Handling Product Management Across The Enterprise copyright 2010. Net Objectives, Inc.
Lean for Executives Product Portfolio Management Business Lean Enterprise ASSESSMENTS CONSULTING TRAINING COACHING Team Manage ment Kanban / Scrum ATDD / TDD / Design Patterns Lean Management Project Management
bstract What is the flow of information in product management? Why do we want to deliver fast? How do we discover value? Why is it important to have structure? Case studies
conomics of responsiveness Investment Period Payback Period Profit Period Cash flow Time Breakeven First Release from Denne and Cleland-Huang. Software by Numbers
Staged Releases Investment Period Payback Period Profit Period Cash flow Release 1 Net Return Time First Release
Staged Releases Profit Period Cash flow Investment Period Payback Period Release 1 Net Return Release 2 Net Return Time Second Release
taged releases Profit Period Cash flow Investment Period Payback Period Total Return Time Breakeven Point Investment
ncreased profit Staged Releases Cash flow Breakeven Single Release Time First Release 10
PARETO Business value realized release release release release
LINEAR Business value realized release release release release
Business value realized release release Time MINIMUM BUILD RELEASE
Business value realized release Time WATERFALL? PARETO WITHOUT EARLY RELEASES
Time BLEND Business value realized release release release
standard development sequence do the most important half first More important Less important
standard development sequence do the most important 25% first More important Less important
Deliver in Stages when possible focusing on the known, valuable features gives greater certainty produces greater value lowers risk of mis-building and over-building
the road well travelled
Consider the Software Value Stream Regional Coordinators Business Leaders Trainers & Educators Product Managers Business Capabilities Managing here Product Champion(s) Product Related Product Related Software Product Product Related New Requirements Shared Components Development Customer Software Release Concept Customers Ops & Support Shared Components Reduces induced waste here Consumption Product Portfolio Management
Does selforganizing teams mean you do what No you want?
Role of Team in Bigger Picture
VALUE Business Lean Enterprise Team Manage ment MAKE FLOW
Team MAKE INCREMENTAL DELIVERY CREATIVE PROBLEM SOLVING QUALITY BUILT IN
VALUE PRIORITIZATION BUSINESS ITERATIONS RELEASE PLANNING Business
FLOW Value Stream Visualization Impediment Impact Workflow as Process ACCOUNTABILITY technical Manage (limit) queues Visual controls Manage flow (process) Manage ment
Getting the right people to work on the right thing at the Is more important than doing the steps faster right time
what structure to use?
how much of what you do is valuable? rework?
What Work Do You Do? Getting Requirements Design Programming Testing Planning Collaboration Integration Re-doing requirements Working from old requirements Fixing bugs Building unneeded features Documentation Deployment Training Integration errors Overbuilding frameworks Essentially duplicating components
Long feedback cycles increase the amount of work to be done. Shorter feedback cycles decrease the amount of work to be done. What organizational structure should we use to decrease feedback times?
Case study 1 Teams self-organized by layer
Case Study 2: Military Aircraft Background 7 components on plane 70 person dev group (50 devs) 7 teams (4-10 each) 4 test platforms, 2 simulators, 1 plane Challenge was integration extremely difficult
ynamic Feature Teams
esulting Savings 63% increase in throughput 42% decrease in defects Greater than 22% savings* ($1.73M) *Was thought to be higher but not claimed due to political reasons
Case Study 3: Coordinating Teams Background Multiple teams Specialized Each team completed sprints in two weeks but value not delivered for months and then with challenges
Focus on time over the entire value stream.
MMF MMF Teams Split work MMF on according their parts to Teams Teams split according to components Eventually Teams work integrating on their them part together until done Feedback times for: Team Across teams Customer 2 weeks 6 weeks 8 weeks Progress bar
MMF MMF Split MMF into sub-features After Integration one iteration, still required teams integrate but takes their much components less time Development Teams work teams on split according their to part components Feedback times for: Team Across teams Customer 2 weeks 2 weeks 2 weeks Progress bar
Case study Coordinating Multiple Business Stakeholders with Multiple Team
The Simple Case 1. Define Business capabilities 2. Create MMFs 3. Prioritize MMFs 4. Create high level stories 5. Assign to team backlog Team Product Backlog Development team A A1 A2 A1 A1 A1 A1 A1 Team(s) A2 Architecture Technical Leads Product Owners
A Harder Case 1. Define Business capabilities 2. Create MMFs 3. Prioritize MMFs 4. Create high level stories 5. Assign to team backlogs Team Product Backlogs Application/ Component Teams A A1 A2 A1 A1 A1 A1 A1 Team(s) A2 A2A2 A2 Team(s) Team(s) Team(s) Architecture Technical Leads Product Owners
Agile At Scale 1. Define Business capabilities 2. Create MMFs 3. Prioritize MMFs 4. Create high level stories B1 B1 B1 B1 5. Assign to team backlogs Team Product Backlogs Application/ Component Teams A A1 A2 A1 A1 A1 A1 A1 Team(s) B2 B2B2 B2 B C B1 C1 B2 B3 C2 B3 C1 A2 B3 B3 B3 Blocked Team(s) Team(s) C2 Business Stakeholders Product Managers Architecture Technical Leads Product Owners Team(s)
Holistic Approach Delivery quickly Discover iteratively Attend to structure (flow) Optimize the whole key points
pen Space 11:00 Scaling Agile Challenges 1:00 Dot Game (simulation of Kanban) 3:00 Intro to Kanban by Chris Hefly
Thank You! copyright 2010 Net Objectives Inc.
Requirement Implementation Acceptance Test_Drive Development Test Case Specification