announcement – career fair who: everyone should plan to go… what: meet / network with companies...
TRANSCRIPT
Announcement – Career Fair
Who: Everyone should plan to go…
What: Meet / network with companies
Meet hiring managers
Get information first hand
Where:3rd floor Davies Center
When: Thursday, September 24th
(10:00 AM – 3:00 PM)
Why: At some point you will need a job, and this is the best way to go about getting one.
COPYRIGHT TOM SULZER © 2015
Tip: The best jobs are not advertised. They are typically filled before by people that are networked and know about the positions ahead of time.
COPYRIGHT TOM SULZER © 2015
Jack Neift Trucking Company
Go through the On-Line interactive case
Read through the case
Review Complexity vs. Uncertainty
Classify the project!
COPYRIGHT TOM SULZER © 2015
Where does Jack Neift Trucking’s Project fit?
How To Get It
Clearly Defined
Not Clearly Defined
What Is Needed?
Clearly Defined Traditional Adaptive
Not Clearly Defined N/A Extreme
from Wysocki 2003
COPYRIGHT TOM SULZER © 2015
LOW HIGH
Uncertainty
HIGH
Complexity
LOW
Adaptive
ExtremeIterative
Traditional(Linear,Incremental)
Jack Neift Trucking’s ProjectComplexity vs. Uncertainty?
Software Development Project Approaches
COPYRIGHT TOM SULZER © 2015
Where does Jack Neift Project fit? Evaluate in teams each of these criteria for Jack
Neift’s CASE problem: Risk: High, Medium, Low Business value: High, Medium, Low Duration: Short (< 3months), Medium (3-6 months), Long
(> 6 months) Complexity: High, Medium, Low Technology: Unknown/New, some familiarity, Well known Proportion of organization affected (All, several depts,
one dept.) Cost: $$$$$, $$$$, $$$, $$, $
Jack Neift Trucking on Wysocki’s model
COPYRIGHT TOM SULZER © 2015
Jack Neift Trucking on Project Complexity vs. Project Environment model
COPYRIGHT TOM SULZER © 2015
LOW HIGH
Uncertainty
HIGH
Complexity
LOW
Adaptive
ExtremeIterative
Traditional(Linear,Incremental)
COPYRIGHT TOM SULZER © 2015
Where does Jack Neift Project fit?
Evaluate in teams each of these criteria for Jack Neift’s CASE problem: Risk: High, Medium, Low Business value: High, Medium, Low Duration: Short (< 3months), Medium (3-6 months), Long
(> 6 months) Complexity: High, Medium, Low Technology: Unknown/New, some familiarity, Well known Proportion of organization affected (All, several depts.,
one dept.) Cost: $$$$$, $$$$, $$$, $$, $
Iterative/Adaptive Project Framework
5 phases
Reminder: Weather Or Not .com Case write up due before 11:59pm tonight!
Fissure Simulation Software: See class web page.
COPYRIGHT TOM SULZER © 2015
Iterative PM & Rational Unified Process
Trad PM Initial cycle
. . . . . .
Trad PM Final cycle
Waterfall process for version 1
. . . . . .
Waterfall process for version n
Much use of software library built up over many projects
COPYRIGHT TOM SULZER © 2015
Overview
Scope is variable – Prioritized list
Iterative – scope changes can occur at the end of
every iteration
High level planning is based on the component or
function
Client – driven change
Client assessment of business value at the end of
each iteration
COPYRIGHT TOM SULZER © 2015
Five Phases
1) Version Scope
2) Cycle Plan
3) Cycle Build
4) Client Check point
5) Post-Version Review
5COPYRIGHT TOM SULZER © 2015
Characteristics More client involvement
Client involvement is more critical
Detailed planning converges to Just in Time
Documentation is reduced
Co-location of team is important
Usually uses more senior employees
More emphasis on oral communication
Increasing need for strong sponsorship
Increasing expectation of change
COPYRIGHT TOM SULZER © 2015
Why?
Why?
Why?
Why?
Why?
Why?
Why?
Why?
Why?
Iterative/Adaptive PM with SCRUM
Scope
Plan
Launch
(Vague) Idea
Product owner develops prioritized
function list (Product backlog)
Sprint Planning Meeting
Sprint Backlog
Sprint4-hr: client presents prioritized functionality to be added to backlog4 hr: high-level sprint plan
COPYRIGHT TOM SULZER © 2015
Iterative / Adaptive PM with SCRUM
Monitor and Control
Close
Sprint Backlog
SprintDemo Sprint Functionality
SCRUM has <= 30 day sprints
COPYRIGHT TOM SULZER © 2015
Version Scope Same as Traditional
Outputs: Conditions Of Satisfaction, Project Overview Statement
Also Best guess at prioritized list of
functions (requirements) in realization that it will change
COPYRIGHT TOM SULZER © 2015
Version Scope Output:
Work Breakdown Structure taken to mid-level
Prioritize scope triangle parameters (time, cost, resources, scope, quality)
COPYRIGHT TOM SULZER © 2015
Cycle Plan Inputs (first cycle)
POS Prioritized scope triangle Functionality to be built Mid level WBS
Add for subsequent cycles Scope Bank (new ideas or
thoughts on functionality – discovery)
COPYRIGHT TOM SULZER © 2015
Cycle Plan Process
1. Prioritize functionality into cycles for development (cycle length 2-6 weeks) Get functionality to be built this cycle
2. Decompose extracted WBS to task level
3. Note dependencies among tasks
4. Group tasks in meaningful way and assign task groups to teams
5. Team develops own schedule and resource allocation subject to cycle time and budget.
COPYRIGHT TOM SULZER © 2015
Cycle Build Finish cycle build schedule and
resource allocation
Team members have daily task list, post status of tasks daily
PM does daily review and acts on any variances
COPYRIGHT TOM SULZER © 2015
Cycle Build Issue Log
Records all issues that arise and how they are addressed and resolved’
Scope Bank Records all ideas, learning,
“discovery” by teams in process of work
COPYRIGHT TOM SULZER © 2015
Client Checkpoint Critical Review
Criteria: Quality Business Value
Consider: Scope bank – what has been
learned, how does it affect the functionality in the scope?
Revise priorities on functionality for next cycle
COPYRIGHT TOM SULZER © 2015
Post-Version Review Version is complete or
incomplete
Allocated Budget/Time spent
Compare to success criteria
Document learning
Initial ideas for next version
COPYRIGHT TOM SULZER © 2015
Final Questions Was the business outcome
realized?
Was anything learned to improve the version?
What was learned to improve the PM process?
Yes? Great!
No? Kill the project.
We’ll do better next time.
COPYRIGHT TOM SULZER © 2015
Extreme PM with Flexible Model
Scope
Plan
Launch
Monitor and Control
Close
Visionate
Speculate
Innovate
Reevaluate
Disseminate
Yes
No
INSPIRE
COPYRIGHT TOM SULZER © 2015
Mapping Extreme to Traditional
Exremei (Agile) Visionate
Speculate
Innovate
Reevaluate
Disseminate
COPYRIGHT TOM SULZER © 2015
Traditional Scope
Planning project infrastructure
Design, Build, Test
Customer to evaluation progress
Deployment, implementation
