contractor with 32+ years of IT experience
 B.S. Comp. Sci., M.S. Soft. Eng., & D.M. Info. Sys.
 Large gov’t projects in U.S., Far/Mid-East, & Europe

 Career systems & software engineering methodologist

 Lean-Agile, Six Sigma, CMMI, ISO 9001, DoD 5000
 NASA, USAF, Navy, Army, DISA, & DARPA projects
 Published seven books & numerous journal articles
 Intn’l keynote speaker, 100+ talks to 11,000 people
 Adjunct at GWU, UMBC, UMUC, Argosy, & NDMU
 Specializes in metrics, models, & cost engineering
 Cloud Computing, SOA, Web Services, FOSS, etc. 2
 Lean & Agile FRAMEWORK?
 Frame-work (frām'wûrk') A support structure, skeletal
enclosure, or scaffolding platform; Hypothetical model
 A multi-tiered framework for using lean & agile methods
at the organization, program, and project levels
 An approach embracing values and principles of lean
thinking, product development flow, & agile methods
 Adaptable framework for collaboration, prioritizing
work, iterative development, & responding to change
 Tools for agile scaling, rigorous and disciplined planning
& architecture, and a sharp focus on product quality
  Maximizes BUSINESS VALUE of organizations, programs,
& projects with lean-agile values, principles, & practices
Leffingwell, D. (2011). Agile software requirements: Lean requirements practices for teams, programs, and the enterprise. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
3
How do Lean & Agile INTERSECT?
 Agile is naturally lean and based on small batches
 Agile directly supports six principles of lean thinking
 Agile may be converted to a continuous flow system
Agile Values Lean Pillars Lean Principles Lean & Agile Practices Flow Principles
 Customer relationships, satisfaction, trust, and loyalty
Empowered Relationships  Team authority, empowerment, and resources Decentralization
Teams  Team identification, cohesion, and communication
 Product vision, mission, needs, and capabilities
Respect
Customer Value  Product scope, constraints, and business value Economic View
for People  Product objectives, specifications, and performance
Customer  As is policies, processes, procedures, and instructions
Collaboration  To be business processes, flowcharts, and swim lanes
WIP Constraints
Value Stream
 Initial workflow analysis, metrication, and optimization & Kanban
 Batch size, work in process, and artifact size constraints
Control Cadence
Iterative Continuous Flow  Cadence, queue size, buffers, slack, and bottlenecks
 Workflow, test, integration, and deployment automation & Small Batches
Delivery
 Roadmaps, releases, iterations, and product priorities
Continuous  Epics, themes, feature sets, features, and user stories
Customer Pull Fast Feedback
Improvement  Product demonstrations, feedback, and new backlogs
Responding
 Refactor, test driven design, and continuous integration
to Change  Standups, retrospectives, and process improvements
Manage Queues/
Perfection
 Organization, project, and process adaptability/flexibility Exploit Variability

  
Womack, J. P., & Jones, D. T. (1996). Lean thinking: Banish waste and create wealth in your corporation. New York, NY: Free Press.
Reinertsen, D. G. (2009). The principles of product development flow: Second generation lean product development. New York, NY: Celeritas.
Reagan, R. B., & Rico, D. F. (2010). Lean and agile acquisition and systems engineering: A paradigm whose time has come. DoD AT&L Magazine, 39(6). 4
 Basic SCRUM Framework
 Created by Jeff Sutherland at Easel in 1993
 Product backlog comprised of needed features
 Sprint-to-sprint, iterative, adaptive emergent model

Schwaber, K., & Beedle, M. (2001). Agile software development with scrum. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
5
 Basic SCRUM-XP Hybrid
 Created by Sanjiv Augustine of Lithespeed in 2008
 Release planning used to create product backlog
 Extends Scrum beyond Sprint-to-sprint planning
Initial Planning Sprint Cycle

Discovery Session Sprint

 Agile Training  Select Tasks and Create Tests

 Project Discovery
 Process Discovery
 Team Discovery
 Initial Backlog
 Create Simple Designs
 Code and Test Software Units
 Perform Integration Testing
 Maintain Daily Burndown Chart
 Update Sprint Backlog

Release Planning Sprint Planning Daily Scrum Sprint Review

 Business Case  Set Sprint Capacity  Completed Backlog Items  Present Backlog Items
 Desired Backlog  Identify Tasks  Planned Backlog Items  Record Feedback
 Estimate Tasks  Impediments to Progress  Adjust Backlog
 Hi-Level Estimates
 Prioritize Backlog
 Finalize Backlog
Sprint Retrospective

Product Backlog Sprint Backlog Potentially Shippable Product

 Prioritized Requirements  List of Technical Tasks Assigned to a Sprint  Working Operational Software

Augustine, S. (2008). Certified scrum master training: Not just how, buy why. Herndon, VA: LitheSpeed.
6
Simplified AGILE PROJECT MGT F/W
 Created by Mark Layton at PlatinumEdge in 2012
 Mix of new product development, XP, and Scrum
 Simple codification of common XP-Scrum hybrid

Layton, M. C., & Maurer, R. (2011). Agile project management for dummies. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley Publishing.
7
 Agile ENTERPRISE FRAMEWORKS
 Dozens of Agile project management models emerged
 Many stem from principles of Extreme Programming
 All include product, project, & team management
eScrum SAFe LeSS DaD RAGE
- 2007 - - 2007 - - 2007 - - 2012 - - 2013 -
 Product Mgt  Strategic Mgt  Business Mgt  Business Mgt  Business
 Program Mgt  Portfolio Mgt  Portfolio Mgt  Portfolio Mgt  Governance
 Project Mgt  Program Mgt  Product Mgt  Inception  Portfolio
 Process Mgt  Team Mgt  Area Mgt  Construction  Program
 Business Mgt  Quality Mgt  Sprint Mgt  Iterations  Project
 Market Mgt  Delivery Mgt  Release Mgt  Transition  Delivery

Schwaber, K. (2007). The enterprise and scrum. Redmond, WA: Microsoft Press.
Leffingwell, D. (2007). Scaling software agility: Best practices for large enterprises. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
Larman, C., & Vodde, B. (2008). Scaling lean and agile development: Thinking and organizational tools for large-scale scrum. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Ambler, S. W., & Lines, M. (2012). Disciplined agile delivery: A practitioner's guide to agile software delivery in the enterprise. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
Thompson, K. (2013). cPrime’s R.A.G.E. is unleashed: Agile leaders rejoice! Retrieved March 28, 2014, from http://www.cprime.com/tag/agile-governance
8
 Enterprise Scrum (ESCRUM)
 Created by Ken Schwaber of Scrum Alliance in 2007
 Application of Scrum at any place in the enterprise
 Basic Scrum with extensive backlog grooming

Schwaber, K. (2007). The enterprise and scrum. Redmond, WA: Microsoft Press. 9
 Scaled Agile Framework (SAFE)
 Created by Dean Leffingwell of Rally in 2007
 Knowledge to scale agile practices to enterprise
 Hybrid of Kanban, XP release planning, and Scrum

Leffingwell, D. (2007). Scaling software agility: Best practices for large enterprises. Boston, MA: Pearson Education. 10
 Large Scale Scrum (LESS)
 Created by Craig Larman of Valtech in 2008
 Scrum for larger projects of 500 to 1,500 people
 Model to nest product owners, backlogs, and teams

Daily Scrum
15 minutes
Feature Team +
Scrum Master 1 Day

Sprint Planning II 2 - 4 Week Sprint

2 - 4 hours
Sprint Retrospective
Sprint Product Backlog Refinement
Backlog 5 - 10% of Sprint

Sprint Sprint Joint

Area Potentially Shippable
Product
ProductBacklog
Owner Planning I Review Sprint
Product
ProductBacklog
Owner Product Increment
2 - 4 hours Review

Larman, C., & Vodde, B. (2008). Scaling lean and agile development: Thinking and organizational tools for large-scale scrum. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley. 11
 Disciplined Agile Delivery (DAD)
 Created by Scott Ambler of IBM in 2012
 People, learning-centric hybrid agile IT delivery
 Scrum mapping to a model-driven RUP framework

Ambler, S. W., & Lines, M. (2012). Disciplined agile delivery: A practitioner's guide to agile software delivery in the enterprise. Boston, MA: Pearson Education. 12
Recipes for Agile Governance (RAGE)
 Created by Kevin Thompson of cPrime in 2013
 Agile governance model for large Scrum projects
 Traditional-agile hybrid of portfolio-project planning

Thompson, K. (2013). cPrime’s R.A.G.E. is unleashed: Agile leaders rejoice! Retrieved March 28, 2014, from http://www.cprime.com/tag/agile-governance 13
 Agile Enterprise F/W COMPARISON
 Numerous lean-agile enterprise frameworks emerging
 eScrum & LeSS were 1st (but SAFe & DaD dominate)
 SAFe is the most widely-used (with ample resources)
Factor eScrum SAFe LeSS DaD RAGE
Simple    
Well-Defined 
 Web Portal 
Books    
Measurable   
 Results  
Training & Cert 
 Consultants  
Tools 
Popularity  
International   
 Fortune 500  
Government 
Lean-Kanban  

Rico, D. F. (2014). Scaled agile framework (SAFe) comparison. Retrieved June 4, 2014 from http://davidfrico.com/safe-comparison.xls 14
 SAFe REVISITED
 Proven, public well-defined F/W for scaling Lean-Agile
 Synchronizes alignment, collaboration, and deliveries
 Quality, execution, alignment, & transparency focus

Portfolio

 Program

Team

Leffingwell, D. (2014). Scaled agile framework (SAFe). Retrieved June 2, 2014 from http://www.scaledagileframework.com 15
 SAFe—Scaling at PORTFOLIO Level
 Vision, central strategy, and decentralized control
 Investment themes, Kanban, and objective metrics
 Value delivery via epics, streams, and release trains
 


AGILE PORTFOLIO MANAGEMENT Investment
● Decentralized decision making Strategy
Funding
● Demand-based continuous flow
● Lightweight epic business cases
● Decentralized rolling wave planning Program
● Objective measures & milestones Governance
Management
● Agile estimating and planning

Leffingwell, D. (2007). Scaling software agility: Best practices for large enterprises. Boston, MA: Pearson Education. 16
 SAFe—Scaling at PROGRAM Level
 Product and release management team-of-team
 Common mission, backlog, estimates, and sprints
 Value delivery via program-level epics and features


 

AGILE RELEASE TRAINS
● Driven by vision and roadmap Alignment Collaboration
● Lean, economic prioritization
● Frequent, quality deliveries
● Fast customer feedback Value
● Fixed, reliable cadence Synchronization
Delivery
● Regular inspect & adapt CI

Leffingwell, D. (2007). Scaling software agility: Best practices for large enterprises. Boston, MA: Pearson Education. 17
 SAFe—Scaling at TEAM Level
 Empowered, self-organizing cross-functional teams
 Hybrid of Scrum PM & XP technical best practices
 Value delivery via empowerment, quality, and CI


 
  

AGILE CODE QUALITY Product Customer

● Pair development Quality Satisfaction
● Emergent design
● Test-first
● Refactoring
● Continuous integration Predictability Speed
● Collective ownership

Leffingwell, D. (2007). Scaling software agility: Best practices for large enterprises. Boston, MA: Pearson Education. 18
 SAFe BENEFITS
 Cycle time and quality are most notable improvement
 Productivity on par with Scrum at 10X above normal
 Data shows SAFe scales to teams of 1,000+ people
Trade Discount John
Benefit Nokia SEI Telstra BMC Valpak Mitchell Spotify Comcast Average
Station Tire Deere

App Maps Trading DW IT Trading Retail Market Insurance Agricult. Cable PoS

Weeks 95.3 2 52 52 52 52 51

People 520 400 75 300 100 90 300 800 150 120 286

 Teams 66 30 9 10 10 9 60 80 15 12 30

Satis 25% 29% 15% 23%

Costs 50% 10% 30%

Product 2000% 25% 10% 678%

 Quality

Cycle
95%

600% 600%
44%

300%
50%

50% 300%
50% 60%

370%

ROI 2500% 200% 1350%

Morale 43% 63% 10% 39%

Leffingwell, D. (2014). Scaled agile framework (SAFe) case studies. Denver, CO: Leffingwell, LLC. 19
Rico, D. F. (2014). Scaled agile framework (SAFe) benefits. Retrieved June 2, 2014, from http://davidfrico.com/safe-benefits.txt
 SAFe CASE STUDIES
 Most U.S. Fortune 500 companies adopting SAFe
 Goal to integrate enterprise, portfolios, and systems
 Capital One going through end-to-end SAFe adoption

John Deere Spotify Comcast

• Agricultural automation
• 800 developers on 80 teams
• Rolled out SAFe in one year
• Transitioned to open spaces
• Field issue resolution up 42%
• Quality improvement up 50%
• Warranty expense down 50%
• Time to production down 20%
• Time to market down 20%
• Job engagement up 10%
• Television cable/DVR boxes • GUI-based point of sale sys
• Embedded & server-side • Switched from CMMI to SAFe
• 150 developers on 15 teams • 120 developers on 12 teams
• Cycle time - 12 to 4 months • QA to new feature focus
• Support 11 million+ DVRs • Used Rally adoption model
• Design features vs. layers • 10% productivity improvement
• Releases delivered on-time • 10% cost of quality reduction
• 100% capabilities delivered • 200% improved defect density
• 95% requirements delivered • Production defects down 50%
• Fully automated sprint tests • Value vs. compliance focus

Leffingwell, D. (2014). Scaled agile framework (SAFe) case studies. Denver, CO: Leffingwell, LLC. 20
Rico, D. F. (2014). Scaled agile framework (SAFe) benefits. Retrieved June 2, 2014, from http://davidfrico.com/safe-benefits.txt
 SAFe SUMMARY
 Lean-agile frameworks & tools emerging in droves
 Focus on scaling agility to enterprises & portfolios
 SAFe emerging as the clear international leader

 SAFe is extremely well-defined in books and Internet

 SAFe has ample training, certification, consulting, etc.
 SAFe leads to increased productivity and quality
 SAFe is scalable to teams of up to 1,000+ developers
 SAFe is preferred agile approach of Global 500 firms
 SAFe is agile choice for public sector IT acquisitions
 SAFe cases and performance data rapidly emerging

Rico, D. F. (2014). Dave's Notes: For Scaling with SAFe, DaD, LeSS, RAGE, ScrumPLoP, Enterprise Scrum, etc. Retrieved March 28, 2014 from http://davidfrico.com
21
Dave’s PROFESSIONAL CAPABILITIES
Organization Government Government Cost Systems
Change Acquisitions Contracting Estimating Engineering

BPR, IDEF0, Innovation

& DoDAF Management
Valuation — Cost-Benefit Analysis, B/CR, ROI, NPV, BEP, Real Options, etc.

CMMI & Evolutionary

ISO 9001 Technical Software Software Design
Project Development Quality
PSP, TSP, &
Code Reviews
Mgt. Methods Mgt. Research
Methods

Lean-Agile — Scrum, SAFe, Continuous Integration & Delivery, DevOps, etc.

DoD 5000, Statistics, CFA,
TRA, & SRA EFA, & SEM

Lean Six Metrics, Workflow Big Data,

Kanban Sigma Models, & SPC Automation Cloud, NoSQL

STRENGTHS – Data Mining  Gathering & Reporting Performance Data  Strategic Planning  Executive & Manage-
ment Briefs  Brownbags & Webinars  White Papers  Tiger-Teams  Short-Fuse Tasking  Audits & Reviews  Etc.

● Action-oriented. Do first (talk about it later).

32 YEARS ● Data-mining/analysis. Collect facts (then report findings). PMP, CSEP,
IN IT ● Simplification. Communicating complex ideas (in simple terms). ACP, CSM,
INDUSTRY ● Git-r-done. Prefer short, high-priority tasks (vs. long bureaucratic projects). & SAFE
● Team player. Consensus-oriented collaboration (vs. top-down autocratic control).
22
 Books on ROI of SW METHODS
 Guides to software methods for business leaders
 Communicates the business value of IT approaches
 Rosetta stones to unlocking ROI of software methods

 http://davidfrico.com/agile-book.htm (Description)
 http://davidfrico.com/roi-book.htm (Description)
23
Backup Slides
 Agile for EMBEDDED SYSTEMS
 1st-generation systems used hardwired logic
 2nd-generation systems used PROMS & FPGAs
 3rd-generation systems use APP. SW & COTS HW
Iterations, Integrations, & Validations

AGILE NEO-TRADITIONAL TRADITIONAL RISK

Embedded
“Software Model” “FPGA Model” “Hardwired Model” Systems
- MOST FLEXIBLE - - MALLEABLE - - LEAST FLEXIBLE - More HW
Than SW

●● Short Lead

Least Cost
●
●
Moderate Lead
Moderate Cost
●
●
Long Lead
Highest Cost 
● Lowest Risk ● Moderate Risk ● Highest Risk
90% Software 50% Hardware 90% Hardware
 ●
● COTS Hardware
●
● COTS Components
●
● Custom Hardware 
● Early, Iterative Dev. ● Midpoint Testing ● Linear, Staged Dev.
 ● Continuous V&V ● “Some” Early V&V ● Late Big-Bang I&T

START GOAL – SHIFT FROM LATE HARDWARE TO EARLIER SOFTWARE SOLUTION STOP
Competing Competing
With SW With HW
Pries, K. H., & Quigley, J. M. (2010). Scrum project management. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
Pries, K. H., & Quigley, J. M. (2009). Project management of complex and embedded systems. Boca Raton, FL: Auerbach Publications.
Thomke, S. (2003). Experimentation matters: Unlocking the potential of new technologies for innovation. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press. 25
 Agile for SYSTEMS ENGINEERING
 SAFe rapidly evolving & adapting to market needs
 A “draft” version was made for “systems engineering”
 SoS, Lean, Kanban, and continuous flow system focus

SoS

 System

Sub-Sys

Leffingwell, D. (2014). Scaled agile framework (SAFe). Retrieved April 8, 2015 from http://www.scaledagileframework.com 26
Agile Scaling w/CLOUD COMPUTING
 1st-generation systems used HPCs & Hadoop
 2nd-generation systems used COTS HW & P2P
 3rd-generation systems use APP. SW & COTS HW
Rank Database Year Creator Firm Goal Model Lang I/F Focus Example User Rate KPro
Steve Gener- Large-scale 3 - $10M


2007 10gen Document C++ BSON CRM Expedia 45% 48 • Gen App
5 MongoDB Francia ality Web Apps
• Reliable
Rapid-prototyping, Queries, Indexes, Replication, Availability, Load-balancing, Auto-Sharding, etc. • Low Cplx

Avinash Relia- Wide Fault-tolerant Mission 2 - $100M


2008 Facebook Java CQL iTunes 20% 15 • Schema
8 Cassandra Lakshman bility Column Data Stores Critical Data
• Dist P2P
Distributed, Scalable, Performance, Durable, Caching, Operations, Transactions, Consistency • Med Cplx

Salvatore Real-time Instant

2009 Pivotal Speed Key Value C Binary Twitter 20% 14
10 Redis Sanfilippo Messaging Messaging
Real-time, Memory-cached, Performance, Persistence, Replication, Data structures, Age-off, etc.
Mike Wide Petabyte-size Image 1 - $1B


2007 Powerset Scale Java REST Ebay 10% 8 • Limited
14 HBase Carafella Column Data Stores Repository
• Sin PoF
Scalable, Performance, Data-replication, Flexible, Consistency, Auto-sharding, Metrics, etc. • High Cplx

Shay Full-text Information Wiki-

Elastic 2004 Compass Search Document Java REST 5% 7
16 Banon Search Portals media
Search
Real-time, Distributed, Multi-tenant, Document-based, Schema-free, Persistence, Availability, etc.

Kovacs, K. (2015). Comparison of nosql databases. Retrieved on January 9, 2015, from http://kkovacs.eu
Sahai, S. (2013). Nosql database comparison chart. Retrieved on January 9, 2015, from http://www.infoivy.com
DB-Engines (2014). System properties comparison of nosql databases. Retrieved on January 9, 2015, from http://db-engines.com 27
Agile Scaling w/AMAZON WEB SVCS
 AWS is most popular cloud computing platform
 Scalable service with end-to-end security & privacy
 AWS is compliant & certified to 30+ indiv. S&P stds.
AICPA COBIT CSA DoD CSM DIACAP FedRAMP FIPS


FISMA
SSAE

Analytics Database

NoSQL Sols
Cross Compute &

GLBA
SOC

• MongoDB
Service Networking • Cassandra
• HBase

Application Storage & Deployment &

HITECH
SAS

Services Content Del. Management

 PCI NIST MPAA ITAR ISO/IEC ISAE

Barr, J. (2014). AWS achieves DoD provisional authorization. Retrieved January 12, 2015, from http://aws.amazon.com
HIPAA

Dignan, L. (2014). Amazon web services lands DoD security authorization. Retrieved January 12, 2015, from http://www.zdnet.com
Amazon.com (2015). AWS govcloud earns DoD CSM Levsl 3-5 provisional authorization. Retrieved January 12, 2015, from http://aws.amazon.com 28
Agile Scaling w/CONTINUOUS DELIVERY
 Created by Jez Humble of ThoughtWorks in 2011
 Includes CM, build, testing, integration, release, etc.
 Goal is one-touch automation of deployment pipeline

CoQ


• 80% MS Tst
• 8/10 No Val
• $24B in 90s
• Rep by CD
• Not Add MLK

Humble, J., & Farley, D. (2011). Continuous delivery. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
Duvall, P., Matyas, S., & Glover, A. (2006). Continuous integration. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Ohara, D. (2012). Continuous delivery and the world of devops. San Francisco, CA: GigaOM Pro. 29
 Agile Scaling at ASSEMBLA
 Goal of continuous delivery is releases vs. build/tests
 Market-driven releases creates rapid business value
 Assembla went from 2 to 45 monthly releases w/CD

3,645x Faster
U.S. DoD

IT Project

62x Faster
U.S. DoD
IT Project

Singleton, A. (2014). Unblock: A guide to the new continuous agile. Needham, MA: Assembla, Inc. 30
 Agile Scaling at GOOGLE
 Google early adopter of agile methods and Scrum
 Google also uses agile testing at enterprise scale
 15,000 developers run 120 million tests per day
 440 billion unique users run 37 trillion searches each year
 Single monolithic code tree with mixed language code
 Submissions at head – One branch – All from source
 20+ code changes/minute – 50% code change/month
 5,500+ submissions/day – 120 million tests per day



80,000 builds per day – 20 million builds per year
Auto code inspections – For low defect density
10X programming productivity improvement

  $150 million in annual labor savings (ROI as a result)

Micco, J. (2013). Continuous integration at google scale. Eclipse Con, Boston, MA.
Whittaker, J., Arbon, J., & Carollo, J. (2012). How google tests software. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
31
 Agile Scaling at AMAZON
 Amazon adopted agile in 1999 and Scrum in 2004
 Using enterprise-scale continuous delivery by 2010
 30,000+ developers deploy over 8,600 releases a day
 Software deployment every 11.6 seconds (as of 2011)
 24,828 to 86,320 releases per Iteration
 161,379 to 561,080 releases per Quarter
 645,517 to 2,244,320 releases per Year
 Automatic, split-second roll-forward & backward

 75-90% reduction in release-caused outages (0.001%)
 Millions of times faster (than traditional methods)
 4,357,241 to 15,149,160 per traditional release 
  Thousands of times faster (than manual agility)
 161,379 to 561,080 per Scrum/SAFe release

 Used agile methods long before U.S. government (1999)

Atlas, A. (2009). Accidental adoption: The story of scrum at amazon.com. Proceedings of the Agile 2009 Conference, Chicago, Illinois, USA, 135-140.
Jenkins, J. (2011). Velocity culture at amazon.com. Proceedings of the Velocity 2011 Conference, Santa Clara, California, USA.
Elisha, S. (2013). Continuous deployment with amazon web services. Proceedings of the AWS Summit 2013, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia. 32
 Agile LEADERSHIP Models
 Power & authority delegated to the lowest level
 Tap into the creative nuclear power of team’s talent
 Coaching, communication, and relationships key skills
Personal Project Enterprise
• Don't Be a Know-it-All • Customer Communication • Business Value vs. Scope
• Be Open & Willing to Learn • Product Visioning • Interactions vs. Contracts
• Treat People Respectfully • Distribution Strategy • Relationship vs. Regulation
• Be Gracious, Humble, & Kind • Team Development • Conversation vs. Negotiation
• Listen & Be Slow-to-Speak • Standards & Practices • Consensus vs. Dictatorship
• Be Patient & Longsuffering • Telecom Infrastructure • Collaboration vs. Control
• Be Objective & Dispassionate • Development Tools • Openness vs. Adversarialism
• Don't Micromanage & Direct • High-Context Meetings • Exploration vs. Planning
• Exhibit Maturity & Composure • Coordination & Governance • Incremental vs. All Inclusive
• Don't Escalate or Exacerbate • F2F Communications • Entrepreneurial vs. Managerial
• Don't Gossip or be Negative • Consensus Based Decisions • Creativity vs. Constraints
• Delegate, Empower, & Trust • Performance Management • Satisfaction vs. Compliance
• Gently Coach, Guide, & Lead • Personal Development • Quality vs. Quantity

Rico, D. F. (2013). Agile coaching in high-conflict environments. Retrieved April 11, 2013 from http://davidfrico.com/agile-conflict-mgt.pdf
Rico, D. F. (2013). Agile project management for virtual distributed teams. Retrieved July 29, 2013 from http://www.davidfrico.com/rico13m.pdf
Rico, D. F. (2013). Agile vs. traditional contract manifesto. Retrieved March 28, 2013 from http://www.davidfrico.com/agile-vs-trad-contract-manifesto.pdf 33
 Agile ORG. CHANGE Models
 Change, no matter how small or large, is difficult
 Smaller focused changes help to cross the chasm
 Shrinking, simplifying, and motivation key factors
SWITCH INFLUENCER DRIVE DECISIVE
Direct the Rider Make it Desirable Purpose Villains of Good Decisions
 Create new experiences  Purpose and profit equality  Narrow framing
 Follow the bright spots
 Create new motives  Business and societal benefit  Confirmation bias
 Script the critical moves  Share control of profits  Short term emotion
Surpass your Limits  Delegate implementation  Over confidence
 Point to the destination
 Culture and goal alignment
 Perfect complex skills
 Remake society and globe Widen Your Options
 Build emotional skills
 Avoid a narrow frame
 Multi-track
Motivate the Elephant Harness Peer Pressure Autonomy  Find someone who solved problem
 Recruit public personalities  Be accountable to someone
 Find the feeling Self-selected work tasks
 Recruit influential leaders  Reality Test Assumptions
 Shrink the change  Self-directed work tasks  Consider the opposite
Find Strength in Numbers  Self-selected timelines  Zoom out & zoom in
 Grow your people  Self-selected teams  Ooch
 Utilize teamwork
 Self-selected implementation
 Enlist the power of social capital
Attain Distance
Design Rewards  Overcome short-term emotion
Shape the Path Mastery
 Gather more info & shift perspective
 Use incentives wisely
 Tweak the environment  Experimentation and innovation  Self-directed work tasks
 Use punishment sparingly  Align tasks to abilities
 Build habits  Continuously improve abilities Prepare to be Wrong
 Rally the herd Change Environment  Elevate learning over profits  Bookend the future
 Make it easy  Create challenging tasks  Set a tripwire
 Make it unavoidable  Establish high expectations  Trust the process

Heath, C., & Heath, D. (2010). Switch: How to change things when change is hard. New York, NY: Random House.
Patterson, K., et al. (2008). Influencer: The power to change anything: New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Pink, D. H. (2009). Drive: The surprising truth about what motivates us. New York, NY: Riverhead Books. 34
Heath, C., & Heath, D. (2013). Decisive: How to make better choices in life and work. New York, NY: Random House.
Agile ACQUISITION-CONTRACT Model
 Communication, cooperation, and interaction key
 Shared responsibility vs. blame and adversarialism
 Needs greater focus on collaboration vs. legal terms
Dynamic Value Performance Based Target Cost Optional Scope Collaborative

 Business & Mission Value OVER Scope, Processes, & Deliverables

 Personal Interactions OVER Contract, Auditor, & Legal Interactions
 Conversations and Consensus OVER Contract Negotiations & Control
 Collaboration & Co-Dependency OVER Methodology & Adversarialism
 Exploration, Evolution, & Emergence OVER Forecasting & Control
 Early Continuous Quality Solutions OVER Late, Long-Term Deliveries
 Entrepreneurialism & Openness OVER Compliance & Self-Interest
 Customer Satisfaction and Quality OVER Policies & Governance

Rico, D. F. (2011). The necessity of new contract models for agile project management. Fairfax, VA: Gantthead.Com.
Rico, D. F. (2013). Agile vs. traditional contract manifesto. Retrieved March 28, 2013 from http://www.davidfrico.com
35
 Key Agile SCALING POINTERS
 One must think and act small to accomplish big things
 Slow down to speed up, speed up ‘til wheels come off
 Scaling up lowers productivity, quality, & business value
 EMPOWER WORKFORCE - Allow workers to help establish enterprise business goals and objectives.
 ALIGN BUSINESS VALUE - Align and focus agile teams on delivering business value to the enterprise.
 PERFORM VISIONING - Frequently communicate portfolio, project, and team vision on continuous basis.

 A S
 REDUCE SIZE - Reduce sizes of agile portfolios, acquisitions, products, programs, projects, and teams.

 B SCT MALL - Get large agile teams to act, behave, collaborate, communicate, and perform like small ones.

 A C E MALL - Get small projects to act, behave, and collaborate like small ones instead of trying to act larger.
CT OLLOCATED - Get virtual distributed teams to act, behave, communicate and perform like collocated ones.
 USE SMALL ACQUISITION BATCHES - Organize suppliers to rapidly deliver new capabilities and quickly reprioritize.
 USE LEAN-AGILE CONTRACTS - Use collaborative contracts to share responsibility instead of adversarial legal ones.

 U SE ENTERPRISE AUTOMATION - Automate everything with Continuous Integration, Continuous Delivery, & DevOps.

Rico, D. F. (2014). Dave's Notes: For Scaling with SAFe, DaD, LeSS, RAGE, ScrumPLoP, Enterprise Scrum, etc. Retrieved March 28, 2014 from http://davidfrico.com
36