Becoming Agile: Agile Transitions in Practice - Rashina Hoda - AgileNZ 2017
•
3 gostaram•916 visualizações
Agile adoption has been typically understood as a one-off organisational process involving a staged selection of Agile development practices. This does not account for the differences in the pace and effectiveness of individual teams transitioning to Agile development. About Rashina Hoda: Dr Rashina Hoda is an internationally renowned researcher and senior lecturer at the University of Auckland. She has 10+ years' experience studying Agile teams and is the author of 60+ publications on Agile self-organisation, project management, knowledge management, reflective practice, task allocation and more. Rashina served as the Research Chair of the Agile India 2012 conference and recently received a Distinguished Paper Award at the flagship international conference on software engineering (ICSE2017) for her ‘grounded theory of becoming Agile’ that explains the multiple dimensions of Agile transitions in practice. She created and teaches the Agile course at UoA in close collaboration with industry and loves to present the 'voice of Agile research' to industry and academia alike.
Recomendados
Recomendados
Mais conteúdo relacionado
Mais procurados
Mais procurados (20)
Destaque
Destaque (20)
Semelhante a Becoming Agile: Agile Transitions in Practice - Rashina Hoda - AgileNZ 2017
Semelhante a Becoming Agile: Agile Transitions in Practice - Rashina Hoda - AgileNZ 2017 (20)
Último
Último (20)
Becoming Agile: Agile Transitions in Practice - Rashina Hoda - AgileNZ 2017
- 1. Becoming Agile Dr Rashina Hoda Senior Lecturer – University of Auckland
- 2. 2 Rashina Hoda Senior Lecturer Software Engineering PhD in Agile Award winning “Theory of Becoming Agile” 60+ publications on Agile topics 10+ years industrial Agile research Founder, AgileCourse@UoA www.rashina.comVoice of Agile Research
- 3. 3 State-of-Agile Agile Usage Using agile to some extent Not using agile Agile Maturity Still maturing Mature 80%96%
- 4. 4 Themes People Organization Project Process Areas Initial adoption Failed adoption Regular practice ADOPTION CHALLENGES Hummel et al., 2012 Kelle et al., 2015 Melo et al., 2013 Eloranta et al., 2013 Kapitsaki & Christou, 2014 Kompella, 2014 Marchenko & Abrahamsson, 2008 Moravcová, & F. Legény, 2016 Goodman, & M. Elbaz, 2008 McAvoy & T. Butler, 2009 Pikkarainen et al., 2012 Gregory et al., 2016 Lopez-Martinez et al., 2016
- 5. 5 Models Sidky agile maturity model Agile adoption and improvement model Agile adoption solution framework Distributed agile transition model Processes Process theory of agility Agile transformation framework ADOPTION FRAMEWORKS Sidky and Aurther, 2007 Qumer et al., 2007 Qumer and Henderson-Sellers, 2008 Sureshchandra and Shrinivasavadhani , 2008 Wufka and Ralph, 2016 Gandomani & Nafchi, 2015 Rohunen et al., 2010
- 6. 6 a One-off event pre-defined Stages Single Dimension focus on CURRENT UNDERSTANDING High-level Abstract Values speed, flexibility, responsiveness Low-level Dev Practices pair programming, test driven dev etc.
- 7. 7 Why are some teams more ‘agile’ than others? How can we explain the differences? What aspects are affected during agile transitions? How do they relate? OPEN QUESTIONS
- 8. 8 Grounded Theory • 31 agile practitioners • 5 countries – Australia, India, New Zealand, Portugal and USA • approx. 1 hour semi-structured interviews + observations • Diverse perspectives – developer, tester, scrum master, PM, BA • Total experience 2 – 14 years • Agile experience 4 months – 6 years • Methods scrum, kanban, lean, mixed RESEARCH METHOD Glaser & Strauss, 1967
- 9. FIVE DIMENSIONS Transitioning 9 Software Dev Practices Team Practices Management Approach Reflective Practices Culture
- 10. TRANSITIONING SOFTWARE DEV PRACTICES Delivery model sequential or iterative and incremental Meetings sprint and release planning, demo, daily stand-up Artifacts scrum boards, user stories 10 AgileHybridTraditional “…people are resistant to changes... not everybody is willing to attend the meetings often...so it takes a while for …the rhythm to set... as time passes it gets easier.” – P15, ERP, India “Transition happens slowly. Initially they don’t understand anything, sprint planning, demo … We need to explain [to] them. Initially learning, then we start applying.” – P25, Tech Lead, India Marked by consistent use of agile practices (daily standup, sprint planning, demos, frequent releases) and artifacts (user stories, scrum boards)
- 11. TRANSITIONING TEAM PRACTICES Project management collective specification, estimation, clarification Task management delegation vs self-assignment 11 Team- driven Manager- assisted Manager- driven “We really don’t feel that we get delegated [tasks by clients], but we feel one less job.” – P13, Project Manager, India “Here we get assistance from the scrum master on how to assign tasks... Once we are confident we can self- assign ourselves in future.” – P19, Developer, India “Almost all tasks are exclusively self-assigned.” – P10, Scrum Master, NZ “We don’t wait for them [team leads]...We directly contact the client ...we are now used to it.” – P30, Senior Developer, India
- 12. TRANSITIONING MANAGEMENT APPROACH Customer collaboration manager- mediated vs direct Problem solving on behalf of team vs stepping in when required 12 EmpoweringAdaptingDriving “He [manager] is the first point of the contact between product owner, dev[elopement] team, scrum master and the stake-holders.” – P6, Software Engineer, India “I think it [self-organization] is fifty-fifty. …try and allow them to self-organize but there is a need for me to right now monitor those activities that they don’t revert to practices that are compulsive. So my team is still transitioning...” – P2, Project Manager, New Zealand “For me self-organizing team is something that wouldn’t notice if I disappeared (laughs).” – P10, Scrum Master, New Zealand “Even if you are self-organizing team you need someone who cuts the interferences from the outside.” – P9, Senior Developer, Australia
- 13. TRANSITIONING REFLECTIVE PRACTICES Reflection and learning retrospectives, learning sessions, formal training, personal efforts Inspect and adapt process improvement 13 EmbeddedFocusedLimited “…where a whole team lacks [knowledge/skills] in one specific area of the project…we had to go through six training sessions … but the problem is time consumption.” – P13, Project Manager, India “We are now working on process improvements. Previously we did not have planning poker, but we introduced it.” – P25, Senior Developer, India “There are many initiatives from organisation...Somebody who just learned new technology, he just speaks on Saturdays once a month...everybody would come and learn.” – P22, Senior Developer, India
- 14. TRANSITIONING CULTURE Culture as a combined effect of individual, team and organizational culture Individuals and teams with same organization manifest different levels of autonomy 14 OpenEvolvingHierarchical “...After getting the approval from the managers we will follow up the same [problems] with the product owner who in turn provides necessary explanation to the clients.” – P6, Developer, India “Also there is no defined communications hierarchy.” – P16, Senior Developer, USA “...we can organize meeting with the clients ourselves. It is purely upon the individual to get the work done on time.” – P1, Business Analyst, USA
- 15. 15 • Describes Relationships between the Dimensions • A set of Inter-related Hypotheses A GROUNDED THEORY Software Dev Practices Team Practices Management Approach Reflective Practices Culture
- 16. 16THEORY OF BECOMING AGILE By Rashina Hoda Software Dev Practices Team Practices Management Approach Reflective PracticesH1 Self-Organizing Roles Hoda et al., ICSE2010 H3 Culture Hypothesis 1: Transition in Software Development Practices is necessary though not sufficient for changes in Team Practices and Management Approach. Hypothesis 2: Transitions in Team Practices and Management Approach tend to reflect and adapt to each other. Hypothesis 3: Transitions in Team Practices and Management Approach are necessary though not sufficient for changes in their Reflective Practices. Hypothesis 4: All these changes are influenced by a combination of individual, team and organizational Culture.
- 18. UNDERSTANDING AGILITY • as a Complex Network of Transitions across Multiple Dimensions • It takes Two to Tango! Team and Managers must both move toward self-organization 18
- 19. 19 Teams progress along the five dimensions at different rates, which explains why some teams are more ‘agile’ than others. For researchers to measure agility For teams to self-assess and improve APPLICATION
- 20. CHANGING PERSPECTIVES 20 From agile adoption as a one-off staged progression across abstract values and software development practices #DoingAgile To agile transitions as holistic and complex network of ongoing changes across multiple dimensions #BecomingAgile Social Physical Emotional Creative Cognitive
- 21. Dr Rashina Hoda The University of Auckland, New Zealand @agileRashina www.rashina.com #BecomingAgile #MoreThanSoftDev
Notas do Editor
- A systematic literature review published last year identified agile adoption challenges to fall within four themes: people, organization, project and process. The areas of challenge include initial adoption, failed adoptions and even regular practice.
- A systematic literature review published last year identified agile adoption challenges to fall within four themes: people, organization, project and process. The areas of challenge include initial adoption, failed adoptions and even regular practice.
- A systematic literature review published last year identified agile adoption challenges to fall within four themes: people, organization, project and process. The areas of challenge include initial adoption, failed adoptions and even regular practice.
- A number of research models and frameworks have been proposed that aim to recommend the best number and sequence of steps to achieving agile adoptions.
- So we are currently used to looking at agile adoptions as a one-off event with pre-defined stages that focus on either high-level abstract values such as speed, flexibility and responsiveness or low-level dev practices such as pair programming, daily standups, test driven development etc. Leaving the average software team confused about where to begin and how to reconcile this huge gap in scale.
- It also leave a number of CRITICAL questions unanswered:
- Using GT allowed me to study agile transitions in the industry with an open mind and to generate a theory that is grounded in practice. It involved 31 agile practitioners from 5 different countries. I collected data using a combination of semi-structured interviews and observations, deliberately including diverse perspectives of practitioners with varying levels of professional and agile experiences.
- I found that software teams become agile across different dimensions.
- A grounded theory is more than a set of categories, it also describes the relationship between those categories, in our case the 5 dimensions of: SDP, TP, MA, RP, and C I will now show you our set of inter-related hypotheses that form the theory.
- H1 The first hypothesis derived from this study is that transition in a team’s SD practice from traditional to agile is necessary though not sufficient for the changes in team practices and management approach. H2 The second is that the transitions in the team practices and the management approach tend to reflect and adapt to each other. In other words, the team trying to become team-driven can only work if the management approach also moves towards becoming empowering. They are intrinsically tied to each other. The SO roles are mechanisms to achieve this dual shift. H3 Transitions in team and management practices are necessary (though not sufficient) for changes in the team’s reflective practices. I.e. Effective and regular reflective practice at a team and individual level can be considered a higher-order practice attained by highly autonomous, self-organizing teams. And Finally H4, all these changes are influenced by a combination of the organizational, team and individual culture. Such that a culture that is conducive will positively influence the other dimensions and vice versa. Culture is arguably the toughest to change bcoz of the sheer number of stakeholders involved.
- The theory has implications that we can understand agility as a complex network of transitions across multiple dimensions. It explains why every agile journey is unique. Also, that it takes 2 to TANGO! Both team and managers must move toward SO.
- An application of the theory is to track teams along the different dimensions of agility. Researchers can use this to measure where they are on their agile journey and better understand the context of the teams they are studying. Practitioners can use this to self-assess and improve their agile practices across all dimensions. Teams progress on different dimensions at different rates – that explains why some teams are more ‘agile’ than others even though they may all be performing the same agile SD practices.