Search Results

Search found 9663 results on 387 pages for 'peopletools strategy team'.

Page 1/387 | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Is your team is a high-performing team?

    As a child I can remember looking out of the car window as my father drove along the Interstate in Florida while seeing prisoners wearing bright orange jump suits and prison guards keeping a watchful eye on them. The prisoners were taking part in a prison road gang. These road gangs were formed to help the state maintain the state highway infrastructure. The prisoner’s primary responsibilities are to pick up trash and debris from the roadway. This is a prime example of a work group or working group used by most prison systems in the United States. Work groups or working groups can be defined as a collection of individuals or entities working together to achieve a specific goal or accomplish a specific set of tasks. Typically these groups are only established for a short period of time and are dissolved once the desired outcome has been achieved. More often than not group members usually feel as though they are expendable to the group and some even dread that they are even in the group. "A team is a small number of people with complementary skills who are committed to a common purpose, performance goals, and approach for which they are mutually accountable." (Katzenbach and Smith, 1993) So how do you determine that a team is a high-performing team?  This can be determined by three base line criteria that include: consistently high quality output, the promotion of personal growth and well being of all team members, and most importantly the ability to learn and grow as a unit. Initially, a team can successfully create high-performing output without meeting all three criteria, however this will erode over time because team members will feel detached from the group or that they are not growing then the quality of the output will decline. High performing teams are similar to work groups because they both utilize a collection of individuals or entities to accomplish tasks. What distinguish a high-performing team from a work group are its characteristics. High-performing teams contain five core characteristics. These characteristics are what separate a group from a team. The five characteristics of a high-performing team include: Purpose, Performance Measures, People with Tasks and Relationship Skills, Process, and Preparation and Practice. A high-performing team is much more than a work group, and typically has a life cycle that can vary from team to team. The standard team lifecycle consists of five states and is comparable to a human life cycle. The five states of a high-performing team lifecycle include: Formulating, Storming, Normalizing, Performing, and Adjourning. The Formulating State of a team is first realized when the team members are first defined and roles are assigned to all members. This initial stage is very important because it can set the tone for the team and can ultimately determine its success or failure. In addition, this stage requires the team to have a strong leader because team members are normally unclear about specific roles, specific obstacles and goals that my lay ahead of them.  Finally, this stage is where most team members initially meet one another prior to working as a team unless the team members already know each other. The Storming State normally arrives directly after the formulation of a new team because there are still a lot of unknowns amongst the newly formed assembly. As a general rule most of the parties involved in the team are still getting used to the workload, pace of work, deadlines and the validity of various tasks that need to be performed by the group.  In this state everything is questioned because there are so many unknowns. Items commonly questioned include the credentials of others on the team, the actual validity of a project, and the leadership abilities of the team leader.  This can be exemplified by looking at the interactions between animals when they first meet.  If we look at a scenario where two people are walking directly toward each other with their dogs. The dogs will automatically enter the Storming State because they do not know the other dog. Typically in this situation, they attempt to define which is more dominating via play or fighting depending on how the dogs interact with each other. Once dominance has been defined and accepted by both dogs then they will either want to play or leave depending on how the dogs interacted and other environmental variables. Once the Storming State has been realized then the Normalizing State takes over. This state is entered by a team once all the questions of the Storming State have been answered and the team has been tested by a few tasks or projects.  Typically, participants in the team are filled with energy, and comradery, and a strong alliance with team goals and objectives.  A high school football team is a perfect example of the Normalizing State when they start their season.  The player positions have been assigned, the depth chart has been filled and everyone is focused on winning each game. All of the players encourage and expect each other to perform at the best of their abilities and are united by competition from other teams. The Performing State is achieved by a team when its history, working habits, and culture solidify the team as one working unit. In this state team members can anticipate specific behaviors, attitudes, reactions, and challenges are seen as opportunities and not problems. Additionally, each team member knows their role in the team’s success, and the roles of others. This is the most productive state of a group and is where all the time invested working together really pays off. If you look at an Olympic figure skating team skate you can easily see how the time spent working together benefits their performance. They skate as one unit even though it is comprised of two skaters. Each skater has their routine completely memorized as well as their partners. This allows them to anticipate each other’s moves on the ice makes their skating look effortless. The final state of a team is the Adjourning State. This state is where accomplishments by the team and each individual team member are recognized. Additionally, this state also allows for reflection of the interactions between team members, work accomplished and challenges that were faced. Finally, the team celebrates the challenges they have faced and overcome as a unit. Currently in the workplace teams are divided into two different types: Co-located and Distributed Teams. Co-located teams defined as the traditional group of people working together in an office, according to Andy Singleton of Assembla. This traditional type of a team has dominated business in the past due to inadequate technology, which forced workers to primarily interact with one another via face to face meetings.  Team meetings are primarily lead by the person with the highest status in the company. Having personally, participated in meetings of this type, usually a select few of the team members dominate the flow of communication which reduces the input of others in group discussions. Since discussions are dominated by a select few individuals the discussions and group discussion are skewed in favor of the individuals who communicate the most in meetings. In addition, Team members might not give their full opinions on a topic of discussion in part not to offend or create controversy amongst the team and can alter decision made in meetings towards those of the opinions of the dominating team members. Distributed teams are by definition spread across an area or subdivided into separate sections. That is exactly what distributed teams when compared to a more traditional team. It is common place for distributed teams to have team members across town, in the next state, across the country and even with the advances in technology over the last 20 year across the world. These teams allow for more diversity compared to the other type of teams because they allow for more flexibility regarding location. A team could consist of a 30 year old male Italian project manager from New York, a 50 year old female Hispanic from California and a collection of programmers from India because technology allows them to communicate as if they were standing next to one another.  In addition, distributed team members consult with more team members prior to making decisions compared to traditional teams, and take longer to come to decisions due to the changes in time zones and cultural events. However, team members feel more empowered to speak out when they do not agree with the team and to notify others of potential issues regarding the work that the team is doing. Virtual teams which are a subset of the distributed team type is changing organizational strategies due to the fact that a team can now in essence be working 24 hrs a day because of utilizing employees in various time zones and locations.  A primary example of this is with customer services departments, a company can have multiple call centers spread across multiple time zones allowing them to appear to be open 24 hours a day while all a employees work from 9AM to 5 PM every day. Virtual teams also allow human resources departments to go after the best talent for the company regardless of where the potential employee works because they will be a part of a virtual team all that is need is the proper technology to be setup to allow everyone to communicate. In addition to allowing employees to work from home, the company can save space and resources by not having to provide a desk for every team member. In fact, those team members that randomly come into the office can actually share one desk amongst multiple people. This is definitely a cost cutting plus given the current state of the economy. One thing that can turn a team into a high-performing team is leadership. High-performing team leaders need to focus on investing in ongoing personal development, provide team members with direction, structure, and resources needed to accomplish their work, make the right interventions at the right time, and help the team manage boundaries between the team and various external parties involved in the teams work. A team leader needs to invest in ongoing personal development in order to effectively manage their team. People have said that attitude is everything; this is very true about leaders and leadership. A team takes on the attitudes and behaviors of its leaders. This can potentially harm the team and the team’s output. Leaders must concentrate on self-awareness, and understanding their team’s group dynamics to fully understand how to lead them. In addition, always learning new leadership techniques from other effective leaders is also very beneficial. Providing team members with direction, structure, and resources that they need to accomplish their work collectively sounds easy, but it is not.  Leaders need to be able to effectively communicate with their team on how their work helps the company reach for its organizational vision. Conversely, the leader needs to allow his team to work autonomously within specific guidelines to turn the company’s vision into a reality.  This being said the team must be appropriately staffed according to the size of the team’s tasks and their complexity. These tasks should be clear, and be meaningful to the company’s objectives and allow for feedback to be exchanged with the leader and the team member and the leader and upper management. Now if the team is properly staffed, and has a clear and full understanding of what is to be done; the company also must supply the workers with the proper tools to achieve the tasks that they are asked to do. No one should be asked to dig a hole without being given a shovel.  Finally, leaders must reward their team members for accomplishments that they achieve. Awards could range from just a simple congratulatory email, a party to close the completion of a large project, or other monetary rewards. Managing boundaries is very important for team leaders because it can alter attitudes of team members and can add undue stress to the team which will force them to loose focus on the tasks at hand for the group. Team leaders should promote communication between team members so that burdens are shared amongst the team and solutions can be derived from hearing the opinions of multiple sources. This also reinforces team camaraderie and working as a unit. Team leaders must manage the type and timing of interventions as to not create an even bigger mess within the team. Poorly timed interventions can really deflate team members and make them question themselves. This could really increase further and undue interventions by the team leader. Typically, the best time for interventions is when the team is just starting to form so that all unproductive behaviors are removed from the team and that it can retain focus on its agenda. If an intervention is effectively executed the team will feel energized about the work that they are doing, promote communication and interaction amongst the group and improve moral overall. High-performing teams are very import to organizations because they consistently produce high quality output and develop a collective purpose for their work. This drive to succeed allows team members to utilize specific talents allowing for growth in these areas.  In addition, these team members usually take on a sense of ownership with their projects and feel that the other team members are irreplaceable. References: http://blog.assembla.com/assemblablog/tabid/12618/bid/3127/Three-ways-to-organize-your-team-co-located-outsourced-or-global.aspx Katzenbach, J.R. & Smith, D.K. (1993). The Wisdom of Teams: Creating the High-performance Organization. Boston: Harvard Business School.

    Read the article

  • Call for Customer Examples and Stories--PeopleTools 8.50

    - by PeopleTools Strategy Team
    PeopleTools 8.50 was a big release for us, and one that we think will provide a lot of value for customers. We've been having some interesting conversations with customers about this release at conferences, advisory board meetings, and technical group meetings. However, we would like to solicit some examples and success stories from you, our broad customer base. Do you have some examples of how you are using PeopleTools 8.50 and Enterprise Portal 9.1 that you would be willing to share? We would like to see some screen shots and perhaps a short blurb describing how you are using the Tools and Portal features, as well as any benefits accrued. Do you have a compelling success story? We are particularly interested in hearing about quantifiable improvements in user productivity, performance, cost savings, etc. You should be aware that these screen shots and stories will be public, and could appear in a conference presentation at some point. You will not be asked to serve as a formal reference, however. If you have some stories and examples you'd be willing share with us, please send them to this email address for the PeopleTools team: [email protected]

    Read the article

  • VIDEO: Improved user experience of PeopleTools 8.50 a hit with customer

    - by PeopleTools Strategy Team
    New and upgraded features in PeopleTools 8.50 really help boost productivity, says Oracle customer Dennis Mesler, of Boise, Inc. From improved navigational flows to enhanced grids to new features such as type-ahead or auto-suggest, users can expect to save time and training with PeopleTools 8.50. To hear more about this customer's opinion on the user experience of PeopleTools 8.50, watch his video at HERE

    Read the article

  • Secure Enterprise Search 11.2.2.2 Now Available for PeopleTools 8.53

    - by Matthew Haavisto
    We are pleased to announce that Oracle Secure Enterprise Search (SES) 11.2.2.2 is now available to PeopleSoft Customers on PeopleTools 8.53.  The minimum PeopleTools Patch Version Required to adopt SES 11.2.2.2 is PeopleTools 8.53.06.  This version of SES provides some important benefits for PeopleSoft Customers, particularly in the areas of platform support, distributed architecture support, and RAC support.  You can get all the details on this update on My Oracle Support.  This MOS document lists the fixes and configurations needed for PeopleTools certification of SES 11.2.2.2. For other useful information on PeopleTools and SES, see this Oracle forum.

    Read the article

  • Good Scoop: The PeopleSoft/IBM Backstory

    - by Brian Dayton
    Sometimes you're searching for something online and you find an unrelated, bonus nugget. Last week I stumbled across an interesting blog post from Chris Heller of a PeopleSoft consulting shop in San Ramon, CA called Grey Sparling. I don't know these guys. But Chris, who apparently used to work on the PeopleTools team, wrote a great article on a pre-acquisition, would-be deal between IBM and PeopleSoft that would have standardized PeopleSoft on IBM technology. The behind-the-scenes perspective is interesting. His commentary on the challenges that the company and PeopleSoft customers would have encountered if the deal had gone through was also interesting: ·         "No common ownership. It's hard enough to get large groups of people to work together when they work for the same company, but with two separate companies it is much, much harder. Even within Oracle, progress on Fusion applications was slow until Thomas Kurian took over Fusion applications in addition to Fusion middleware." ·         "No customer buy-in. PeopleSoft customers weren't asking for a conversion to WebSphere, so the fact that doing that could have helped PeopleSoft stay independent wouldn't have meant much to them, especially since the cost of moving to whatever a "PeopleSoft built on WebSphere" would have been significant." ·         "No executive buy-in. This is related to the previous point, but it's worth calling out separately. If Oracle had walked away and the deal with IBM had gone through, and PeopleSoft customers got put through the wringer as part of WebSphere move, all of the PeopleSoft project teams would be put in the awkward position of explaining to their management why these additional costs and headaches were happening. Essentially they would need to "sell" the partnership internally to their own management team. That's not a fun conversation to have." I'm not surprised that something like this was in the works. But I did find the inside scoop and Heller's perspective on the challenges particularly interesting. Especially the advantages of aligning development of applications and infrastructure development under one roof. Here's a link to the whole blog entry.  

    Read the article

  • Good Scoop: The PeopleSoft/IBM Backstory

    - by [email protected]
    Sometimes you're searching for something online and you find an unrelated, bonus nugget. Last week I stumbled across an interesting blog post from Chris Heller of a PeopleSoft consulting shop in San Ramon, CA called Grey Sparling. I don't know these guys. But Chris, who apparently used to work on the PeopleTools team, wrote a great article on a pre-acquisition, would-be deal between IBM and PeopleSoft that would have standardized PeopleSoft on IBM technology. The behind-the-scenes perspective is interesting. His commentary on the challenges that the company and PeopleSoft customers would have encountered if the deal had gone through was also interesting: ·         "No common ownership. It's hard enough to get large groups of people to work together when they work for the same company, but with two separate companies it is much, much harder. Even within Oracle, progress on Fusion applications was slow until Thomas Kurian took over Fusion applications in addition to Fusion middleware." ·         "No customer buy-in. PeopleSoft customers weren't asking for a conversion to WebSphere, so the fact that doing that could have helped PeopleSoft stay independent wouldn't have meant much to them, especially since the cost of moving to whatever a "PeopleSoft built on WebSphere" would have been significant." ·         "No executive buy-in. This is related to the previous point, but it's worth calling out separately. If Oracle had walked away and the deal with IBM had gone through, and PeopleSoft customers got put through the wringer as part of WebSphere move, all of the PeopleSoft project teams would be put in the awkward position of explaining to their management why these additional costs and headaches were happening. Essentially they would need to "sell" the partnership internally to their own management team. That's not a fun conversation to have." I'm not surprised that something like this was in the works. But I did find the inside scoop and Heller's perspective on the challenges particularly interesting. Especially the advantages of aligning development of applications and infrastructure development under one roof. Here's a link to the whole blog entry.  

    Read the article

  • Deleting Team Project in Team Foundation Server 2010

    - by Hosam Kamel
    I’m seeing a lot of people still using some old ways ported from TFS 2008 to delete a team project like TFSDeleteProject utility.   In TFS 2010 the administration tasks are made very easy to help you in a lot of administration stuff, for the deletion point specially you can navigate to the Administration Console then Select Team Project Collection Select the project collection contains the project you want to delete then navigate to Team Projects. Select the project then click Delete, you will have the option to delete any external artifacts and workspace too.   Hope it helps. Originally posted at "Hosam Kamel| Developer & Platform Evangelist"

    Read the article

  • Does a team of developers need a manager?

    - by Amadiere
    Background: I'm currently part of a team of four: 1 manager, 1 senior developer and 2 developers. We do a range of bespoke in-house systems / projects (e.g. 6-8 weeks) for an organisation of around 3500 staff, as well as all the maintenance and support required from the systems that have been created before. There is not enough of us to do all the work that is potentially coming our way - we're understaffed. Management acknowledge this, but budget restraints limit our ability to recruit additional members to the team (even if we make the salary back in savings). The Change This leaves us where we are now. Our manager is due to leave his role for pastures new, leaving a vacancy in the team. Management are using this opportunity to restructure our team which would see the team manager role replaced by another developer and another senior developer. Their logic being that we need more developers, so here's a way of funding it (one of the roles is partially funded from another vacant post). The team would have no direct line manager and the roles and responsibilities would be divided up between the seniors and the (relatively new to post) service manager (a non-technical role with little-to-no development knowledge/experience whose focus is shared amongst a number of other teams and individuals) - who would be our next actual manager up the food chain. I guess the final question is: Is it possible to run a development team without an manager? Have you had experience of this? And what things could go wrong / could be of benefit to us? I'd ideally like to "see the light" and the benefits of doing things this way, or come up with some points for argument against it.

    Read the article

  • Dealing with selfish team member(s)

    - by thegreendroid
    My team is facing a difficult quandary, a couple of team members are essentially selfish (not to be confused with dominant!) and are cherry-picking stories/tasks that will give them the most recognition within the company (at sprint reviews etc. when all the stakeholders are present). These team members are very good at what they do and are fully aware of what they are doing. When we first started using agile about a year ago, I can say I was quite selfish too (coming from a very individual-focused past). I took ownership of certain stories and didn't involve anyone else in it, which in hindsight wasn't the right thing to do and I learnt from that experience almost immediately. We are a young team of very ambitious twenty somethings so I can understand the selfishness to some extent (after all everyone should be ambitious!). But the level to which this selfishness has reached of late has started to bother me and a few others within my team. The way I see it, agile/scrum is all about the team and not individuals. We should be looking out for each other and helping each other improve. I made this quite clear during our last retrospective, that we should be fair and give everyone a chance. I'll wait and see what comes out of it in the next few sprints. In the meantime, what are some of the troubles that you have faced with selfish members and how did you overcome them?

    Read the article

  • Microsoft Team Foundation Server 2010 Service Pack 1

    - by javarg
    Last week Microsoft has released the first Service Pack for Team Foundation Server. Several issues have been fixed and included in this patch. Check out the list of fixes here. Cool stuff has been shipped with this new released, such as the expected Project Service Integration. PS: note that these annoying bugs has been fixed: Team Explorer: When you use a Visual Studio 2005 or a Visual Studio 2008 client, you encounter a red "X" on the reporting node of the team explorer. Source Control: You receive the error "System.IO.IOException: Unable to read data from the transport connection: The connection was closed." when you try to download a source

    Read the article

  • Messing with the Team

    - by Robert May
    Good Product Owners will help the team be the best that they can be.  Bad product owners will mess with the team and won’t care about the team.  If you’re a product owner, seek to do good and avoid bad behavior at all costs.  Remember, this is for YOUR benefit and you have much power given to you.  Use that power wisely. Scope Creep The product owner has several tools at his disposal to inject scope into an iteration.  First, the product owner can use defects to inject scope.  To do this, they’ll tell the team what functionality that they want to see in a feature.  Then, after the feature is developed, the Product Owner will decide that they don’t really like how the functionality behaves.  To change it, rather than creating a new story, they’ll add a defect.  The functionality is correct, as designed, but the Product Owner doesn’t like it.  By creating the defect, the Product Owner destroys the trust that the team has of the product owner.  They may not be able to count the story, because the Product Owner changed the story in the iteration, and the team then ends up looking like they have low velocity for something over which they have no control.  This is bad.  One way to deal with this is to add “Product Owner Time” to the iteration.  This will slow the velocity, but then the ScrumMaster can tell stake holders that this time is strictly in place to deal with bad behavior of the Product Owner. Another mechanism often used to inject Scope is the concept of directed development.  Outside of planning, stand-ups, or any other meeting, the Product Owner will take a developer aside and ask them to complete a task for them.  This is bad!  The team should be allocating all of their time to development.  If the Product Owner asks for a favor, then time that would normally be used for development will be used for a pet project of the Product Owner and the team will not get credit for this work.  Selfish product owners do this, and I typically see people who were “managers” do this behavior.  Authoritarian command and control development environments also see this happen.  The best thing that can happen is for the team member to report the issue to the ScrumMaster and the ScrumMaster to get very aggressive with management and the Product Owner to try and stop the behavior.  This may result in the ScrumMaster being fired, but if the behavior continues, Scrum is doomed.  This problem is especially bad in cases where the team member’s direct supervisor is the Product Owner.  I don’t recommend that the Product Owner or ScrumMaster have a direct report relationship with team members, since team members need the ability to say no.  To work around this issue, team members need to say no.  If that fails, team members need to add extra time to the iteration to deal with the scope creep injection and accept the lower velocity. As discussed above, another mechanism for injecting scope is by changing acceptance tests after the work is complete.  This is similar to adding defects to change scope and is bad.  To get around, add time for Product Owner uncertainty to the iteration and make sure that stakeholders are aware of the need to add this time because of the Product Owner. Refusing to Prioritize Refusing to prioritize causes chaos for the team.  From the team’s perspective, things that are not important will be worked on while things that the team knows are vital will be ignored.  A poor Product Owner will often pick the stories for the iteration on a whim.  This leads to the team working on many different aspects of the product and results in a lower velocity, since each iteration the team must switch context to the new area of development. The team will also experience confusion about priorities.  In one iteration, Feature X was the highest priority and had to be done.  Then, the following iteration, even though parts of Feature X still need to be completed, no stories to address them will be in the iteration.  However, three iterations later, Feature X will again become high priority. This will cause the team to not trust the Product Owner, and eventually, they’ll stop caring about the features they implement.  They won’t know what is important, so to insulate themselves from the ever changing chaos, they’ll become apathetic to all features.  Team members are some of the most creative people in a company.  By losing their engagement, the company is going to have a substandard product because the passion for the product won’t be in the team. Other signs that the Product Owner refuses to prioritize is that no one outside of the product owner will be consulted on priorities.  Additionally, the product, release, and iteration backlogs will be weak or non-existent. Dealing with this issue is not easy.  This really isn’t something the team can fix, short of taking over the role of Product Owner themselves.  An appeal to the stake holders might work, but only if the Product Owner isn’t a “manager” themselves.  The ScrumMaster needs to protect the team and do what they can to either get the Product Owner to prioritize or have the Product Owner replaced. Managing the Team A Product Owner that is also the “boss” of team members is a Scrum team that is waiting to fail.  If your boss tells you to do something, failing to do that something can cause you to be fired.  The team needs the ability to tell the Product Owner NO.  If the product owner introduces scope creep, the team has a responsibility to tell the Product Owner no.  If the Product Owner tries to get the team to commit to more than they can accomplish in an iteration, the team needs the ability to tell the Product Owner no. If the Product Owner is your boss and determines your pay increases, you’re probably not going to ever tell them no, and Scrum will likely fail.  The team can’t do much in this situation. Another aspect of “managing the team” that often happens is the Product Owner tries to tell the team how to develop the stories that are in the iteration.  This is one reason why I recommend that Product Owners are NOT technical people.  That way, the team can come up with the tasks that are needed to accomplish the stories and the Product Owner won’t know better.  If the Product Owner is technical, the ScrumMaster will need to take great care to protect the team from the ScrumMaster changing how the team thinks they need to implement the stories. Product Owners can also try to manage the team by their body language.  If the team says a task is going to take 6 hours to complete, and the Product Owner disagrees, they will use some kind of sour body language to indicate this disagreement.  In weak teams, this may cause the team to revise their estimate down, which will result in them taking longer than estimated and may result in them missing the iteration.  The ScrumMaster will need to make sure that the Product Owner doesn’t send such messages and that the team ignores them and estimates what they REALLY think it will take to complete the tasks.  Forcing the team to deal with such items in the retrospective can be helpful. Absenteeism The team is completely dependent upon the Product Owner to develop features for the customer.  The Product Owner IS the voice of the customer and without them, the team will lack direction.  Being the Product Owner is a full time job!  If the Product Owner cannot dedicate daily time with the team, a different product owner should be found. The Product Owner needs to attend every stand-up, planning meeting, showcase, and retrospective that the team has.  The team also must be able to have instant communication with the product owner.  They must not be required to schedule meetings to speak with their product owner.  The team must be the highest priority task that the Product Owner has. The best way to work around an absent Product Owner is to appoint a new Product Owner in the team.  This person will be responsible for making the decisions that the Product Owner should be making and to act as the liaison to the absent Product Owner.  If the delegate Product Owner doesn’t have authority to make decisions for the team, Scrum will fail.  If the Product Owner is absent, the ScrumMaster should seek to have that Product Owner replaced by someone who has the time and ability to be a real Product Owner. Making it Personal Too often Product Owners will become convinced that their ideas are the ones that matter and that anyone who disagrees is making a personal attack on them.  Remember that Product Owners will inherently be at odds with many people, simply because they have the need to prioritize.  Others will frequently question prioritization because they only see part of the picture that Product Owners face. Product Owners must have a thick skin and think egos.  If they don’t, they tend to make things personal, which causes them to become emotional and causes them to take actions that can destroy the trust that team members have in the Product Owner. If a Product Owner is making things person, the best thing that team members can do is reassure them that its not personal, but be firm about doing what is best for the Company and for the users.  The ScrumMaster should also spend significant time coaching the Product Owner on how to not react emotionally and how to accept criticism without becoming defensive. Conclusion I’m sure there are other ways that a Product Owner can mess with the team, but these are the most common that I’ve seen.  I would encourage all Product Owners to seek to be a good Product Owner.  If you find yourself behaving in any of the bad product owner ways, change your behavior today!  Your team will thank you. Remember, being Product Owner is very difficult!  Product Owner is one of the most difficult roles in Scrum.  However, it can also be one of the most rewarding roles in Scrum, since Product Owners literally see their ideas brought to life on the computer screen.  Product Owners need to be very patient, even in the face of criticism and need to be willing to make tough decisions on priority, but then not become offended when others disagree with those decisions.  Companies should spend the time needed to find the right product owners for their teams.  Doing so will only help the company to write better software. Technorati Tags: Scrum,Product Owner

    Read the article

  • Who should determine team size?

    - by TaylorOtwell
    Developers, managers, or customers? I was recently involved in a situation where I felt like the customers were arbitrarily demanding for more developers on a team which already had too many developers. They were scared the project was going to be late (and it probably will be). Personally, I was scared we were going to fulfill Brook's Law. The group of programmers already lacked in-depth business knowledge, and some were even new to the technology (.NET), yet the customer wanted to add more developers who had even less business knowledge. The impression was that this would make the project get done quicker. I started wondering if the customer, who is extremely bright, but presumably knows little about IT project management, should really be the one determining team size.

    Read the article

  • Essential roles for web application team

    - by jromero
    Some friends of mine came up with an idea for a web application which we (so far) think could be great. I made the analysis and all the early stages of the development process and I'm about to start the coding. I'm talking about something that is barely a mid-level project, so I consider one developer (myself) should be enough. The thing is that we are trying to assign roles to each one of us so we can be focused on our duties and have clear our responsibilities within the team. We are a crew of four people, three of us (my friends) are business people who would do the marketing, customer relationship, management and accounting stuff and I'm basically the developer. I have in mind to get them involved into the development process by giving them documentation to write and use them as testers, all of that besides the management duties they have. Perhaps someone out there have been in the same situation, so I would appreciate if the experience is shared so we can effectively give ourselves positions in the project based on what I explained above. Which are the essential roles or the optimal team layout so the idea can be developed successfully? The question is not strictly about programming, but it's related to build a software entrepreneurship beyond the code, that is something that I'm sure plenty of us are looking. Any help is really appreciated! Regards.

    Read the article

  • News you can use, PeopleTools gems at OpenWorld 2012

    - by PeopleTools Strategy
    Here are some of the sessions which may not have caught your eyes during your scheduling of events you would like to attend at this year's Open World! CON9183 PeopleSoft Technology Roadmap Jeff Robbins Mon, Oct 1 4:45 PM Moscone West, Room 3002/4 Jeff's session is always very well attended. Come to hear, and see, what's going to be delivered in the new release and get some thoughts on where PeopleTools and the industry is heading. CON9186 Delivering a Ground-Breaking User Interface with PeopleTools Matt Haavisto Steve Elcock Wed, Oct 3 3:30 PM Moscone West, Room 3009 This session will be wonderfully engaging for participants.  As part of our demonstration, audience members will be able to interact live and real-time with our demo using their smart phones and tablets as if you are users of the system. CON9188 A Great User Experience via PeopleSoft Applications Portal Matt Haavisto Jim Marion Pramod Agrawal Mon, Oct 1 12:15 PM Moscone West, Room 3009 This session covers not only the PeopleSoft Portal, but new features like Workcenters and Dashboards, and how they all work together to form the PeopleSoft ecosystem. CON9192 Implementing a PeopleSoft Maintenance Strategy with My Update Manager Mike Thompson Mike Krajicek Tue, Oct 2 1:15 PM Moscone West, Room 3009 The LCM development team will show Oracle's My Update Manager for PeopleSoft and how it drastically simplifies deciding what updates are required for your specific environment. CON9193 Understanding PeopleSoft Maintenance Tools & How They Fit Together Mike Krajicek Wed, Oct 3 10:15 AM Moscone West, Room 3002/4 Learn about the portfolio of maintenance tools including some of the latest enhancements such as Oracle's My Update Manager for PeopleSoft, Application Data Sets, and the PeopleSoft Test Framework, and see what they can do for you. CON9200 PeopleTools Product Team Panel Discussion Jeff Robbins Willie Suh Virad Gupta Ravi Shankar Mike Krajicek Wed, Oct 3 5:00 PM Moscone West, Room 3009 Attend this session to engage in an open discussion with key members of Oracle's PeopleTools senior management team. You will be able to ask questions, hear their thoughts, and gain their insight into the PeopleTools product direction. CON9205 Securing Your PeopleSoft Integration Infrastructure Greg Kelly Keith Collins Tue, Oct 2 10:15 AM Moscone West, Room 3011 This session, with the senior integration developer, will outline Oracle's best practices for securing your integration infrastructure so that you know your web services and REST services are as secure as the rest of your PeopleSoft environment. CON9210 Performance Tuning for the PeopleSoft Administrator Tim Bower David Kurtz Mon, Oct 1 10:45 AM Moscone West, Room 3009 Meet long time technical consultants with deep knowledge of system tuning, Tim Bower of the Center of Excellence and David Kurtz, author of "PeopleSoft for the Oracle DBA". System administrators new to tuning a PeopleSoft environment as well as seasoned experts will come away with new techniques that will help them improve the performance of their PeopleSoft system. CON9055 Advanced Management of Oracle PeopleSoft with Oracle Enterprise Manager Greg Kelly Milten Garia Greg Bouras Thurs Oct 4 12:45 PM Moscone West, Room 3009 This promises to be a really interesting session as Milten Garia from CSU discusses lessons learned during the implementation of Oracle's Enterprise Manager with the PeopleSoft plug-in across a multi campus environment. There are some surprising things about Solaris 10 and the Bourne shell. Some creative work by the Unix administrators so the well tried scripts and system replication processes were largely unaffected. CON8932 New Functional PeopleTools Capabilities for the Line of Business User Jeff Robbins Tues, Oct 2 5:00 PM Moscone West, Room 3007 Using PeopleTools 8.5x capabilities like: related content, embedded help, pivot grids, hover-over, and more, Jeff will discuss how these can deliver business value and innovation which will positively impact your business without the high costs associated with upgrading your PeopleSoft applications. Check out a more detailed list here. We look forward to meeting you all there!

    Read the article

  • Strategy Design Pattern -- *dynamic* !!!

    - by alexeypro
    My application will have different strategies for my objects. What's the best way of implementing that? I would really love the case when we can make strategy classes implementation dynamically loaded from, say, some relational database. Not sure how do that better, though. What's the best approach? Idea is that say we want to apply to object MyObj strategy Strategy123 then we just load from database by ID 123 the object, deserialize it, get the Strategy class, and use it with MyObj. The maintenance while sounds easier from the first look can be a pain in the long run if Strategy interfaces changes, etc. What can I do also? I want to find solution when I should be keeping Strategy classes in codebase -- just for the sake that I don't need code change and re-deployment of the application if my Strategy changes, or I add new strategy. Please advise!

    Read the article

  • Closing the gap between strategy and execution with Oracle Business Intelligence 11g

    - by manan.goel(at)oracle.com
    Wikipedia defines strategy as a plan of action designed to achieve a particular goal. An example of this is General Electric's acquisitions and divestiture strategy (plan) designed to propel GE to number 1 or 2 place (goal) in every business segment that it operated in. Execution on the other hand can be defined as the actions taken to getting things done. In GE's case execution will be steps followed for mergers/acquisitions or divestiture. Business press has written extensively about the importance of both strategy and execution in achieving desired business objectives. Perhaps the quote from Thomas Edison says it best - "vision without execution is hallucination". Conversely, it can be said that "execution without vision" is well may be "wishful thinking". Research overwhelmingly point towards the wide gap between strategy and execution. According to a published study, 49% of surveyed executives perceive a gap between their organizations' ability to develop and communicate sound strategies and their ability to implement those strategies. Further, of these respondents, 64% don't have full confidence that their companies will be able to close the gap. Having established the severity and importance of the problem let's talk about the reasons for the strategy-execution gap. The common reasons include: -        Lack of clearly defined goals -        Lack of consistent measure of success -        Lack of ownership -        Lack of alignment -        Lack of communication -        Lack of proper execution -        Lack of monitoring       There are multiple approaches to solving the problem including organizational development practices, technology enablement etc. In most cases a combination of approaches is required to achieve the desired result. For the purposes of this discussion, I'll focus on technology.  Imagine an integrated closed loop technology platform that automates the entire management cycle from defining strategy to assigning ownership to communicating goals to achieving alignment to collaboration to taking actions to monitoring progress and achieving mid course corrections. Besides, for best ROI and lowest TCO such a system should also have characteristics like:  Complete -        Full functionality -        Rich end user access Open -        Any data source -        Any business application -        Any technology stack  Integrated -        Common metadata -        Common security -        Common system management From a capabilities perspective the system should provide the following capabilities: Define -        Strategy -        Objectives -        Ownership -        KPI's Communicate -        Pervasive -        Collaborative -        Role based -        Secure Execute -        Integrated -        Intuitive -        Secure -        Ubiquitous Monitor -        Multiple styles and formats -        Exception based -        Push & Pull Having talked about the business problem and outlined the blueprint for a technology solution, let's talk about how Oracle Business Intelligence 11g can help. Oracle Business Intelligence is a comprehensive business intelligence solution for reporting, ad hoc query and analysis, OLAP, dashboards and scorecards. Oracle's best in class BI platform is based on an architecturally integrated technology foundation that provides a unified end user experience and features a Common Enterprise Information Model, with common security, query request generation and optimization, and system management. The BI platform is ·         Complete - meaning it delivers all modes and styles of BI including reporting, ad hoc query and analysis, OLAP, dashboards and scorecards with a rich end user experience that includes visualization, collaboration, alerts and notifications, search and mobile access. ·         Open - meaning the BI platform integrates with any data source, ETL tool, business application, application server, security infrastructure, portal technology as well as any ODBC compliant third party analytical tool. The suite accesses data from multiple heterogeneous sources--including popular relational and multidimensional data sources and major ERP and CRM applications from Oracle and SAP. ·         Integrated - meaning the BI platform is based on an architecturally integrated technology foundation built on an open, standards based service oriented architecture.  The platform features a common enterprise information model, common security model and a common configuration, deployment and systems management framework. To summarize, Oracle Business Intelligence is a comprehensive, integrated BI platform that lets you define strategy, identify objectives, assign ownership, define KPI's, collaborate, take action, monitor, report and do course corrections all form a single interface and a single system. The platform's integrated metadata model and task based design ensures that the entire workflow from defining strategy to execution to monitoring is completely integrated delivering end to end visibility, transparency and agility. Click here to learn more about Oracle BI 11g. 

    Read the article

  • New A-Team Web Site Launched

    - by .raja
    The A-Team has launched a new web site – the A-Team Chronicles which aggregates and organizes content produced by The A-Team members (including your humble blogger). The A-Team is a central, outbound, highly technical team comprised of Enterprise Architects, Solution Specialists and Software Engineers within the Fusion Middleware Product Development Organization that works with customers and partners, world wide, providing guidance on implementation best practices, architecture, troubleshooting and how best to use Oracle products to solve customer business needs. This content captures best practices, tips and tricks and guidance that the A-Team members gain from real-world experiences, working with customers and partners on implementation projects, through Architecture reviews, issue resolution and more. A-Team Chronicles makes this content available, through short and to the point articles to all our customers and partners in a consistent, easy to find and organized way. If you like the articles we post here, you might find even more interesting articles at the new A-Team Chronicles site, covering a wider range of Fusion Middleware topics. We will be decommissioning this site shortly in favor of A-Team Chronicles site and all new contents will be posted there.

    Read the article

  • PeopleSoft and PeopleTools at Oracle OpenWorld 2012

    - by PeopleTools Strategy
    From Jeff Robbins PeopleTools 8.52 Gregory Sawyer October 12.00 Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";} Oracle Open World is once again just around the corner.  This is a huge event for Oracle with thousands of individual sessions that cover all sorts of topics.  Here’s a link to a note from Paco Aubrejuan about PeopleSoft’s plans for this year’s conference: [link: http://www.oracle.com/us/industries/utilities/pfst-oow12-letter-1841052.pdf] Each year, PeopleTools sessions prove to be among the highest rated and best attended sessions of the conference. Once again we’ve put together a broad program of sessions and a great Hands on Lab, so be sure to use the Open World Schedule Builder to pre-register for the sessions you think will be of greatest value to you: [link: https://www.oracle.com/webapps/token/scheduler] Highlights of our program include: · Customer success with PeopleTools 8.52 · Great new features of the upcoming PeopleTools 8.53 · PeopleSoft’s new mobile solutions · Innovative technologies for your PeopleSoft system: Integration, User Experience, Lifecycle Management and more We’re excited about all that we have planned and look forward to seeing you there.  Stop by the DEMOGrounds to ask questions, see new features or just say hello. See you all there Jeff

    Read the article

  • What would you do to improve the working of a small Development team?

    - by Omar Kooheji
    My company is having a reshuffle and I'm applying for my boss' job as he's moved up the ladder. The new role would give me a chance to move our development team into the 21st century and I'd like to make sure that: I can provide sensible suggestions in the interview to get the job so I can fix the team If I get the job I can actually enact some changes to actually improve the lives of the developers and their output. I want to know what I can suggest to improve the way we work, because I think it's a mess but every time I've suggested a change it's been shot down because any time spend implementing the change would be time that isn't spent developing software. Here is the state of play at the moment: My team consists of 3-4 developers (Mainly Java but I do some .Net work) Each member of the team is usually works on 2-3 projects at a time We are each responsible for the entire life cycle of the project from design to testing. Usually only one person works on a project (Although we have the odd project that will have more than one person working on it.) Projects tend to be bespoke to single customer, or are really heavilly reliant on a particular customer environment. We have 2-3 "Products" which we evolve to meet customer requirements. We use SVN for source control We don't do continuous integration (I'd like to start) We use a really basic bug tracker for internal issue tracking (I'd like to move to an issue/task management system) Any changes that bring a sudden dip in revenue generation will probably be rejected, the company isn't structured for development most of the rest of the technical team's jobs can be broken down to install this piece of hardware, configure that piece of hardware and once a job is done it's done and you never have to look at it again. This mentality has crept into development team because it's part of the company culture.

    Read the article

  • How to interview my future team leader?

    - by Stormenet
    Our current team leader is quitting his job (starting his own company) and thus we are searching for a new team leader. It's a small team of 4 people (Team leader included). Since it's a small team we expect the team leader not to only manage us but also do some coding. Because of this I convinced the R&D manager to let me have a say in this so that I can evaluate his technical skills and managing skills. I have little experience interviewing people let alone my future Team leader. What I search in a team leader is someone who isn't running a dictatorship but someone that when there are issues there is a discussion about it and we take everyone on the same line. What are the things I should not forget to ask and what are the skills I should find in that person?

    Read the article

  • What was missing from the Content Strategy Forum?

    - by Roger Hart
    In April, Paris hosted the first ever Content Strategy Forum. The event's website proudly proclaims: 170 attendees, 18 nationalities, 17 speakers, 1 volcano... Content Strategy Forum 2010 rocked the world! The volcano was in Iceland, and the closest we came to rocking the world was a cursory mention in the Huffington Post, but I'll grant the event was awesome. One thing missing from that list, however, is "94 companies" (Plus a couple of universities and freelancers, and what have you). A glance through the attendees directory reveals a fairly wide organisational turnout - 24 students from two Parisian universities, countless design and marketing agencies, a series of tech firms, small and large. Two delegates from IBM, two from ARM, an appearance from RIM, Skype, and Facebook; twelve from the various bits of eBay. Oh, and, err, nobody from Google, Microsoft, Yahoo, Amazon, Play, Twitter, LinkedIn, Craigslist, the BBC, no banks I noticed, and I didn't spot a newspaper. You get the idea. Facebook notwithstanding, you have to scroll through a few pages to Alexa rankings to find company names from the attendee list. I find this interesting, and I'm not wholly sure what to make of it. Of the large, web-centric, content-rich organizations conspicuously absent, at least one of two things is true: They didn't know about the event They didn't care about the event Maybe these guys all have content strategy completely sorted, and it's an utterly naturalised part of their business process. Maybe nobody at say, Apple or Play.com ever publishes a single piece of content that isn't neatly tailored to their (clearly defined, of course) user and business goals. Wouldn't that be lovely? The thing is, in that rosy and beatific world, there's still a case for those folks to join the community. There are bound to be other perspectives, and things to learn. You see, the other thing achingly conspicuous by its absence was case studies. In her keynote address, Kristina Halvorson made the point that what content strategy really needs is some big, loud success stories. A point I'd firmly second as a content strategist working within an organisation. Sarah Cancilla's presentation on content strategy at Facebook included some very neat, specific examples, and was richer for it. It didn't hurt that the example was Facebook - you're getting impressively big numbers off base. What about the other big boys? Is there anybody out there with a perspective? Do we all just look very silly to you, fretting away over text and images and users and purposes? Is content validation and maintenance so accustomed a part of your business that calling attention to it is like sniffing the air and saying "Hmm, a lot of nitrogen about today."? And if it is, do you have any wisdom to share?

    Read the article

  • TF30004: The New Team Project Wizard encountered an unexpected error while initializing the Microsof

    - by Frozzare
    Hello, i get this error when i trying to create a new project in team project. The server is right, i check all ports. I don't now what i should do now, can't find any good information 2009-09-19 01:45:41Z | Module: Internal | Team Foundation Server proxy retrieved | Completion time: 0.338 seconds 2009-09-19 01:45:41Z | Module: Internal | The template information for Team Foundation Server "TFSServer01" was retrieved from the Team Foundation Server. | Completion time: 0.099 seconds 2009-09-19 01:45:41Z | Module: Wizard | Retrieved IAuthorizationService proxy | Completion time: 0.404 seconds 2009-09-19 01:45:41Z | Module: Wizard | TF30227: Project creation permissions retrieved | Completion time: 0.015 seconds 2009-09-19 01:45:44Z | Module: Engine | Thread: 5 | New project will be created with the "MSF for Agile Software Development - v4.2" methodology 2009-09-19 01:45:44Z | Module: Engine | Retrieved IAuthorizationService proxy | Completion time: 0 seconds 2009-09-19 01:45:44Z | Module: Engine | TF30227: Project creation permissions retrieved | Completion time: 0.01 seconds 2009-09-19 01:45:45Z | Module: Engine | Wrote compressed process template file | Completion time: 0.001 seconds 2009-09-19 01:45:46Z | Module: Engine | Extracted process template file | Completion time: 1.428 seconds 2009-09-19 01:45:46Z | Module: Engine | Thread: 5 | Starting Project Creation for project "TestProject" in domain "TFSServer01" 2009-09-19 01:45:46Z | Module: Engine | The user identity information was retrieved from the Group Security Service | Completion time: 0.045 seconds 2009-09-19 01:45:46Z | Module: Initializer | Thread: 5 | The New Team Project Wizard is starting to initialize the plug-ins. 2009-09-19 01:45:46Z | Module: CssStructureUploader | Thread: 5 | Entering Initialize in CssStructureUploader 2009-09-19 01:45:46Z | Module: CssStructureUploader | Thread: 5 | Initialize for CssStructureUploader complete 2009-09-19 01:45:46Z | Module: Initializer | Thread: 5 | The New Team Project Wizard successfully Initialized the plug-in Microsoft.ProjectCreationWizard.Classification. 2009-09-19 01:45:46Z | Module: Rosetta | Thread: 5 | Entering Initialize in RosettaReportUploader 2009-09-19 01:45:48Z | Module: Rosetta | Thread: 5 | Exiting Initialize for RosettaReportUploader 2009-09-19 01:45:48Z | Module: Initializer | Thread: 5 | The New Team Project Wizard successfully Initialized the plug-in Microsoft.ProjectCreationWizard.Reporting. 2009-09-19 01:45:48Z | Module: WSS | Thread: 5 | Entering Initialize in WssSiteCreator 2009-09-19 01:45:48Z | Module: WSS | Thread: 5 | Site information: Title = "TestProject" Description = "This team project was created based on the 'MSF for Agile Software Development - v4.2' process template." 2009-09-19 01:45:48Z | Module: WSS | Thread: 5 | Base site url: http://TFSServer01:14143/webbplatser 2009-09-19 01:45:48Z | Module: WSS | Thread: 5 | Admin site url: http://TFSServer01:16183/_vti_adm/admin.asmx ---begin Exception entry--- Time: 2009-09-19 01:46:27 Z Module: Initialize Event Description: TF30207: Initialization for plugin "Microsoft.ProjectCreationWizard.Portal 'failed Exception Type: Microsoft.TeamFoundation.Client.PcwException Exception Message: The client discovered that content-type of request is text / html; charset = utf-8, but the text / xml expected. The request failed with error message: -- Unable to connect to the configuration database. --. Stack Trace: vid Microsoft.VisualStudio.TeamFoundation.WssSiteCreator.CheckPermissions(ProjectCreationContext ctxt) vid Microsoft.VisualStudio.TeamFoundation.WssSiteCreator.Initialize(ProjectCreationContext context) vid Microsoft.VisualStudio.TeamFoundation.EngineStarter.InitializePlugins(MsfTemplate template, PcwPluginCollection pluginCollection) -- Inner Exception -- Exception Type: System.InvalidOperationException Exception Message: The client discovered that content-type of request is text / html; charset = utf-8, but the text / xml expected. The request failed with error message: -- Unable to connect to the configuration database. --. Stack Trace: vid System.Web.Services.Protocols.SoapHttpClientProtocol.ReadResponse(SoapClientMessage message, WebResponse response, Stream responseStream, Boolean asyncCall) vid System.Web.Services.Protocols.SoapHttpClientProtocol.Invoke(String methodName, Object[] parameters) vid Microsoft.TeamFoundation.Proxy.Portal.Admin.GetLanguages() vid Microsoft.VisualStudio.TeamFoundation.WssSiteCreator.CheckPermissions(ProjectCreationContext ctxt) -- end Inner Exception -- --- end Exception entry --- Thanks for you help

    Read the article

  • Modified Strategy Design Pattern

    - by Samuel Walker
    I've started looking into Design Patterns recently, and one thing I'm coding would suit the Strategy pattern perfectly, except for one small difference. Essentially, some (but not all) of my algorithms, need an extra parameter or two passed to them. So I'll either need to pass them an extra parameter when I invoke their calculate method or store them as variables inside the ConcreteAlgorithm class, and be able to update them before I call the algorithm. Is there a design pattern for this need / How could I implement this while sticking to the Strategy Pattern? I've considered passing the client object to all the algorithms, and storing the variables in there, then using that only when the particular algorithm needs it. However, I think this is both unwieldy, and defeats the point of the strategy pattern. Just to be clear I'm implementing in Java, and so don't have the luxury of optional parameters (which would solve this nicely).

    Read the article

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