A mature maturity model for continuous delivery including culture and DevOps

Do you love the idea of a model that rules them all? I bet you have, we all have 🙂

“Devops has huge business benefits: Statistics show that organizations that practice devops outperform the SMP500 over a 3 year period, high-performing IT organizations have 50 percent higher market cap growth, and so on.”

I have ben fan of models in my whole life (kind of, since I remember anyway). The idea with a model it that it’s not a process. It just helps you understand things. While a process is how you shall navigate. I’m not fan of processes. I love to create them though, for others. It might sound rude but I’m a creative person that love to be on the top of the wave. Processes can’t make me think outside of the box or live outside it so I just creates them for others that don’t have time or interest to be on the top of the wave all the time. My daily activity in my head loves the ideas of innovation, efficiency – how can we make it easier and still with high quality? How can we do it in such a way that we do not need to do a lot of bad work when we want to change something? These are the questions I always ask myself every day in all areas. I can not stand the feeling to stand still and be smug. I am a thinker who loves changes. I’m curious person.

The last 10 years or so I have always been interested in different working models/processes. Therefore ALM (Application Lifetime Management) became an interesting area for me. Agile processes, gamification and so on.

We have this constant goal and vision to work towards something better. It shall be easy to make adjustments to the code and the architecture. It shall be easy to delete code that is not used anymore and, last but not least it should be fun and innovative approach to work with software development and deliver a smile on the customer’s lips every time. Faster deliveries and keep up with the competition has never been more important than now. Before, it was easier to become complacent and just sell on. Today we cant work this way if we want to keep up.

drastolen

Today we talk about agile delivery, continuous delivery. We’re talking about spending less time on code problems with smart and effective continuous integrations. We talk about the importance to measure value via monitor behaviour etc. We’re talking also about saving time in testing, operations and so on in order to keep up. To help and make managers and buyers less busy, several companies worked to develop various maturity models. With the main goal to be able to run faster delivery and early take part of the digitalisation and its digital transformation taking place today.

I wrote myself a Swedish post on my LinkedIn about five maturity levels for the  transformation regarding better continues delivery benefit.

Level 1 – A few develop are the organisations super heroes (Ad hoc solutions)
Level 2 – Time-Boxed releases
Level 3 – Regular deliveries
Level 4 – Release Command
Level 5 – Hypothesis-driven development

I recently wanted to find a model that explains all this in a more technical level. To help companies to identify where you are in the area of DevOps, test, code, culture, processes and so on. I have read four different maturity models from four different companies. But I didn’t like them. Most of them feel like they were created based on other companies’ problems and not based on a general level. A colleague of mine gave me a link to a model that actually is a great addition to the five levels I previously presented.

The model comes from the company Praqma. Not only that it is presented nicely, it is also spot on based on my thought and experiences in that field. The expert step is a great addition to #NoEstimate, Lean Startups with Hypothesis-Driven-development/Design and Pain-Driven-Development/design as the level 5 above.

cd-maturity

You can read more about it here
http://code-maturity.praqma.com/

If you are interested how you can work or how a system need to be designed and what transformation you need to do to reach the expert level, don’t hesitate to contact me or read my blog and forthcoming posts.

Who is Johan Normén?

Johan Normén works as a speaker, mentor, team leader, agile coach, and senior .net developer at Softhouse in Gothenburg Sweden. He has over 18 years business experienced and worked in many different projects and roles. Was one of the creators of Swenug (Sweden .Net User Group) with over 3000 members all over the country. He started the computer era as game designer at the age of 12 with his Amiga and team. He has been nominated as the top 10 developers in Sweden in the Swedish version of Computer Sweden 2015 and member of IDG Expert Network Team

Twitter: @johannormen

Advertisements

Hypothesis Driven Development with example

My previous blog-post was an introduction to HDD (Hypothesis driven development). In this blog post I will take it a step further and give you an example how you can use it and how easy it can be and how it can change the way you work entirely to a new level.
You can read it [here].

Remember:
HDD is an experimental driven process, it’s main goal is to find out if a certain idea generates ROI and happy users. To get fast result you will also need fast support to evaluate your experiment, if you want to evaluate the idea in production I prefer a smooth decoupled architecture and a mature CI & CD organization. It’s not a must to, but it will really decrease development time and cycle time.
Sadly, I have no maturity model written in English yet. You can read one I did in Swedish on my LinkedIn posts [here]

Let’s start the story.

Team:  A cross-functional team with talent people regarding:
Design, UX, Coding, Testing and so on. And also including some market people and product owner.

At a meeting with the customer and team a team member (TM) got this cool idea regarding an e-commerce platform.

– What if the stock value changes in real time? Wouldn’t that be cool? Maybe it increases the conversion rate? The users might be stressed that this nice shoe will get out of stock?

A business person (BP) responds:
– What will it cost? Can you estimate?

– I don’t know, and I don’t. And I don’t know if my hypothesis even works. Can’t we skip this estimating and cost discussion and find out and then see if it’s worth implementing at all?  (TM)

– How? (BP)

– Let’s just do some A/B testing and fake a simulation of stock value changes and monitor if the user will buy the product more often or faster than today? If we get an 2% increased conversion rate it really worth implementing isn’t it?  (TM)

– Yes, you got a points there, this Sounds interesting. (BP)

Instead of creating User Stories the team now write Hypothesis stories.

Real-Time stock value changes
We Believe That
real-time stock values on the product page
Will Result in improved customer engagement and conversion
We Will Know We Have Succeeded When we see a 5% increased speed and about 2% conversion increase from the time the stock change in real-time till they press the add to cart button.

The meeting generate lots of hypothesis stories and the product owner can now prioritize them based on the ROI for the result outcome.

– A 2% increased conversion rate is really nice. Today we got like 5000$ each day, 2% will give us about 100$ more. In a month it’s around 3000$. If the experiment works and generate this value; You can spend around 30h of development time and we still get more money than not implement it at all. (BM)

– Yes you can say that, but let’s not convert it to time yet, let’s see if it’s worth implementing at all. Because if we spend around 10-30 hour for this feature and it will not increase conversion at all; we just wasted lots of money for developing a crappy feature. Let’s be smart and just spend time creating features that generate values in short and long runs instead. Assumptions is not a good thing. (TM)

– Ok, we can give it a try, because we have done so many bad assumptions we even can’t monitor at all. (BP)

The Product owner decided to activate the experiment and tells the team to do the fastest possible implementation to get information to see if this hypothesis will generate values at all.

The team gathered as usual at a stand-up and activated the work of the hypothesis.

– So what is the fastest possible solution to get rapid feedback regarding this? (TM)
– We can ask the customer?
– Nah, the customer might say, cool feature or – Do you want to stress us even more?
– Ok, let’s implement a test in our code and monitor the outcome?
– Sure, what’s the fastest way?
– This is part of the UI so let’s do it simple with some JavaScript. The only thing we need to understand is if it works. So there is no need to make it perfect. We do not need to add back-end functionality to get this information either. I can type a JavaScript that just randomly decrease the stock-values on some products. And then monitor with our application-insight code if they will press the button faster or not. It doesn’t matter if the stock value is a faked value for a while… If the value is 5 or 4 doesn’t matter that much.
– Nice, cool this will take us around 15 minutes or so? And thanks to our CI  & CD approach the feature will be out within 20-30 min or so and we can then start monitor it. If the result is good, then we implement it all the way with tests and quality in mind.
– Cool, this is nice, if the PO asked us to estimate it and add management work around it and do all the other stuff we do for a user story it would take longer cycle time than 30 minutes for just get started on this one. We aren’t wasting anything here, just getting knowledge and information if the idea is worth implementing or not. We will save around 15 minutes and also get the information if it’s even worth implementing. It’s much better than assume it does by implement it and hope it will generate values.

The team agreed.

Liza loved the idea regarding NoPSD so instead of spend time on working with PSD files or other tools for design she just opened the SASS file (css manipulation) and added three new classes with three different color. Green for normal stock values, Orange that indicate near out of stock and red that indicate very soon out of stock.

.stock-Normal
{
     color: #38893d;
}.stock-Warning

    color: #fe8f01;
}
.stock-Critical

    color: #be0000;
}

Thanks to nice SASS structures it just took her 2 minutes. When she pushed the code to the source control it automatically generated a new css file that got released into production, this because the team had nice CI & CD approach. (Why not release it? It will not hurt anything though nothing using the classes at the moment anyway.)

The front-end was built on AngularJs and the stock area was created as a web component and rest of the system is based on ASP.Net MVC and Web Api. Meanwhile Liza added the css John added a feature toggle in the code and took the html from the web component template and added it to the new feature for the hypothesis.

The feature toggle framework they use uses one configuration file to indicate if the feature is on and off.
They simple add it as an appSetting in web.config or appSettings.json (if using ASP .Net 1.0 Core).

“IRLStock” : “true”;

The team uses a framework that uses a C# class as a feature toggle so they easy can remove the class and get compilation error where the feature existed, so they do not forget to remove the code later on.

public class IRLStock {}

The code with razor syntax (ugly code? I know but much faster than create a new web-component to get the result from this experiment, it’s important to not waste unnecessary time for a more complicated solution, then you missed the whole point. This code will be deleted after the experiment anyway. For experiments it’s just waste to add sugar to it.):

@if(Feature<IRLStock).Is().Enabled)
{  
     < script >
… a script that just gets a random number between 2-6 seconds…
… this number just trigger a interval eg.
setInterval(changeStock, randomNumber);..
..
and set a new class to the element…
getElementById(“stockDemo”)…

< /script >

< div class=”stock-number” id=”stockDemo”>< /div >
< div class=”stock-text”> In Stock< /div >
}
else
{
<stock-indicator></stock-indicator>
 //Old code that works. If feature is turned off the ordinary code will run. An easy way to turn on off features, you can even turn on feature in dev mode but disable it in production mode…

}

John started the page to see if the script worked as intended. He didn’t create any tests since the code will be deleted as soon the experiment is done.

It worked. So he pushed the code, the CI & CD took care of everything and now the experiment was live.
It took him only 15 minutes.

And the result:

 

Two weeks later:
The PO asked the team how the experiment went. The team showed the PO the monitored data they have gathered. It didn’t show any direct speed increase only 0.5% faster than average. But the conversion rate was higher than before. 1.8%. So the hypothesis with the goal of 5% increased speed and 2% conversion rate did not work. But it still generates 1.8% conversion rate. The PO was not fully convinced if the feature was that good so he wanted to test the experiment one more week.

One week later:
Still the same result 1.8%.

– Ok the experimental code just gave us about 2400$ extra income. That’s nice, lets implement it. Is it possible to get it done within a week or two? (BP)

– Sure, we already have the infrastructure with SignalR since before so we just need to add a new REST API in our Asp .Net Web Api module for the product page. We already have code for retrieving Stock   values in our validation of the cart so thanks to our SOLID approach with SRP (Single responsibility principle) we already have a repository method to retrieve the actual stock value for an articleid.
The style we added can be reused, no need to change that; we just need to add the event handling in our Angular web-component for the stock indicator. It will not take that long either though we only need to act on the event triggered from SignalR and add the new stock value to our view model. Add some code that switch the class based on the stock value. I think with tests we will have this implemented up and running within few days or in a week. Especially thanks to our CI & CD approach and our architecture. (TM)

– Nice. Let’s create a user story and add it to the backlog (BP)

Summary
Sounds too easy right? Like a Utopia? I know, but it’s not. With good agile organization mindset, with well-educated team, with good CI & CD, DevOps and architecture it will be easier than before. As humans we mostly do things too complicated, and thanks to a lack of slack in organizations you don’t have time over for the team to be more innovated and creative in learning.We need time to invent things easier and better than last time. Continuous improvement is so important so don’t waste that benefit.

 

Who is Johan Normén?

Johan Normén is 37 years old, work as a speaker, mentor, team leader, agile coach, and senior .net developer at Softhouse in Gothenburg Sweden. He has over 18 years business experienced and worked in many different projects and roles. Was one of the creators of Swenug (Sweden .Net User Group) with over 3000 members all over the country. He started the computer era as game designer at the age of 12 with his Amiga and team. He has been nominated as the top 10 developers in Sweden in the Swedish version of Computer Sweden 2015

Twitter: @johannormen

 

 

Implement HDD (Hypothesis driven development – Part of Lean Startup) with #NoEstimate

I remember when I study Information Technology in college (1995), we published local newspapers for our school. I’m not that good writing articles so I mostly worked with the layout and ideas to make the paper look great. My talent was used for the cover and also to make the paper more user friendly. To do this I tested lots of ideas with the team and with survey,  interviews and we monitored what worked best for our readers. We also had another competitor who also launched a newspaper at our school.

I remember one time when I wanted to add a little tag on the upper left corner. A tag with black background and white uppercase words explaining what section you where on. Like SPORT, MEDIA, GOSSIPS, GAMES and so on. I wanted this because I thought it will make it easier for the readers to remember what section they where on and also an indicator so the reader can jump to the most interested section without reading the table of contents. We added this section topic tags on each page as a test.

One week later we asked the readers what they think about the new version. Most of them pointed out that it was really nice with the section topic tags but they wanted to us to add the page number up in that corner as well. Some other stuff was bad so we removed that in the next number and added the page number in the upper left corner as the user wanted. We used reusable template so it was an easy fix.

Two months later, our competitors also took this idea to their newspaper. At this point we got a better colored RGB-printer so we removed the section topic tag names and colored the background instead. Why read the topic when you can see the topic? Blue for sport, red for gossip, yellow for fashion and so on. It worked even better, the user thought some colors felt wrong for some sections, so we changed the color based on the user inputs and they where happy. Guess what our competitor did later on?

Some ideas were great so we kept them even if the competitors copy us. We still sold more newspapers then them. Because we tested new ideas and listened to our readers all the time to get rapid feedback. We engaged our readers. And it was important for us to fail fast if our ideas were bad. It’s our readers who pays us so it would be bad idea not listen to them. How often do you ask your users what pain them the most with your software and what change they expect? What functions can you delete to clean up the code from smells and other unnecessary things that are not used anymore? Do you monitor how the user use your software?

In this post I will give you some introduction and guidance of some practices regarding how you can make this possible with HDD and #NoEstimate.

HDD (Hypothesis driven development)
As development industry continues to mature, we now have an opportunity to leverage improved capabilities with Continuous Design and Delivery to maximize our potential to learn quickly what works and what does not for the users. To do this we need to engage the user or monitor the user’s actions. We need to learn from them not just teach them.

Are you familiar with User Stories and maybe even BDD (Behavior riven development?)

User story focused on capturing requirements for what we want to build and for whom and why. The main goal is to enable the user to receive a specific benefit from the system.

User story format:

As a…  <user>
I Want… <something>
So That… <I receive benefit>

User story are mostly common in the process when some market people or it-leaders have decide what shall be built. It’s not uncommon that the selection of user stories is based on the estimated time rather then the real user value. – Is X that big? Then let’s skip it, we need to give the user features fast and can’t spend time on the most expensive once.

(BDD) Behaviour Driven Development takes us to the next step. It aims to improve the user stories by supporting communication and collaboration between developers, tester and non-technical participants in a software project.

In Order To… <receive benefit>
As A… <role>
I Want… <goal/desire>

User Stories and BDD stories are both often created within the development process as a result of already prioritised features that will be built based on our definition of done and so on. But how value-driven is that? Do you really know if that feature will be used by the users? They might say “we need it!” if you ask them, but will they use it? Is it worth spending time to estimate something you are not sure if a user really need? Is it worth develop a user story with high quality and release it month later if the user wont even use it anyway? What about the feature Y you decided to skip because it was estimated to high? We need to view our work as an experiment to really find out. We need to ad a better process for innovation and monitoring what pains the user most to understand what benefit them the most. We need to learn from the users, not the value of an estimate or assumptions.

When viewing work as an experiment, the traditional story process is insufficient. As in college when we defined the steps we needed to achieve the desired outcome. We need to observe if our idea (hypothesis) is valid.

If we observe signals that indicate if our idea or hypothesis is correct, we can be more confident that we are on the right path and can alter the user story process to reflect this.

Keep in mind that a hypothesis that was once valid may later be disproven when markets change. Markets move, so you need to continually ask whether the business model is still valid or not. HDD is value-driven and the market is too.

A hypothesis story can be implemented with different technologies and tools, the main goal with a hypothesis is the explanation what action you need to implement to get the indication if it worth implementing.

We believe… <this capability>
Will result in… <this outcome>
We will know we have succeeded when… <we see a measurable signal>

Examples of Hypothesis-Driven Development user stories are;
We Believe That real-time stock values on the product page
Will Result In improved customer engagement and conversion
We Will Know We Have Succeeded When we see a 5% increased speed from the time the stock change in real-time till they press the add to cart button.

Why I mentioned #NoEstimate in this post topic is because you do not estimate when wotking with hypothesis, you just use the easiest and fastest tools to reach your goal, so you can take action if it’s worth implement it as a full qualified feature in your system or not.

Lean startup and UX for Lean Startup will explain more how. I will not cover this in this blogpost, it’s almost to big as is.
A hint: Instead of write user story, spend time estimating and then build all the technical stuff regarding real-time stock value changes, just add a simple timer in javascript that decrease the stock value on different products to see if the user reacts on it. If not, then you have saved lots of time not implement a fully working feature. I can promise you that it’s worth spending less then one hour to implement some test data rather then add a push or pull system (with eg. SignalR?) that monitor the stock values in the e-commerce platform you use.

To use value-driven-design and HDD you need to change the way your organization work and also the traditional mindset of yours.

Some methods you need to add to your organization are:
– Increase observations
– Formulate a hypothesis
– Design an experiment to test the hypothesis
– Evaluate if the experiment has succeeded
– Conduct the experiment
– Evaluate the results of the experiment
– Accept or reject the hypothesis
– If necessary, make and test a new hypothesis

To make this possible you also need the developers to be more mature in the way they craft. HDD requires that you write code that is easy to test, profile, benchmark, and change. They need to learn about A/B Testing and how to implement it to the code.
A more mature model for CI (Continuous integration) and CD (Continuous Delivery) are also a must for even bigger benefits. Other useful techniques can be feature toggling (can be used for A/B Testing) and also rapid development for releasing and remove measured and monitored prototypes, dark launches and even live ops.

“By combining Continuous Delivery and Hypothesis-Driven Development we can now define working software and validated learning as the primary measures of progress.”
– Thoughtworks

Traditional process vs HDD process

Traditional process
1. PO add epics, features or user stories in a backlog.
2. Team estimate the items
3. PO decide what items need to be implemented (often based on time and cost)
4. The team implement the feature
5. The team release the feature
6. The process starts over from 1-6 again.
(7). Team spend time on supporting and maintain released software.

Result: Something will be implemented and released, but it’s uncertain if its what the users really want.

HDD process
1. The organization make observations
a. Ask the support people what makes the users scream the most
b. Ask the team and acceptance testers what features are hardest to test
c. Interview real users and also create personas if hard to get interview, or use both
d. Record users using the software to get indication of the impression and feelings etc…
e. Look at trends, competitors
d. Monitor and measure the app (buttons clicks, sequence orders, timers etc..)
(Did you know that people mostly use only about 10%-20% of all features in one
application?)
2. Formulate the hypothesis.
3. Design what’s needed to experiment the hypothesis.
(see: Lean startup, Lean startup ux for more inspirations.)
4. Evaluate the result of the experiment
(If you need to implement a monitored A /B Testing and  prototype, remember you need   some time to collect that data. It’s better to wait for a result then spend lots of            unnecessary time to implement something that takes time and never gets used and spend that time on the most valuable features instead)
5. Accept or reject the hypothesis.
(If rejected, start over from 1 or continue from 3)
6. Make a User story of the accepted hypothesis.
(#NoEstimate: There is no need to estimate the user stories, at this point the users have already told you they will use the feature and need it. Save unnecessary waste instead and spend time to continuous improve your CI & CD process instead.)
7. Implement the user story and release with CI  & CD in mind.

Result :
You will mostly spent time on feature users really want that gives you the best value and ROI. You don’t waste time on features that never get used. And the whole HDD process is like an innovation process as well. So you get that as a bonus too.

If you liked this, please read: Hypothesis Driven Development with example

 

Who is Johan Normén?
Johan Normén is 37 years old, work as a speaker, mentor, team leader, agile coach, and senior .net developer at Softhouse in Gothenburg Sweden. He has over 18 years business experienced and worked in many different projects and roles. Was one of the creators of Swenug (Sweden .Net User Group) with over 3000 members all over the country. He started the computer era as game designer at the age of 12 with his Amiga and team. He has been nominated as the top 10 developers in Sweden in the Swedish version of Computer Sweden 2015

Twitter: @johannormen

 

How can I add style rules to give visual feedback in TFS Online regarding untouched working items?

I love design and I love visual reports and alarms if something is failing. I do not love text reports though they don’t give much based on real time information and you must read lots of text to say some few things. That’s one of the biggest ideas I love about Kanban boards and the creativity for teams to make it more self-reporting by look at the board.

In this blog-post I will give you a tips how you early can indicate if a user story hasn’t been change for a while. Let say you have a velocity of doing x-total user stories a day. Something happens on the way and you want it to be visual for the whole team.  Maybe you thought you could handle more user stories than predicted in the sprint? Or in your daily work? Maybe you have spent to many days on a user story without anything happens to it and want to indicate a visual risk?
And to indicate this you want the Kanban board to tell you early that you might be in trouble so you can fix the problem early in the iteration.

You can simple visual this by adding styling rules in TFS Online that change the color of the User Story or the Task if you want to.

I my case I love the idea to indicate a warning if the card hasn’t been processed for a while. First I want to indicate it with orange color that tells me: “Hey, we might be in trouble here, but we are not in the critical state yet! :/ And I also want to know if my User Story is in a critical state. “hey, dude this User story takes too long, there is a high risk here! 😛 ”.

3
Like this image above.

TFS Online does not have all the feature I wish for when created this blogpost. So I will use the “Changed Date” attribute on cards. What I really wanted was some kind of Deadline Attribute. If using #NoEstimate and 1-2days UoW (Unit of Work) approach it could be set to 2 days from the date when you approved it, and start working on that item. Or if using Scrum Model and add estimated times on the tasks you can set the deadline to the time summarized by all the tasks and some extra risk factor if wanted.

I used LeanKit before and added deadline to cards that the customer needed to handle before it was in the Definition of Ready State. To let them understand that something needs to be done in two days, if not we need to put it back to the backlog. Or a deadline for people that love to compete with them self-regarding their own task in a more “Gamification at work” way. Or if working with other stakeholders like integration partners and need to push them to be done with some tasks before a certain date, though they had not the possibility to go full agile with us.

0
This is how it looks like in LeanKit if the end date is near. It gets yellow. If not, it’s white and over time it’s red. I love those kinds of Visual Elements and LeanKit have many nice features for it. So let’s hope TFS Online soon will have too.

To add similar rule, you simply go to the board settings.
1
After that I added two rules.
I called them ”to Late” and “Out of Time”. The naming can be something different I just used them for this demonstration.

2

In the Styling rule I used the “Changed date” and @Today syntax. @Today is just the date of the actual day. You can use more advanced attributes if using TFS on premise.

For the “Out of Time” I added the orange color and wanted to get indication if the item hasn’t changes within a day.

Changed Date <= @Today -1

2a

The Card will indicate change when it’s moved to different states, when text is changed etc. But sadly it will not trigger changed date if a related task has been changed, and that’s sad though in Scrum projects you mostly work with many tasks for each user story. And it would be nice to indicate on the User Story level if a task has some rules you missed.  Eg. You might have forgotten to change the remaining time, and to indicate on the user story level that something is wrong would be a nice feature to let developers know that they have missed this. The remaining time is important for the burn charts etc.

And for the “to late” I did the same but red color and -2 days.

Changed Date <= @Today -2

You can have higher numbers if you like to. I just add -1 and -2 for the demo.
2b

And here is how it can look like in action.

You got the warnings. One user story is near critical state and the other one is already in critical state.
As soon you move the card it will change the date and the result will be normal again.

34

Have fun playing around…

More tips:
How to color a card based on Tags or Title containing some kind of texts:
https://rockjohan.wordpress.com/2015/10/09/how-to-color-cards-in-microsoft-tfs-online-like-add-color-to-a-lean-hypothesis-card/

How to add DoD (Definiton of Done) you your columns in TFS Online
https://rockjohan.wordpress.com/2015/10/04/definition-of-done-dod-in-tfs-online/

Who is Johan Normén?
Johan Normén is 37 years old, work as a speaker, mentor, team leader, agile coach, and senior .net developer at Softhouse in Gothenburg Sweden.
He has over 18 years business experienced and worked in many different projects and roles. Was one of the creators of Swenug (Sweden .Net User Group) with over 3000 members all over the country. He started the computer era as game designer at the age of 12 with his Amiga and team. He has been nominated two time as the top 100 developers in Sweden in the Swedish version of Computer Sweden.

Twitter: @johannormen

#NOESTIMATE, SUCCESSFUL PROJECTS IN AN AGILE WORLD. PART 2.

The big difference between agile methods and other methods is that you focus more on value and results before time and deadline. The word focus does not mean that time is an unnecessary factor, it is but agile is more about using it effectively in an agile manner.

Many of us that are really passionate about the agile methodology, have actually succeeded with good results in our projects. And our customers have been extremely satisfied and in return we got good relations.

Our highest priority as agile coachers and team is to satisfy the customer through early and continuous delivery of valuable software.
We welcome changing requirements, even late in the development phase. The agile process yields change to the customer’s competitiveness and give us as team leaders or developer the creativity to do good.
We want to deliver working software usually with the timeframe of few week sprints or within few months. Together with the team we want to create good design and code to get out as much of the customer’s requirements as possible, based on requirements with the highest ROI (Return Of Investment) value. And deliver it all within the client’s budget and desired time frames.
We know that business people and developers must work together daily throughout the project. We also like continuous meetings to synchronise with customer continuously. We are simply motivated to deliver high value to the customer together with the customer. And we remove unnecessary management works to visual instead. Therefore, we must constantly work to reduce factors in our own process that does not give teams and customers a good ROI. That is what Agile is all about. As agile team we also know that our time costs money and we need to use it effectively and profitable. We use product owners and agile coachers to remind us.

Heres where #NoEstimate comes in as one of many factors to decrease waste in our projects. #NoEstimate does not mean we should stop estimating, we shall. #NoEstimate focus is to make it right to bring out the best value for both the customer and the team. In Part 1, I talked about the Chaos report that more or less says that about 78% of our estimates are wrong. And therefore classic estimates are waste of time in our process and can instead be used for other things. Like delivering value to the customer, right?  So why not use it to deliver more value to the customer instead? We can never trust our estimates, they are truly lying for us.

Let me give you some more examples.

You estimate with planning poker or something similar to get as close estimates as possible right?
There is a problem with planning poker. Say that a team set an user story with the number 13. What does that mean? 13h? (2.1 days?). A space of time against Another User Story? 13 as in 13 days? The higher the number is, the harder it is to get the correct estimate. Higher numbers are higher risks. The higher it is the more complex it is. If we want to trust the Chaos report, then 13 user story point has 78% chance of being wrong. It even has a chance (if it is a medium sized company) to go 220% over  the time.
That mean that a 13 user story point can result in about 30 instead. If 13 is a estimate number for days it’s 78% chance that such a point would take 30 days (a month, it is more than a full sprint if you have four weeks sprints.). Imagine then if our project has 10 x 13-day points then it is 78% chance that our 130 days user stories instead will take about 290 days.
(Remember there is also statistics that say that the more experienced you are as a team the better you will hit the right time. But how many elite teams do we have in today’s society? We must constantly replenish with new people so we will never be able to have 100% elite team. That is how our reality looks and the reality we have to adapt.)

Another problem is also the negotiations on the requirements during the project. The customer wants a new requirement but would not extend the deadline. So we negotiate away less important requirement for this new requirement. But how? We do this by estimates the new requirements with Planning Poker and get the number 8. But what does it mean? Normally replace another 8, right?. But is an 8 equal another 8? What if the 8 we will replace actually happened to be one of the 25% chances you have to spot the right estimate and the new 8 happen to be one of the 78% that we gets wrong. There is therefore a risk that the new 8 takes about 18 days and the one you removed actually took 8 days to finish. So it’s 10 days overtime instead. It can also be the other way around, but less likely.
Why do we expose ourselves to this risks when we know about this? Why spend unnecessary time to estimates like this instead of use it to focus on delivery on time instead? In next part (part 3), I will describe some #NoEstimate ideas that will provide safer time estimation and much more measurable velocity quality and ROI for the team and customer.

Stay tuned…