Lean Software Delivery

Lean Software Delivery
Get lean and mean without
being stretched too thing

UrbanCode Inc. ©2013
Lead Consultant & Tech Evangelist
Eric is Lead Consultant at Urbancode
where I help customers get the most
out of their build, deploy and
release processes.
Today he works with customers and
industry leaders to figure out this
DevOps thing.
Eric Minick
eminick@us.ibm.com
@EricMinick

Why Lean?
 Need to do more
- Agile: Faster pace of builds & releases
- More complex architectures
- Distributed, even global teams
 Adding more people unlikely
 Only solution is to increase efficiency

Lean Software
 By analogy, inspiration and even direct mapping from
Lean Manufacturing
 More focused on principles than practices
- 7 Lean Principles
- Complements and underpins Agile and DevOps
 Provides a low-risk approach to increasing efficiency

Lean increases efficiency by removing waste
7 Wastes: of Manufacturing
Inventory
Extra Processing
Overproduction
Transportation
Waiting
Motion
Defects
7 Wastes: of Software
Partially Done Work
Extra Processes
Extra Features
Task Switching
Waiting
Motion
Defects

Wastes: 1 Partially Done Work
 Waste: Work you get no value from
 Risk: Untestable.
- Can’t verify you’re on the right track
Commons.wikimedia.org

Wastes: 2 Extra Process
 Wastes: Paperwork that nobody really reads is
“theater” at best, a complete waste at worst.
 What happens if we skip or delay this process? Is any
value to the customer lost?
Image:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d9/Paperwork_-
_by_Tom_Ventura.jpg

Wastes: 3 Extra Features
 Waste: All planning, development and testing time
was useless. No value was delivered.
 Worse: Extra complexity was introduced
Image: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:IPhone_3G.png

Wastes: 4 Task Switching
 Waste: “Reloading” the information for various
concurrent process is expensive when switching
between them.
?
Another useless meeting…
now where was I on this?

Wastes: 5 Waiting
 Waste: When the project is not moving
forward, value is not being delivered.
Waiting tends to generate more task switching as well.
♫

Wastes: 6 Motion
 Each hand-off represents a risk due to incomplete
knowledge.
 Can my developer quickly understand a feature, or
does she need to ask someone; who asks someone;
who asks someone?

Wastes: 7 Defects
 Severity of Defect * Time undetected

In Short
Build the right thing
Deliver it promptly

In Short
Deliver it promptly
Execute Efficiently

In Short
Deliver it promptly
Execute Efficiently
Agile focuses
here
DevOps
focuses here

In Short
Deliver it promptly
Execute Efficiently
Agile
focuses here
DevOps
focuses here
DevOps also
helps with
feedback

Build the right thing: Strategy by situation
 When requirements are well understood
- Document them well
 When big picture is understood but details are shaky
- Tight customer collaboration
- Rapidly deliver to QA and user acceptance for validation
 When big picture of the app is shaky
- Use ‘Lean Startup’ approach of Minimum Viable Product
• Get something in front of customers quickly and measure

Should I support „Log-in with Facebook‟?

Pro: Lower sign-up barrier to entry.
More customers!
Con: My company is B2B.
Maybe Facebook is too personal
1) Acknowledge uncertainty

More customers!
2) Establish a Thesis
10% of People who would otherwise
‘bounce’ will attempt to sign up w/ Facebook

More customers!
3) Test it cheaply. Then decide
10% of People who would otherwise
‘bounce’ will attempt to sign up w/ Facebook
Add button that doesn’t work for X% of
visitors. Measure attempted use.
Something went wrong. Try
again.

Experimentation may depend on delivery
Deliver it promptly
Execute Efficiently
Agile
focuses here
DevOps
focuses here
DevOps also
helps with
feedback

Visualize waste with lean techniques
Spaghetti Diagramming
- shows motion, such as handoffs and the flow of artifacts
between people
Value Stream Mapping
- shows the temporal division between work being done
(value being added) and waiting (waste)
image credits: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Diagram_spaghetti_kilka_produktow.PNG
http://www.michaelnygard.com/blog/2008/02/outrunning_your_headlights.html

Example: Sign-off Process
1. PM emails Dev Manager
2. Dev Manager emails PM
3. PM emails QA Manager
4. QA Manager emails PM
5. PM emails Operations
6. Operations emails PM

Spaghetti diagrams show flow of work

Value stream map shows delays
---
30
30
30
30
30
1
1
1
1
1
1
Waiting Working
150 6
1. PM  Dev
2. PM  Dev
3. PM  QA
4. PM  QA
5. PM  Ops
6. PM  Ops

Value stream map after process change
---
---
30
---
30
30
1
---
1
---
1
1
Waiting Working
90 4
1. PM  Dev
2. ----------
3. Dev  QA
4. ----------
5. QA  Ops
6. Ops  PM

Lean Software Takeaways
 Inspired by Lean Manufacturing
 Strong emphasis on removing “waste”
 The 7 Wastes of Lean Software Development
 Tools for Visualizing Waste

A Lean view of build & deployment

Common Practice: “Dan the Deployer”
1. Pam emails Dan to deploy to the Development
environment
2. Dan the Deployer reads the email
3. Dan moves the build artifacts to the Development
environment
4. Dan runs the deployment scripts
5. Deployment script runs while Dan monitors
progress via the console
6. Dan emails Pam to let her know the deployment is
complete
7. Pam reads the email

Dan‟s Diagram

1. Pam emails
2. Dan reads
3. Moves artifacts
4. Launches script
5. Deploy runs
6. Dan emails
7. Pam reads
---
?
?
?
0
?
1
1
1
1
1
10
1
1
Waiting Working
? 16
Delays from Dan

What if Pam could click a button?
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Big_Green_Button.png

1. Pam triggers
2. ----------
3. Move artifacts
4. ----------
5. Deploy runs
6. System emails
7. Pam reads
---
---
0
---
0
0
1
1
---
1
---
10
0
1
Waiting Working
1 13
Self-service deployment removes delays

Deployment automation story
 Offshore testing team needed to request deploys to
test environments
- Due to timezones, average turn-around was 20 hours
- Giving the offshore team direct access to servers was not
an option
 Secure, automated deployments allow self-service
- Turn around drops to under one hour
 Win: 15% more testing gets done. Defects found
faster, cheaper to fix, and product ships quicker.

Bug fix & verify cycle
1. Pam commits a feature
2. Feature is built by Bob
3. Build with new feature is deployed by Dan
4. Tom the Tester tests new feature and reports a bug
5. Pam fixes the bug
6. Bug fix is built
7. Build with fix is deployed
8. Tom verifies the bug fix

Manual fix & verify spaghetti

Bug fix & verify value stream
720
3600
240
2880
720
3600
240
15
15
120
60
15
15
60
Waiting Working
12000 300
1. Feature build
2. Build deployed
3. Bug reported
4. Pam fixes
5. Fix built
6. Fix deployed
7. Tom verifies

Adding automation
1. Automated builds (CI); that invokes:
2. Automated deployments; that invokes:
3. Automated regression tests

15
15
120
60
15
15
60
1. Feature build
2. Build deployed
3. Bug reported
4. Pam fixes
5. Fix built
6. Fix deployed
7. Tom verifies
720
3600
240
2880
720
3600
240
Waiting Working
12000 300
Impact of continuous delivery

720
3600
240
2880
720
3600
240
15
15
120
60
15
15
60
1. Feature build
2. Build deployed
3. Bug reported
4. Pam fixes
5. Fix built
6. Fix deployed
7. Tom verifies
Waiting Working
12000 300
Impact of automated testing

1. Feature build
2. Build deployed
3. Bug reported
4. Pam fixes
5. Fix built
6. Fix deployed
7. Tom verifies
Waiting Working
12000 300
720
3600
240
2880
720
3600
240
15
15
120
60
15
15
60
Impact of automated reporting

Bug fix & verify with Enterprise CD

Bug fix & verify value stream with ECD
0
0
0
60
0
0
1440
15
15
30
15
15
15
120
Waiting Working
1500 225
1. Feature build
2. Build deployed
3. Bug reported
4. Pam fixes
5. Fix built
6. Fix deployed
7. Tom verifies

CD impact on bug fix & verify cycle
Partially Done Work
Extra Processes: no bug “hot potato”; Tom tests once
Extra Features
Task Switching: Pam quickly notified of defect
Waiting: no waiting for builds or deployments
Motion: fewer handoffs; no bug report adminstrivia
Defects: more time testing, can find additional defects

The impact of automated building & testing
 90% rise in LOC output/programmer
when performing builds at least daily
 36% reduction in defect rate
when integration/regression testing at each code check-in
“Trade-offs between Productivity and Quality in
Selecting Software Development Practices”, IEEE
Software, Sept-Oct 2003

Think at the system level
Image credit: http://52weeksofux.com/post/694598769/the-local-maximum

Urbancode.com/resources
Continuous Delivery Maturity Model
Deployment Automation Basics
Value of Deployment Automation
Blogs.urbancode.com
Twitter.com/UrbanCode
Facebook.com/IBMUrbanCodeProducts
SlideShare.net/Urbancode
Further Resources

Yes, UrbanCode has tools that help
 IBM UrbanCode Deploy
- Application Release Automation
 IBM UrbanCode Release
- Release management and release weekend v
execution
 IBM UrbanCode Build
- Build automation on an enterprise scale

Q&A
eminick@us.ibm.com
Slideshare.net/Urbancode
@EricMinick
Linked-in group:
“Automating Deployment and Release”

Lean Software Delivery

Recomendados

Recomendados

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Mais procurados

Mais procurados (20)

Destaque

Destaque (15)

Semelhante a Lean Software Delivery

Semelhante a Lean Software Delivery (20)

Mais de IBM UrbanCode Products

Mais de IBM UrbanCode Products (20)

Último

Último (20)

Lean Software Delivery