Search Results

Search found 1228 results on 50 pages for 'agile plm'.

Page 4/50 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • What is a clean Agile (Scrum) Sprint Presentation?

    - by negarnil
    Suppose someone of your development team is presenting the a sprint to the customer but he is having web connection problems such that a complete storie cannot be presented. For the sake of the cleanness of the presentation, do you help your collegue suggesting posible solutions and try to fix it in the moment? Or is it kind of messy? May be the client (who is "part" of the team) will understand? Why? I'm really looking forward for a good answer! Regards,

    Read the article

  • Failure Driven Development

    - by DevSolo
    At our shop, we strive to be agile. And I'd say we are making great strides. That said, a few of us have spotted a pattern we have started calling "Failure Driven Development". Failure Driven Development can basically be desribed as an agile release/iteration cycle where the bugs/features are guided not by tasks and stories with acceptance criteria, but with defects entered in the defect tracking software. Our team has a great Project Manager who strives to get the acceptance criteria from the customer(s), but it's not always possible. From my development chair, this is due to the customer either not knowing exactly what they want or (and this is the kicker) two different "camps" at the customer's main office conflict with how a story should be implemented. Camp A will losely dictate that Feature X works like this, then Camp B will fail it due not functioning like that. Hence, the term "FDD". The process is driven by "failures". This leads to my question: Has anyone else encountered this and if so, any tips/suggestions for dealing with it? We have, of course, tried to get Camp A and B to agree prior, but everyone knows this isn't always the case. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Announcing the Return of the AGILITY Awards for Excellence in PLM!

    - by Kerrie Foy
    Nominations for the Oracle Excellence in PLM “AGILITY” Awards are now open. These awards are exclusively for enterprises utilizing Oracle Agile PLM solutions to address relevant industry and business challenges, and will be given to companies that have innovatively carried out projects that quantitatively improved processes, business results, and competitiveness.  Winners will receive a FREE pass to the Oracle Value Chain Summit (visit www.oracle-DOT-com/goto/vcs for more), taking place in San Francisco, February 4-6, 2013. Agile customers, partners and Oracle representatives are all welcome to submit nominations. To receive a nomination form or to get more information about the process, email terri.hiskey-AT-oracle.com. Deadline for submissions is Friday, December 14, 2012.

    Read the article

  • Can an agile shop every really score 12 on the Joel Test? [closed]

    - by Simon
    Possible Duplicate: Can an agile shop every really score 12 on the Joel Test? I really like the Joel test, use it myself, and encourage my staff and interviewees to consider it carefully. However I don't think I can ever score more than 9 because a few points seem to contradict the Agile Manifesto, XP and TDD, which are the bedrocks of my world. Specifically the questions about schedule, specs, testers and quiet working conditions run counter to what we are trying to create and the values that we have adopted in being genuinely agile. So my question is whether it is possible for a true Agile shop to score 12? [Note: I had this question closed on meta so I have re-posted here]

    Read the article

  • How to manage Agile developers working with traditional (serial) business persons?

    - by Riggy
    Good afternoon, My work environment has some problems. Our IT team is trying to be more agile, but we're not really getting buy-in from the business. They attend our daily stand-ups and sprint reviews, and they help with sprint planning, but then they turn around and do 4 months of requirements gathering for a project before moving forward with a (mostly) serial development style. The sprint goals are things like "get XX% closer to release". For the IT team, they've turned the Sprints into a sort of death march. We end a Sprint one day and start a new Sprint the very next day. There's no reflection or changes done between sprints, only during. Having never done any of the agile methodologies before, I haven't had a very pleasant introduction to them. So my questions are: 1) Should there be some time (perhaps a week or so) between sprints to do the reflection/introspection/changes/etc.? Or are back-to-back-to-back sprints the norm? 2) Is there any chance for survival for an agile team with no agile business counter-parts? If not, are there some transitional methodologies or even tips for moving the business towards an iterative if not necessarily agile mindset? 3) Should your entire team be on every sprint? We have almost 20 programmers on a single sprint but working on completely different projects (typically teams of 3-5, sometimes larger). Is it normal to have a single sprint or should we be trying to manage multiple independent sprints? Should we be trying to keep the multiple sprints in concurrent lockstep or should their timetables be allowed to overlap and be flexible? Any thoughts or advice is appreciated. This is my first time coming over from SO for a question, so please let me know if there are better ways to phrase these kinds of questions (faq was rather helpful, but still not sure I'm following it perfectly). Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Agile and Scrum burning me down please help me figuring out the truth

    - by jadook
    hi all, in the last while I installed MS-TFS 2008 then started to get myself prepared to use Agile Process Guidance template shipped with the TFS. with little googling I passed through Mike Cohn materials: I watched his conference in youtube "sponsored by google: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fb9Rzyi8b90 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jeT0pOVg0EI Read his book "Agile Estimating and Planning" Watching the video series in his website: http://www.mountaingoatsoftware.com/presentations-tag/video-recorded I was very happy while absorbing and eating the techniques he is using with the teams and how agile and scrum is such a great software process/methodology until I saw Mike answering a question regarding an architect role and talking about the requirements document... at that point everything start falling apart due to the following: Last year I had been assigned to make full analysis "including requirements gathering" for big project "very high priority project". within 2 months of hardwork, dedication and commitment I delivered the whole analysis with full satisfaction of the customer and my BOSS and ZERO amendments. Later on, the project entered the architecting, development ... phases. due to the fact that the system included many competitive and exciting features I requested patenting it and its going in the process... so imagine you are the kind of person who used to love facing all kind of challenges and returning with excellent experience and results for the stakeholders and yourself, How fairly agile and scrum processes will credit and admit your talent and passion while the scrum master/coach treat the team as one unit that accomplish user stories and converge through trial and error approach??!!!! with that dark thoughts about agile and scrum I found many people "anti agile" and on top of them is "Crispin Rogers Johnson": http://agile-crispin.blogspot.com/ that guy made anti statement for everything Mike Cohn used to talk about. I really don't know what to do next! so any guidance will be appreciated. Thanks,

    Read the article

  • Open Source projects that use agile methods or have tried them

    - by Patrick Cornelissen
    I'm preparing a short talk for a conference in august and I'm looking for open source projects that are using agile methods internally or have tried them in the past. My goal is to talk about the things that work well and what won't work and promote the agile methods a little bit, because I think certain agile techniques are a good fit, but don't seem to be that common in real development. So does anyone know projects that have tried agile methods and techniques before? I'd like to contact them for a few questions.

    Read the article

  • How do you explain to an "agile" team that they still need to plan the software they write?

    - by user23157
    This week at work I got agiled yet again. Having gone through the standard agile, TDD, shared ownership, ad hoc development methodology of never planning anything beyond a few user stories on a piece of card, verbally chewing the cud over the technicallities of a 3rd party integration ad nauseam without ever doing any real thinking or due dilligence and architecturally coupling all production code to the first test that comes into anyone's head for the past few months we reach the end of a release cycle and lo and behold the main externally visible feature that we have been developing is too slow to use, buggy, becoming labyrinthinly complex and completely inflexible. During this process "spikes" were done but never documented and not a single architectural design was ever produced (there was no FS, so what the hell eh, if you don't know what you are developing, how can you plan or research it?) - the project passed from pair to pair, each of whom only ever focused on a single user story at a time and well the result was inevitable. To resolve this I went off the radar, went (the dreaded) waterfall, planned, coded and basically didn't swap off the pair and tried as much as I could to work alone - focusing on solid architecture and specifications rather than unit tests which will come later once everything is pinned down. The code is now much better and is actually totally usable, flexible and fast. Certain people seem to have really resented me doing this and have gone out of their way to sabotage my efforts (possibly unconsciously) because it goes against the holy process of agile. So how do you, as a developer, explain to the team that it is not "un-agile" to plan their work, and how do you fit planning into the agile process? (I'm not talking about the IPM; I'm talking about sitting down with a problem and sketching out an end-to-end design that says how a problem should be solved in sufficient detail that anyone who works on the problem knows what architecture and patterns they should be using and where the new code should integrate into existing code)

    Read the article

  • Hologic Ensures Regulatory Compliance & UDI with Agile PLM for the Medical Device Industry

    - by Ulf Köster
    A new success story featuring Hologic, Inc., is now available. Hologic is known for developing innovative medical technology—like the world’s first 3-D mammogram—that can quickly diagnose women’s health issues and save lives in the process.The success story features Hologic’s use of Oracle Agile PLM to ensure regulatory compliance in every phase of product development, including managing all product-related data, design history files, and device master records. Hologic is using Oracle Agile PLM as the foundation for Unique Device Identification (UDI). Thanks to Agile PLM, Hologic can easily interface with the FDA’s database (GUDID) to streamline compliance, without devoting additional time and resources towards a new solution. Hologic is one of the first 2 companies granted production accounts by the FDA for GUDID submittal, and is the first company to submit official data. This an important milestone for Oracle Agile PLM, our partner Inspirage and the Medical Device industry as a whole. Read the full story here!

    Read the article

  • How to convince the agile product owner to change their mind? [closed]

    - by Joshiatto
    A friend of a friend ran into a situation recently in which the agile product owner specified features down to exactly what every single user click should look like. The problem is, the dev team has already figured out a way to accomplish the business value in fewer clicks (better UX), but in the past, questioning the product owner has led to career disaster. How do we convince the product owner to change their mind and go along with our recommendation? What can be done within the agile model to fix this situation and how do we accomplish it? On a bigger level: What can be done to make agile product owners better at their job to prevent this kind of thing from happening?

    Read the article

  • Modelling in Agile Development

    - by bertzzie
    I'm writing a bachelor dissertation report where I'm developing a system with Agile methodology. Given that the development is an one man show, of course the "Agile" I did was not really agile at all (from my understanding at least). So I want some perspective from SO crowds, who is of course a professional, real world, developer with tons of experience. I think real world experience is better than the theory and experiments that I did. My question is: Do we model during development time when using Agile? UML? DFD? Or a Functional Specification is enough1? If modelling is not really necessary, what do we use to communicate to the user, as the user almost always won't understand UML or DFD? For my system, I use UI & UX Design with heavy prototyping, but then I don't have time to draw UML any more. Which one is better? 1 http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog0000000036.html I hope the question's not "subjective and argumentative" as I know this question exist because of my lack of understanding in the agile development. If it is, could someone just give me a pointer or reference about that? Possible duplicate: Do you use UML in Agile development practices?

    Read the article

  • New AutoVue for Agile Data Sheet & Solution Brief

    - by Pam Petropoulos
    AutoVue for Agile visualization solutions deliver best-in-class document and CAD (MCAD and ECAD) visualization and collaboration capabilities directly within Oracle Agile PLM. With AutoVue for Agile solutions, companies can enable visual decision-making across the product lifecycle and simplify end-to-end design to manufacturing. They can also optimize new product development and introduction, as well as change management processes, and enable more efficient collaboration with global supply chain partners without jeopardizing critical intellectual property. Check out the latest AutoVue for Agile materials which outline the capabilities of the AutoVue 2D Professional for Agile and AutoVue Electro-Mechanical Professional for Agile solutions and their corresponding benefits. Click here for the data sheet. Click here for the solution brief.

    Read the article

  • Cone of Uncertainty in classic and agile projects

    - by DigiMortal
    David Starr from Scrum.org made interesting session in TechEd Europe 2012 - Implementing Scrum Using Team Foundation Server 2012. One of interesting things for me was how Cone of Uncertainty looks like in agile projects (or how agile methodologies distort the cone we know from waterfall projects). This posting illustrates two cones – one for waterfall and one for agile world. Cone of Uncertainty Cone of Uncertainty was introduced to software development community by Steve McConnell and it visualizes how accurate are our estimates over project timeline. Here is the Cone of Uncertainty when we deal with waterfall and Big Design Up-Front (BDUF). Cone of Uncertainty. Taken from MSDN Library page Estimating. The closer we are to project end the more accurate are our estimates. When project ends we know exactly how much every task took time. As we can see then cone is wide when we usually have to give our estimates – it happens somewhere between Initial Project Concept and Requirements Complete. Don’t ask me why Initial Project Concept is the stage where some companies give their best estimates – they just do it every time and doesn’t learn a thing later. This cone is inevitable for software development and agile methodologies that try to make software world better are also able to change the cone. Cone of Uncertainty in agile projects Agile methodologies usually try to avoid BDUF, waterfalls and other things that make all our mistakes highly expensive. Of course, we are not the only ones who make mistakes – don’t also forget our dear customers. Agile methodologies take development as creational work and focus on making it better. One main trick is to focus on small and short iterations. What it means? We are estimating functionalities that are easier for us to understand and implement. Therefore our estimates are more accurate. As we move from few big iterations to many small iterations we also distort and slice Cone of Uncertainty. This is how cone looks when agile methodologies are used. Cone of Uncertainty in agile projects. We have more cones to live with but they are way smaller. I don’t have any numbers to put here because I found any but still this “chart” should give you the point: more smaller iterations cause more but way smaller cones of uncertainty. We can handle these small uncertainties because steps we take to complete small tasks are more predictable and doesn’t grow very often above our heads. One more note. Consider that both of charts given in this posting describe exactly the same phase of same project – just uncertainties are different.

    Read the article

  • Introduction to Agile Development

    - by Grant Fritchey
    Even though my current job is a little weird, I still consider myself to be a DBA. I didn’t start that way in IT. I came through support and into development. I loved development. There was a constant struggle to attempt to improve your code, your understanding, and, most importantly, the process of development itself. Development can be slow and tedious. Left alone, developers can simply disappear to build a project and not come back for two years, at which time they deliver it. But, maybe that software isn’t what you wanted, or it’s no longer needed, or who knows what. So developers are constantly attempting to improve their processes in order to deliver more relavent software quicker (something DBAs could learn about). I really admire it. One of the many processes that has come out of that constant striving is known as Agile. As the name implies, Agile development attempts to come up with a quick, fast turning, business aware, well, for want of a word, agile, process that is more responsive to the needs of the business. There are tons and tons of books and blogs and videos on the subject that can get you going. But, Agile isn’t easy (note, Easy is not part of the name). Agile processes can be hard. I’ve worked on multiple agile teams, some successful, some not. The two principal differences between the teams were their discipline and their knowledge of the process. Discipline, that comes from within. But knowledge, ah, well there I can help. Red Gate is bringing a series of free instructional events to the United States in a few weeks time focused primarily on SQL Server (click here right now to register while there’s still space). We’re also offering some .NET instruction too. That’s a full day, free, with top experts in the business. But, the next day, there’s a full day session introducing Agile. You can go to this and learn how to do Agile. Develop that knowledge that will enable you to successfully use the Agile process. Go to this web site to check it out. No, this event is not free, but not everything can be. And it’s not just for developers. DBAs, you need to learn this stuff too. Management could also benefit from understanding these processes (because you guys can help to enforce discipline). It’s really for everyone involved in the development process.

    Read the article

  • "Agile Principles, Patterns, and Practices in C#": Is this just a .NET-translation of the popular Uncle Bob book?

    - by Louis Rhys
    I found this book sold on Amazon Agile Principles, Patterns, and Practices in C#, written by Robert C Martin and Micah Martin. Is it merely a .NET port of the older, more popular Agile Software Development, Principles, Patterns, and Practices? Or is it just a new book trying to take advantage of the other book's popularity? If I am a .NET developer who hasn't read either book, which one would you recommend?

    Read the article

  • Why has extreme programming (XP) gone out of date in favor of Agile, Kanban etc?

    - by Nick Rosencrantz
    I like XP (extreme programming) especially the part where there are 2 programmers at the same screen since often a problem's solution gets closer if only you explain what you're doing and pair programming forces you to explain what your doing. Last 10 years or so, the XP style of working seems to have gone out of date in favor of the working methodologies Agile and/or Kanban. Why? Since XP to me seems a veru good way to work and is a lot about the programming where Agile and Kanban are more about processes.

    Read the article

  • AutoVue for Agile 20.2.2 Now Available!!

    - by Warren Baird
    We are happy to announce that AutoVue for Agile 20.2.2 is now available via the Oracle Software Delivery Cloud.   AutoVue for Agile 20.2.2 is a minor release within the 20.2 product family that is specifically targeted for users of Agile PLM 9. AutoVue 20.2.2 brings a number of improvements, including support for SolidWorks 2013, AutoCAD and Inventor 2014, SolidEdge ST5, and Cadence Allegro 16.6.   It also includes support for Adobe Illustrator CS4 and up.   Another improvement involves bringing our support for Oracle Linux and Java Virtual Machine versions in-line with Agile's support. Please see our previous post (https://blogs.oracle.com/enterprisevisualization/entry/autovue_20_2_2_is) for more details on the specifics introduced in AutoVue 20.2.2. Agile PLM 9.3.3 has also been released, which as part of its many improvements introduces support for associating AutoVue annotations with change request objects in Agile, and a preliminary solution using Augmented Business Visualization to allow the creation of change objects from within AutoVue.   Please see the Agile Transfer of Information sessions in the KM note 1589164.1 for more details. We will provide additional posts over the next couple of weeks providing more details on these improvements.  Until then, if you have any questions, let us know in the comments! 

    Read the article

  • Agile development; on-line free tools!

    - by BT.
    We have been looking to implement Agile methodology within our geographically distributed development team, so i need suggestions on any free on-line application that you have used and find useful. Right now we are using paper cards and wall to manage this :), but we want to shift to an on-line version preferably free. I have used TargetProcess at my previous job! My Core requirements are: Business Analyst can add user stories We can assign, prioritize different user stories to developers. QA team can add test cases around different user stories. Project Manager can track the time of all the resources and can pull reports for upper management

    Read the article

  • How can we make agile enjoyable for developers that like to personally, independently own large chunks from start to finish

    - by Kris
    We’re roughly midway through our transition from waterfall to agile using scrum; we’ve changed from large teams in technology/discipline silos to smaller cross-functional teams. As expected, the change to agile doesn’t suit everyone. There are a handful of developers that are having a difficult time adjusting to agile. I really want to keep them engaged and challenged, and ultimately enjoying coming to work each day. These are smart, happy, motivated people that I respect on both a personal and a professional level. The basic issue is this: Some developers are primarily motivated by the joy of taking a piece of difficult work, thinking through a design, thinking through potential issues, then solving the problem piece by piece, with only minimal interaction with others, over an extended period of time. They generally complete work to a high level of quality and in a timely way; their work is maintainable and fits with the overall architecture. Transitioning to a cross-functional team that values interaction and shared responsibility for work, and delivery of working functionality within shorter intervals, the teams evolve such that the entire team knocks that difficult problem over. Many people find this to be a positive change; someone that loves to take a problem and own it independently from start to finish loses the opportunity for work like that. This is not an issue with people being open to change. Certainly we’ve seen a few people that don’t like change, but in the cases I’m concerned about, the individuals are good performers, genuinely open to change, they make an effort, they see how the rest of the team is changing and they want to fit in. It’s not a case of someone being difficult or obstructionist, or wanting to hoard the juiciest work. They just don’t find joy in work like they used to. I’m sure we can’t be the only place that hasn’t bumped up on this. How have others approached this? If you’re a developer that is motivated by personally owning a big chunk of work from end to end, and you’ve adjusted to a different way of working, what did it for you?

    Read the article

  • How can we make agile enjoyable for developers that like to personally, independently own large chunks from start to finish

    - by Kris
    We’re roughly midway through our transition from waterfall to agile using scrum; we’ve changed from large teams in technology/discipline silos to smaller cross-functional teams. As expected, the change to agile doesn’t suit everyone. There are a handful of developers that are having a difficult time adjusting to agile. I really want to keep them engaged and challenged, and ultimately enjoying coming to work each day. These are smart, happy, motivated people that I respect on both a personal and a professional level. The basic issue is this: Some developers are primarily motivated by the joy of taking a piece of difficult work, thinking through a design, thinking through potential issues, then solving the problem piece by piece, with only minimal interaction with others, over an extended period of time. They generally complete work to a high level of quality and in a timely way; their work is maintainable and fits with the overall architecture. Transitioning to a cross-functional team that values interaction and shared responsibility for work, and delivery of working functionality within shorter intervals, the teams evolve such that the entire team knocks that difficult problem over. Many people find this to be a positive change; someone that loves to take a problem and own it independently from start to finish loses the opportunity for work like that. This is not an issue with people being open to change. Certainly we’ve seen a few people that don’t like change, but in the cases I’m concerned about, the individuals are good performers, genuinely open to change, they make an effort, they see how the rest of the team is changing and they want to fit in. It’s not a case of someone being difficult or obstructionist, or wanting to hoard the juiciest work. They just don’t find joy in work like they used to. I’m sure we can’t be the only place that hasn’t bumped up on this. How have others approached this? If you’re a developer that is motivated by personally owning a big chunk of work from end to end, and you’ve adjusted to a different way of working, what did it for you?

    Read the article

  • What do you do if you reach a design dead-end in evolutionary methods like Agile or XP?

    - by Dipan Mehta
    As I was reading Martin Fowler's famous blog post Is Design Dead?, one of the striking impressions I got is that given the fact that in Agile Methodology and Extreme Programming, the design as well as programming is evolutionary, there are always points where things need to get refactored. It may be possible that when a programmer's level is good, and they understand design implications and don't make critical mistakes, the code continues to evolve. However, in a normal context, what is the ground reality in this context? In a normal day given some significant development goes into product, and when critical change occurs in requirement isn't it a constraint that how much ever we wish, fundamental design aspects cannot be modified? (without throwing away major part of the code). Is it not quite likely that one reaches dead-end on any further possible improvement on design and requirements? I am not advocating any non-Agile practice here, but I want to know from people who practice agile or iterative or evolutionary development methods, as for their real experiences. Have you ever reached such dead-ends? How have you managed to avoid it or escaped it? Or are there measures to ensure that design remains clean and flexible as it evolves?

    Read the article

  • In agile environment, how is bug tracking and iteration tracking consolidated.

    - by DXM
    This topic stemmed from my other question about management-imposed waterfall-like schedule. From the responses in the other thread, I gathered this much about what is generally advised: Each story should be completed with no bugs. Story is not closed until all bugs have been addressed. No news there and I think we can all agree with this. If at a later date QA (or worse yet a customer) finds a bug, the report goes into a bug tracking database and also becomes a story which should be prioritized just like all other work. Does this sum up general handling of bugs in agile environment? If yes, the part I'm curious about is how do teams handle tracking in two different systems? (unless most teams don't have different systems). I've read a lot of advice (including Joel's blog) on software development in general and specifically on importance of a good bug tracking tool. At the same time when you read books on agile methodology, none of them seem to cover this topic because in "pure" agile, you finish iteration with no bugs. Feels like there's a hole there somewhere. So how do real teams operate? To track iterations you'd use (whiteboard, Rally...), to track bugs you'd use something from another set of products (if you are lucky enough, you might even get stuck with HP Quality Center). Should there be 2 separate systems? If they are separate, do teams spend time creating import/sync functionality between them? What have you done in your company? Is bug tracking software even used? Or do you just go straight to creating a story?

    Read the article

  • Using Definition of Done to Drive Agile Maturity

    - by Dylan Smith
    I’ve been an Agile Coach at a lot of different clients over the years, and I want to share an approach I use to help them adopt and mature over time. It’s important to realize that “Agile” is not a black/white yes/no thing. Teams can be varying degrees of agile. I think of this as their agile maturity level. When I coach teams I want them to start out being a little agile, and get more agile as they mature. The approach I teach them is to use the definition of done as a technique to continuously improve their agile maturity over time. We’re probably all familiar with the concept of “Done Done” that represents what *actually* being done a feature means. Not just when a developer says he’s done right after he writes that last line of code that makes the feature kind-of work. Done Done means the coding is done, it’s been tested, installers and deployment packages have been created, user manuals have been updated, architecture docs have been updated, etc. To enable teams to internalize the concept of “Done Done”, they usually get together and come up with their Definition of Done (DoD) that defines all the activities that need to be completed before a feature is considered Done Done. The Done Done technique typically is applied only to features (aka User Stories). What I do is extend this to apply to several concepts such as User Stories, Sprints, Releases (and sometimes Check-Ins). During project kick-off I’ll usually sit down with the team and go through an exercise of creating DoD’s for each of these concepts (Stories/Sprints/Releases). We’ll usually start by just brainstorming a bunch of activities that could end up in these various DoD’s. Here’s some examples: Code Reviews StyleCop FxCop User Manuals Updated Architecture Docs Updated Tested by QA Tested by UAT Installers Created Support Knowledge Base Updated Deployment Instructions (for Ops) written Automated Unit Tests Run Automated Integration Tests Run Then we start by arranging these activities into the place they occur today (e.g. Do you do UAT testing only once per release? every sprint? every feature?). If the team was previously Waterfall most of these activities probably end up in the Release DoD. An extremely mature agile team would probably have most of these activities in the DoD for the User Stories (because an extremely mature agile team will probably do continuous deployment and release every story). So what we need to do as a team, is work to move these activities from their current home (Release DoD) down into the Sprint DoD and eventually into the User Story DoD (and maybe into the lower-level Check-In DoD if we decide to use that). We don’t have to move them all down to User Story immediately, but as a team we figure out what we think we’re capable of moving down to the Sprint cycle, and Story cycle immediately, and that becomes our starting DoD’s. Over time the team makes an effort to continue moving activities down from Release->Sprint->Story as they become more agile and more mature. I try to encourage them to envision a world in which they deploy to production as each User Story is completed. They would need to be updating User Manuals, creating installers, doing UAT testing (typical Release cycle activities) on every single User Story. They may never actually reach that point, but they should envision that, and strive to keep driving the activities down closer to the User Story cycle s they mature. This is a great technique to give a team an easy-to-follow roadmap to mature their agile practices over time. Sure there’s other aspects to maturity outside of this, but it’s a great technique, that’s easy to visualize, to drive agility into the team. Just keep moving those activities (aka “gates”) down the board from Release->Sprint->Story. I’ll try to give an example of what a recent client of mine had for their DoD’s (this is from memory, so probably not 100% accurate): Release Create/Update deployment Instructions For Ops Instructional Videos Updated Run manual regression test suite UAT Testing In this case that meant deploying to an environment shared across the enterprise that mirrored production and asking other business groups to test their own apps to ensure we didn’t break anything outside our system Sprint Deploy to UAT Environment But not necessarily actually request UAT testing occur User Guides updated Sprint Features Video Created In this case we decided to create a video each sprint showing off the progress (video version of Sprint Demo) User Story Manual Test scripts developed and run Tested by BA Deployed in shared QA environment Using automated deployment process Peer Code Review Code Check-In Compiled (warning-free) Passes StyleCop Passes FxCop Create installer packages Run Automated Tests Run Automated Integration Tests PS – One of my clients had a great question when we went through this activity. They said that if a Sprint is by definition done when the end-date rolls around (time-boxed), isn’t a DoD on a sprint meaningless – it’s done on the end-date regardless of whether those other activities are complete or not? My answer is that while that statement is true – the sprint is done regardless when the end date rolls around – if the DoD activities haven’t been completed I would consider the Sprint a failure (similar to not completing what was committed/planned – failure may be too strong a word but you get the idea). In the Retrospective that will become an agenda item to discuss and understand why we weren’t able to complete the activities we agreed would need to be completed each Sprint.

    Read the article

  • Please, tell us how you made Agile work for you?

    - by Paul
    I've been seeing many questions related to Agile. There seems to be confusion between the people who are doing Agile successfully, and those of us who don't understand it. So I'm wondering if some of the successful teams would be willing to give the result of us some examples of how you succeeded. Some of the things I know I wonder What steps did you use? (ie. Talk to users, mock up, tests, code, testing, (whatever)) Tools that helped you? Did you generate any artifacts, other than a working implementation? How did you prevent spaghetti architecture / code? How do you pass along to new team members, or is the team stable for the project How did you determine exit criteria, or was it open ended. (Scope of project?) Did you do this as contracting? How did you develop a contract up-front? Did the business do any up front work? Or did they come to the table with "We want to implement a "bleh bleh blah"? What types of tests did you use? Unit, Integration, UAT? Or did the process make some/all of those unnecessary? Bonus: Do you have an situations / links to "How To" Agile articles, books, etc? Wiki, describes what but not how (to the uninitiated) At least to me, not a duplicate

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >