Scrum Development Blog

Better teams make better products.

Archive for the ‘Development’ Category

Agile Development

Agile Pathways, Development, Scrum Terms | Posted by The 3Back Team
Apr 08 2010
empirical-thinking-vs-predictive

Empirical Team Thinking

Agile development is now commonly referred to as those set of methods that come under the umbrella term agile or support agile thinking. To avoid a circular set of definitions we will define the word agile.

Agile is being quick enough to avoid or take advantage of those things that can hurt or help in your pursuit.

A  pursuit in this context would often be called an effort, work or project. However, notice the phrase “quick enough” why is that wording used and relevant. The biggest difference here and said in a very summarized way (which does not reveal the depth of thought behind it) is the difference between predictive thinking vs. adaptive thinking.

No matter who you are and what you do we will all fall prey to predictive thinking in varying degrees. To reduce the likely hood of being tripped up by predictive thinking agile frames a state of mind that leverages those around us to help us detect when we are being predictive and should be adjusting our plan based on new information rather than ignore it. Said another way is that we fail to detect/ignore when our assumption are no longer valid. So, agile is a social agreement to be empirical as a team. Agile development is a description of how we can put that framework to use as a well formed team. A framework for agile development is especially important as the complexity of our effort increases. For simple problems or things that are complicated but knowable a standardized process is suitable. For complex problems that can change just by looking at them we need an empirical framework.

Agile Methods that Support Empirical Thinking

Spectrum of Agile Methods

There are several Agile methods which support an Agile Development process. However, each one is best called a framework because it is applied in a unique way for each context of use.

The above diagram represents the best way we have seen to describe the agile development methods available. The ones on the right are more Bodies of Knowledge and are vast. It is their very nature of vast that can cripple a team of people trying to focus their effort. Typically large systematized thought models can become more than I want to think about and crowd out the purpose for me focus which is my effort/work/project or product that I am trying to build.

There are more such as TSP / PSP but, this model paints out a quick spectrum that summarizes the models of thought and those that sit on the boarder such as RUP. The bodies of knowledge on the right have some very good practices, processes and methods in them and should not be ignored just because they are vast. Often when you scale past 70 or so people on one project effort you will need many of the techniques that can be found in the bodies of knowledge on the right. Or if you are simple running a call center where things are complicated but, knowable and creativity for transcending the current established patterns is not desired then they are more appropriate. We would call this things that fit SOP (standard operating procedures). However, were creativity is desired and the problem is complex then the models that support agile thinking are the only ones that seem to work.

Scrum is by far the most popular of the agile models and has shown some of the best success and transaction because it is not vast. Scrum is a simple rational framework that can be memorized in 20 minutes. Applied Scrum is exceedingly difficult to do well because it requires a tremendous amount of discipline and challenges standing assumptions. The ability to reveal and challenge standing assumptions is what has made Scrum so successful. Scrum has proven itself beyond the realm of software development (form where it orginated) however, its language and purely rational approach are its weaknesses.

A quick list of agile methods

  • Scrum
  • FDD
  • Lean
  • XP
  • Crystal
  • Kanban
  • Other often proprietary Special forms…

When doing software development work a popular pattern is to use the Scrum method wrapper the XP coding practices. This is recomended and has been found to be one of the best patterns for success.

Transitioning to an agile thinking process is best done by building Agile Pathways that supports and nurtures a pattern of adoption. It is important when applying agile to not toss out established processes that work but, instead reveal how they can be improved and reinvigorated. However, a solid implementation requires an almost prescriptive start. There are too many hidden assumptions that need to be re-explored and often changed.

  • Some short phrases that help focus on agile thinking
    • Let the product lead
    • One bite at a time
    • No head works alone
    • Be empirical
    • Reflect early and often
    • Make it visible
    • Pay attention and adapt

The agile movement got it start in the public sector in 2001 with the signing of the Agile Manifesto. The first project done under the term agility and done with 1 week development cycles was in 1983 (more on this later).

For those new to agile, Scrum is a recommended place to start.

In all cases of applied agility or scrum the analysis sets the tone. Without agility in the analysis the remaining part of your effort will “waterfall” or fall prey to predictive thinking. The following set of techniques assumes a complex problem or situation. Analysis is looking for an opportunity to move. There are a few analytic techniques that show up

  • No head works alone: peer review your thought process with someone and avoid heavy process driven peer review
  • Don’t make a belief out of a model: use a data rich subject matter orientation so that you don’t try to overly tidy your thinking at the wrong time
  • Highlight areas of risk and uncertainty: the number one risk is building the wrong thing! adjust your analysis to mitigate that risk first
  • Conceptualize appropriately through time: watch which techniques you are thinking with when you move from past certainty to future uncertainty (i.e. accounting vs. finance)

Quick Summary of Scrum

Development | Posted by The 3Back Team
Feb 26 2010

Quick Scrum Summary

What follows is a bulleted list for a rapid intro / reminder of Scrum. For Scrum a good metaphor to think of is Race Car, Driver and Mechanic. Can you guess which role in Scrum is Race Car, Drive and Mechanic?scrum race car mechanic driver

3 Roles ScrumMaster (SM), Product Owner (PO) and Team

  • Team 7±2 does the work
  • PO provides the work requests
  • SM provides care for the whole team (PO/Team)
  • Team swarms on the work
  • Team is cross functional
  • Team owns its process
  • PO provides validation for each work request
  • Work is done in short bursts < 30 days each (Sprints)
  • Work starts and stops with Planning and Review
  • Review demo for product; Review retro for process
  • Daily standup detects any adjustments needed
  • PO determines priority as a flow of work requests
  • SM observes and helps the whole team adjust
  • SM tunes the whole team for maximum performance

Microsoft Agile

Development | Posted by The 3Back Team
Feb 11 2010

Is Microsoft agile? yes and no. Before we dig into the question directly it is worth spending some time to understand the word agile.

The word Agile:  The word is so commonly used and everyone acts like they have a clean definition of it but if you look for agreement around the word you will find a ton of different understandings.  There are very few good stable definitions out there from which to ground a foundation of understanding. Too often marketing has taken hold of the word and warped it’s meaning for personal gain. Or agile “experts” have not really nailed the term down to anything stable. Nothing is wrong with that, it’s just good business or people learning. However, the result is that it permeates a very messy set of understandings into the community at large.

A common mistake when people view Microsoft is too see it as one company. My experience is they made up of many subgroups or companies within a larger framework. It is one big giant company. Some subgroups are very agile and some are not. The agility is not evenly distributed and understood within Microsoft. No surprise there, every big company I have consulted with has this problem. Some groups (teams and individuals) within Microsoft are great agilists, not all. They have some of the best in the world.

What is even more interesting is that they have made significant strides with Visual Studio 2010 and winding the promise of agility into the tool. The Scrum Alliance is making an effort to launch a possible Certified Scrum Developer program. Combining both the expertise of Microsoft in VSTS 2010 and Scrum you have a winner that could really improve the practice of agility within Microsoft.

clean code helpsWhy is a good agile enabled IDE like Visual Studio 2010 so important? Clean code and clean tools allow for rapid feedback which enables a quick practice of agile understanding. A good IDE will enable rapid feedback so that the fundamentals are practiced continuously. When I use the word fundamentals it is like in basketball. You are never done dribbling the ball and when writing code you can never stop practicing good fundamentals. Unit tests are a way to achieve rapid feedback but, like all of the agile practices not a panacea. Unit testing is a piece to a bigger evolving puzzle. So a good IDE holds the promises of helping developer master and remain in mastery of the fundamentals.

Yes, Mircrosoft is agile in parts and they are poised to become much better at the practice of agility.

For more on 2010 VSTS training

Four Pillars of Software Development

Development | Posted by The 3Back Team
Apr 22 2009

The purpose of this post is to consider Four Pillars of Software Development and Simpley Rules  four-pillars-software-development

  • Project Management is mainly about “managing the work” or stimulating the environment so the work gets done with minimal telling people how / what to do.
  • Source Control if it’s only one file then, I don’t need it :)  of course it is always more than that as soon as it goes over 100 files it becomes a necessity.
  • Build automation (and repeatable automated configurations as a whole) shows up after source control and becomes a necessity around 500(pick a number that you think you will go crazy at) items or so. It is a number thing but, I can get by longer without repeatable automated configurations than I can without Source Control.
  • Test Automation this shows up as needed after 1000 plus code files. Test automation is all about feedback. When I say feedback it assumes people are already thinking in terms of interface design “start with the end in mind” if not then TDD/Unit must be purused because people are missing critical thinking skills. 
Calling them pillars for complex software development that goes over 50,000 lines of code is appropriate. If it is something less than that then they are not pillars because I can make do without.  Order that the Pillars Show Up In and Simply Rules for each pillar’s primary purpose.
  1. Project Management – “Make it visible” then emergent order can happen
  2. Source Control – “Create a Known Center” then we can work from a place of stability without getting lost in our own mess.
  3. Automated Deployments/Builds – “Work from repeatable base lines” then makes changes from there
  4. Automated Testing – “Keep stuff we want” modify to add new behavior. Sometimes through open/close and sometimes refactoring to accommodate new which yes, is recursively open/close but, not really :)
  • Each pillar is to help shorten feedback and bring focus so that we “pay attention and adapt“ .
So my take is that if you are something over 50k + lines of code then these are pillars because you just can’t move much beyond that without the tower of code falling over. Each pillar shows up as you scale the pile of complexity you are dealing with. People also increase the complexity and require more structure to work within.

 

Ideally, I want “just enough structure to run rampant in“.