Business Value of

Agile MethodsUsing ROI & Real Options

Dr. David F. Rico, PMP, CSEP, ACP, CSM, SAFe

Twitter: @dr_david_f_ricoWebsite: http://www.davidfrico.com

LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidfricoFacebook: http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1540017424

Dave’s Agile Resources: http://www.davidfrico.com/daves-agile-resources.htm

Author Background Gov’t contractor with 30+ years of IT experience B.S. Comp. Sci., M.S. Soft. Eng., & D.M. Info. Sys. Large gov’t projects in U.S., Far/Mid-East, & Europe

2

Published six books & numerous journal articlesAdjunct at George Wash, UMBC, UMUC, ArgosyAgile Program Management & Lean DevelopmentSpecializes in metrics, models, & cost engineeringSix Sigma, CMMI, ISO 9001, DoDAF, & DoD 5000Cloud Computing, SOA, Web Services, FOSS, etc.

Today’s Whirlwind Environment

3

OverrunsAttritionEscalationRunawaysCancellation

GlobalCompetition

DemandingCustomers

OrganizationDownsizing

SystemComplexity

TechnologyChange

VagueRequirements

Work LifeImbalance

InefficiencyHigh O&MLower DoQVulnerableN-M Breach

ReducedIT Budgets

81 MonthCycle Times

RedundantData Centers

Lack ofInteroperability

PoorIT Security

OverburdeningLegacy Systems

ObsoleteTechnology & Skills

Pine, B. J. (1993). Mass customization: The new frontier in business competition. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press. Pontius, R. W. (2012). Acquisition of IT: Improving efficiency and effectiveness in IT acquisition in the DoD. Second Annual AFEI/NDIA Conference on Agile in DoD, Springfield, VA, USA.

Global Project Failures

4Standish Group. (2010). Chaos summary 2010. Boston, MA: Author.Sessions, R. (2009). The IT complexity crisis: Danger and opportunity. Houston, TX: Object Watch.

Challenged and failed projects hover at 67% Big projects fail more often, which is 5% to 10% Of $1.7T spent on IT projects, over $858B were lost

16% 53% 31%

27% 33% 40%

26% 46% 28%

28% 49% 23%

34% 51% 15%

29% 53% 18%

35% 46% 19%

32% 44% 24%

33% 41% 26%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

1994

1996

1998

2000

2002

2004

2006

2008

2010

Year

Successful Challenged Failed

$0.0

$0.4

$0.7

$1.1

$1.4

$1.8

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Trill

ions

(US

Dolla

rs)

Expenditures Failed Investments

Requirements Defects & Waste

5Sheldon, F. T. et al. (1992). Reliability measurement: From theory to practice. IEEE Software, 9(4), 13-20Johnson, J. (2002). ROI: It's your job. Extreme Programming 2002 Conference, Alghero, Sardinia, Italy.

Requirements defects are #1 reason projects fail Traditional projects specify too many requirements More than 65% of requirements are never used at all

Other 7%

Requirements47%

Design28%

Implementation18%

Defects

Always 7%

Often 13%

Sometimes16%

Rarely19%

Never45%

Waste

What is Agility? A-gil-i-ty (ə-'ji-lə-tē) Property consisting of quickness,

lightness, and ease of movement; To be very nimble The ability to create and respond to change in order to

profit in a turbulent global business environment The ability to quickly reprioritize use of resources when

requirements, technology, and knowledge shift A very fast response to sudden market changes and

emerging threats by intensive customer interaction Use of evolutionary, incremental, and iterative delivery

to converge on an optimal customer solution Maximizing BUSINESS VALUE with right sized, just-

enough, and just-in-time processes and documentationHighsmith, J. A. (2002). Agile software development ecosystems. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley.

6

What are Agile Methods?

7

People-centric way to create innovative solutions Product-centric alternative to documents/process Market-centric model to maximize business value

Agile Manifesto. (2001). Manifesto for agile software development. Retrieved September 3, 2008, from http://www.agilemanifesto.orgRico, D. F., Sayani, H. H., & Sone, S. (2009). The business value of agile software methods. Ft. Lauderdale, FL: J. Ross Publishing.Rico, D. F. (2012). Agile conceptual model. Retrieved February 6, 2012, from http://davidfrico.com/agile-concept-model-1.pdf

Customer Collaboration

Working Systems & Software

Individuals & Interactions

Responding to Change

valuedmore than

valuedmore than

valuedmore than

valuedmore than

Contracts

Documentation

Processes

Project Plans

Frequent comm. Close proximity Regular meetings

Multiple comm. channels Frequent feedback Relationship strength

Leadership Boundaries Empowerment

Competence Structure Manageability/Motivation

Clear objectives Small/feasible scope Acceptance criteria

Timeboxed iterations Valid operational results Regular cadence/intervals

Org. flexibility Mgt. flexibility Process flexibility

System flexibility Technology flexibility Infrastructure flexibility

Contract compliance Contract deliverables Contract change orders

Lifecycle compliance Process Maturity Level Regulatory compliance

Document deliveries Document comments Document compliance

Cost Compliance Scope Compliance Schedule Compliance

NetworkComputer

Operating SystemMiddlewareApplications

APIsGUI

How Agile Works Agile requirements implemented in slices vs. layers User needs with higher business value are done first Reduces cost & risk while increasing business success

8Shore, J. (2011). Evolutionary design illustrated. Norwegian Developers Conference, Oslo, Norway.

Agile Traditional1 2 3 Faster

Early ROI

Lower Costs

Fewer Defects

Manageable Risk

Better Performance

Smaller Attack Surface

Late

No Value

Cost Overruns

Very Poor Quality

Uncontrollable Risk

Slowest Performance

More Security Incidents Seven Wastes1.Rework2.Motion3.Waiting4.Inventory5 .Transportation6.Overprocessing7 .Overproduction

MINIMIZES MAXIMIZES

JIT, Just-enough architecture Early, in-process system V&V Fast continuous improvement Scalable to systems of systems Maximizes successful outcomes

Myth of perfect architecture Late big-bang integration tests Year long improvement cycles Breaks down on large projects Undermines business success

Agile Enterprise Delivery Model

Beck, K., & Fowler, M. (2001). Planning extreme programming. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Addison-Wesley.Highsmith, J. A. (2010). Agile project management: Creating innovative products. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.Larman, C., & Vodde, B. (2010). Practices for scaling lean and agile development. Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley.Leffingwell, D. (2011). Agile software requirements: Lean requirements practices for teams, programs, and the enterprise. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.

Begins with a high-level product vision/architecture Continues with needs development/release planning Includes agile delivery teams to realize business value

9

10

Agile Performance MeasurementW

ork

(Sto

ry, P

oint

, Tas

k)or

Eff

ort

(Wee

k, D

ay, H

our)

Time Unit (Roadmap, Release, Iteration, Month, Week, Day, Hour, etc.)

Burndown

Wor

k (S

tory

, Poi

nt, T

ask)

or E

ffor

t (W

eek,

Day

, Hou

r)

Time Unit (Roadmap, Release, Iteration, Month, Week, Day, Hour, etc.)

Cumulative Flow

Wor

k (S

tory

, Poi

nt, T

ask)

or E

ffor

t (W

eek,

Day

, Hou

r)

Time Unit (Roadmap, Release, Iteration, Month, Week, Day, Hour, etc.)

Earned Value Management - EVMCPI

SPI

PPC

APC

Wor

k (S

tory

, Poi

nt, T

ask)

or E

ffor

t (W

eek,

Day

, Hou

r)

Time Unit (Roadmap, Release, Iteration, Month, Week, Day, Hour, etc.)

Earned Business Value - EBV

Agile Metrics Taxonomy Agile methods are based on traditional measures Story points, velocity, and burndown basic metrics Experts use Agile EVM, portfolio, contract, ent., etc.

11Rico, D. F., Sayani, H. H., & Sone, S. (2009). The business value of agile software methods. Ft. Lauderdale, FL: J. Ross Publishing.

Agile Metrics

1. Traditional Metrics

2. Basic Agile Metrics

3. Agile EVM Metrics

Size Effort Productivity Quality Complexity Cycle Time

Story Points Ideal Days Velocity Burndown Cumulative Flow Running Tested Features

Planned Story Points Planned Sprints Planned Release Budget Completed Story Points Completed Sprints Completed Releases

4. Agile Portfolio Metrics

5. Agile Contract Metrics

6. Agile Enterprise Metrics

Benefit-Cost Ratio Return on Investment Net Present Value Breakeven Point Real Options Earned Business Value

Level of Effort Dynamic Value Performance Based Target Cost Optional Scope Collaborative

Relationships Communications Collaboration Motivation Creativity Satisfaction

0. “No Metrics”1. Traditional Metrics2. Basic Agile Metrics3. Agile EVM Metrics4. Agile Portfolio Metrics5. Agile Contract Metrics6. Agile Enterprise Metrics

Agile Cost of Quality (CoQ) Agile testing is 10x better than code inspections Agile testing is 100x better than traditional testing Agile testing is done earlier “and” 1,000x more often

12Rico, D. F. (2012). The Cost of Quality (CoQ) for Agile vs. Traditional Project Management. Fairfax, VA: Gantthead.Com.

Agile Cost & Benefit Analysis Costs based on avg. productivity and quality Productivity ranged from 4.7 to 5.9 LOC an hour Costs were $588,202 and benefits were $3,930,631

13Rico, D. F., Sayani, H. H., & Sone, S. (2009). The business value of agile software methods: Maximizing ROI with just-in-time processes and documentation. Ft. Lauderdale, FL: J. Ross Publishing.

d1 = [ln(Benefits Costs) + (Rate + 0.5 Risk2) Years] Risk Years, d2 = d1 Risk Years

5

1i

Benefits of Agile Methods Analysis of 23 agile vs. 7,500 traditional projects Agile projects are 54% better than traditional ones Agile has lower costs (61%) and fewer defects (93%)

Mah, M. (2008). Measuring agile in the enterprise: Proceedings of the Agile 2008 Conference, Toronto, Canada.

Project Cost in Millions $

0.75

1.50

2.25

3.00

2.8

1.1

Before Agile

After Agile

61%LowerCost

Total Staffing

18

11

Before Agile

After Agile

39%LessStaff

5

10

15

20

Delivery Time in Months

5

10

15

20

18

13.5

Before Agile

After Agile

24%Faster

Cumulative Defects

625

1250

1875

2500

2270

381

Before Agile

After Agile

93%Less

Defects

14

Agile vs. Traditional Success Traditional projects succeed at 50% industry avg. Traditional projects are challenged 20% more often Agile projects succeed 3x more and fail 3x less often

Standish Group. (2012). Chaos manifesto. Boston, MA: Author.

15

Agile Traditional

Success42%

Failed9%

Challenged49%

Success14%

Failed29%

Challenged57%

Hoque, F., et al. (2007). Business technology convergence. The role of business technology convergence in innovation and adaptability and its effect on financial performance. Stamford, CT: BTM Institute. 16

Study of 15 agile vs. non-agile Fortune 500 firms Based on models to measure organizational agility Agile firms out perform non agile firms by up to 36%

Benefits of Organizational Agility

Agile Adoption

17House, D. (2013). Seventh annual state of agile survey: State of agile development. Atlanta, GA: VersionOne.

VersionOne found 84% using agile methods today Most are using Scrum with several key XP practices Lean-Kanban is a rising practice with a 32% adoption

ContinuousIntegration

●●●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●

●●

●

●

54%

11%

9%

Agile Proliferation

Scrum Alliance. (2012). Scrum certification statistics. Retrieved February 6, 2013, from http://www.scrumalliance.org/resource_download/2505Taft, D. K. (2012). Agile developers needed: Demand outpaces supply. Foster City, CA: eWeek. 18

Number of CSMs have doubled to 200,000 in 2 years 558,918 agile jobs for only 121,876 qualified people 4.59 jobs available for every agile candidate (5:1)

Agile Industry Case Studies 84% of worldwide IT projects use agile methods Includes regulated industries, i.e., DoD, FDA, etc. Agile now used for safety critical systems, FBI, etc.

19

Industry

ShrinkWrapped

ElectronicCommerce

HealthCare

LawEnforcement

Org 20 teams 140 people 5 countries

Size

15 teams 90 people Collocated 4 teams 20 people Collocated 10 teams 50 people Collocated 3 teams 12 people Collocated

U.S.DoD

Primavera

Google

Stratcom

FBI

FDA

Project

Primavera

Adwords

SKIweb

Sentinel

m2000

Purpose

ProjectManagement

Advertising

KnowledgeManagement

Case FileWorkflow

BloodAnalysis

1,838 User Stories 6,250 Function Points 500,000 Lines of Code

Metrics

26,809 User Stories 91,146 Function Points 7,291,666 Lines of Code 1,659 User Stories 5,640 Function Points 451,235 Lines of Code 3,947 User Stories 13,419 Function Points 1,073,529 Lines of Code 390 User Stories 1,324 Function Points 105,958 Lines of Code

Rico, D. F. (2010). Lean and agile project management: For large programs and projects. Proceedings of the First International Conference on Lean Enterprise Software and Systems, Helsinki, Finland, 37-43.

Agile Leadership

Rico, D. F. (2013). Agile coaching in high-conflict environments. Retrieved April 11, 2013 from http://davidfrico.com/agile-conflict-mgt.pdfRico, D. F. (2013). Agile project management for virtual distributed teams. Retrieved July 29, 2013 from http://www.davidfrico.com/rico13m.pdfRico, D. F. (2013). Agile vs. traditional contract manifesto. Retrieved March 28, 2013 from http://www.davidfrico.com/agile-vs-trad-contract-manifesto.pdf 20

Personal Project Enterprise

• Don't Be a Know-it-All• Be Open & Willing to Learn• Treat People Respectfully• Be Gracious, Humble, & Kind• Listen & Be Slow-to-Speak• Be Patient & Longsuffering• Be Objective & Dispassionate• Don't Micromanage & Direct• Exhibit Maturity & Composure• Don't Escalate or Exacerbate• Don't Gossip or be Negative• Delegate, Empower, & Trust• Gently Coach, Guide, & Lead

• Customer Communication• Product Visioning• Distribution Strategy• Team Development• Standards & Practices• Telecom Infrastructure• Development Tools• High-Context Meetings• Coordination & Governance• F2F Communications• Consensus Based Decisions• Performance Management• Personal Development

• Business Value vs. Scope• Interactions vs. Contracts• Relationship vs. Regulation• Conversation vs. Negotiation• Consensus vs. Dictatorship• Collaboration vs. Control• Openness vs. Adversarialism• Exploration vs. Planning• Incremental vs. All Inclusive• Entrepreneurial vs. Managerial• Creativity vs. Constraints• Satisfaction vs. Compliance• Quality vs. Quantity

Power & authority delegated to the lowest level Tap into the creative nuclear power of team’s talent Coaching, communication, and relationships key skills

Conclusion

21

Agility is the evolution of management thought Confluence of traditional and non-traditional ideas Improves performance by over an order of magnitude

“The world of traditional methods belongs to yesterday”“Don’t waste your time using traditional methods on 21st century projects”

Agile methods are …

Systems development approachesNew product development approachesExpertly designed to be fast and efficientIntentionally lean and free of waste (muda) Systematic highly-disciplined approachesCapable of producing high quality systemsRight-sized, just-enough, and just-in-time tools

Scalable to large, complex mission-critical systems Designed to maximize business value for customers

Wysocki, R.F. (2010). Adaptive project framework: Managing complexity in the face of uncertainty. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.

Books on ROI of SW Methods Guides to software methods for business leaders Communicates the business value of IT approaches Rosetta stones to unlocking ROI of software methods

http://davidfrico.com/agile-book.htm (Description) http://davidfrico.com/roi-book.htm (Description)

22