Refactor Your PMP: Communications Management

As promised… next up we're talking about Communications Management.

According to PMI, Project Communications Management employs the processes required to ensure timely and appropriate generation, collection, distribution, storage, retrieval, and ultimate disposition of project information. This knowledge area provides the critical links between people and information that are necessary for successful project communications.

There is a neat little book by Andy Crowe called "Alpha Project Managers: What the Top 2% Know That Everyone Else Does Not". This book surveyed over 5000 project managers to find out what the best project managers are doing differently. One of Andy's conclusions is that top project managers spend significantly more time communicating than their less successful brethren.

In some cases these top project managers spent up to 90% of their time communicating in one form or another. I have to say, that is certainly consistent with my personal experience. If something is going wrong on one of my projects, it is usually because people are not talking to each other.

But maybe I am taking a naïve view of what it means to communicate on a project? It seems to me that the PMI definition of Communications Management is a little broader than just making sure the team is talking to each other. Communications management deals with documents and plans and stakeholders. Communications management is really about managing the flow of information.

Since it's common knowledge that Agile teams don't do documents, I am guessing we have some work ahead of us to reconciling these points of view.

Okay… I was kidding with the Agile documentation comment. That said, there is clearly a difference in how these two project management perspectives treat the issue of documentation, reporting, and even interpersonal communication.

Both PMI and Agile have quite a bit to say about how to manage project communications so let's get started.

Communications Planning

PMI Definition: Determining the information and communication needs of the projects stakeholders

When Agile teams talk about communications, they are usually talking about communications within the team. Agile puts a great deal of emphasis on the free flow of information between team members, between team members and the product owner, and even between the team and the direct customer. In some ways, the Agile community has really abstracted the entire stakeholder community behind the role of Product Owner.

Communication between team members, and between the team and its customers, is essential but it is not the only component of communication that must be planned. Sometimes there are other stakeholders that we must take into consideration.

At the team level, we usually deal with team member communication through collocation, whiteboards, wikis, and other rich and collaborative workspaces. Agile teams trade a great deal of written documentation for these more osmotic forms of information exchange. On a small team with a single customer, it might be sufficient to suggest that customers get all the information they need from attending planning meetings, daily stand-ups, and iteration reviews.

When there is more than one stakeholder, or possibly a hierarchy of stakeholders , sometimes it is not sufficient to suggest that these stakeholders come down to the team room and check out the team's progress on the Kanban board. Sometimes we need to do some roll-up reporting across a portfolio of projects or even programs. Sometimes we need to report status at a much higher level of abstraction for a more senior audience.

The key to planning communications on an Agile project is to follow the principle of simplicity. Don't write documentation for the sake of documentation. Find out what your stakeholders really need and provide it as quickly and as simply as possible. Make use of natural information sources that the team is already producing (task boards, burndown charts, architectural representations) and create documentation that enables your business to make decisions.

Keep things light, go for face to face whenever possible, and when your stakeholders require more; make things as simple, clear, and accurate as possible.

Information Distribution

PMI Definition: Making needed information available to project stakeholders in a timely manner

At the team level, information distribution focuses on those rich channels of communication I mentioned in the last section. Agile teams keep their status up to date using large, visible information radiators that everyone in the team room has access to and can update themselves. These repositories of information are there for the team to know where it is at all times and so they can manage their work. The side effect of these radiators for the Project Manager is that you have instant access to real time information about the health of the project, release, or iteration.

Often, design and architecture will be worked out on whiteboards and then minimally documented on a Wiki or Sharepoint so they can be easily changed as we learn more about the evolving system. Agile teams lean toward lightweight artifacts and central, universally accessible document repositories. Agile teams recognize that the only truly accurate representation of the product is the code itself ; therefore documentation is kept light and at a pretty high level.

Sometimes a customer has a need for more detailed documentation to manage an external dependency or possibly an audit requirement. In these cases, that increased level of documentation is built into the estimate for the feature. Documentation is not free and it will slow down the creation of working software.

The key once again is to figure out what is the minimum amount of documentation needed to satisfy the requirement. Document systems at the highest level of abstraction you can get away with. Make sure you understand the information needs of the external stakeholder, make sure that work is represented in the backlog, and that it is prioritized to meet the needs of the organization.

Use the same collaborative techniques you would use to build features to create the documentation required by the business.

Performance Reporting

PMI Definition: Collecting and distributing performance information. This includes status reporting, progress measurement, and forecasting

Okay… so we've already talked about things like burndown charts and Kanban boards. These are tools that a team will use to organically manage their work and make sure they are on track. As an Agile project manager is your responsibility to help the team and encourage that these tools are kept up to date. For the most part, these are the only tools you will need to understand the health of your project, and you largely get them for free.

Performance on Agile projects is pretty simple. You know how big your backlog is and you know how much you are able to complete each iteration. Based on these two variables you are able to predict how many features you will be able to complete before the end of the project, release, or iteration. I personally like to keep a high level project roadmap that helps me understand where the project is expected to be at certain points as it progresses to completion. This is also useful for managing external dependencies.

These simple tools help you understand what progress you are making against expectations and if you'll need to extend the release, adjust scope, or request additional funding. Since you are an agile team, you'll more than likely be communicating how early you'll be, how much more you'll be able to do, and how much more value you've delivered to the organization.

Either way, you have a tremendous amount of information at your disposal to communicate project to the project stakeholders. Think EVM based on delivery of working product.

Manage Stakeholders

PMI Definition: Managing communications to satisfy the requirements and resolve issues with project stakeholders.

Managing stakeholders is really about managing the issues that come up during the life of the project. A significant benefit of Agile is that nothing is hidden. This level of visibility gives the project manager the information they need to resolve problems and remove impediments.

Issues can arise during iteration planning, execution, closedown, or just in the course of day to day work. Just like on any project, these need to get tracked and dealt with as soon as possible. Issues are reviewed during the daily stand-up meetings and retrospectives.

There are always going to be some issues that cannot be dealt with by the team. I typically hold a weekly or bi-weekly meeting with senior stakeholders where they get a distillation of significant impediments and what I need them to do to help me resolve the issue.

It is my opinion that stakeholders need to be managed and issues resolved no matter what your software development methodology.

I think that does it for this installment. That was much longer than I had expected. I figured communications management would be one of the easier topics to discuss. Maybe I just need to go home for the day.

Let see… next up… Quality Management.

Subscribe to this blog

Refactor Your PMP: Scope Management

Okay… let's get back to our discussion on how to look at the PMI knowledge areas from a more Agile point of view. Last time we tackled Cost Management, this post let's look at Scope Management

According to the third edition of the Project Management Body of Knowledge, Scope Management includes the processes required to ensure that the project includes all the work required, and only the work required, to complete the project successfully. PMI states that project scope management is primarily concerned with defining and controlling what is and is not included in the project.

I find it a little entertaining how these statements seem to be universally interpreted as "define everything you are going to do up front and make sure you deliver what was originally defined". While that may have been the intent of the PMBOK Guide, some projects don't lend themselves to that kind of up front planning. Some projects must allow for discovery. Some projects must adapt to changing markets, or at the very least, adapt based on the teams understanding of the emerging product.

For some of us working in more dynamic problem domains, ensuring that "the project includes all the work required", is a process of discovery. Controlling what is included, and what is not included, is an ongoing concern rather than something done once for the entire project. We need a project management framework that embraces this uncertainty rather than wishing it away or pretending it doesn't exist.

I am becoming convinced that Project Managers default to this static point of view because we have never been taught another way of managing projects. We just don't have the tools to deliver projects any other way. So… that said, let's take a moment to look at the PMI Scope Management processes from a more Agile point of view. I bet we find another way of approaching Scope Management that does not involve defining everything up front and then locking it down for the duration of the project.

Scope Planning

PMI Definition: Creating a project scope management plan that documents how the scope will be defined, verified, controlled, and how the Work Breakdown Structure will be created and defined

Agile project management practices are really the embodiment of a scope planning approach. As a project manager, especially a traditional project manager making the switch to Agile, I have no problem documenting this for my organization. An Agile Scope Management Plan is going to address things like creating the backlog, characteristics of a good backlog item, how we are going to establish velocity or throughput, how we are going to measure burndown against the backlog, and how we are going to deal with changes to the backlog.

Scope Definition

PMI Definition: Developing a detailed project scope statement as the basis for future project discussions

Scope on an Agile project is defined in the product backlog. The backlog is a listing of the features that your product owner would like to have included in their project. One of the most important considerations to keep in mind is that every item in the backlog should be independent of each other. This is the secret sauce that makes it possible to reprioritize and make changes on the fly. Bill Wake has a great explanation of what makes a good backlog item on his website: http://xp123.com/xplor/xp0308/index.shtml.

Rather than looking at the product backlog as a static indicator of what WILL be built, look at it as the baseline for further adaptation. It is expected to change as we learn more about the emerging product.

Create WBS

PMI Definition: Subdividing the major project deliverables and project work into smaller, more manageable components

This is one of the toughest things for traditional project managers to get their heads around. There is no WBS on an Agile project, at least not one in the traditional sense. From the Scope Definition section, we learned that our backlog represents the scope of the project and that each of the backlog items should be independent of each other. Independence is key because it allows us to do just in time scheduling.

Agile projects are broken down into smaller projects called releases. Project releases are broken down into smaller time-boxes called iterations. Content is pulled into a release just prior to its start, and only as the previous release is winding down. Likewise, content is only pulled into the upcoming iteration as the previous iteration is coming to a close. The idea here is that we are going to review what the team was able to complete and make decisions about the next increment based on what we learned from delivering the previous increment.

As an Agile Project Manager, I am generally comfortable laying out a high level plan to understand where I expect to be at certain points in the project. I am also comfortable keeping a chart of external and internal dependencies to help manage commitments. The key is to use these as guidance for decision making and indicators of progress. Problems arise when these tools restrict our ability to learn and adapt to the realities of our projects.

Scope Verification

PMI Definition: Formalizing acceptance of the completed project deliverables

Each iteration we will decide the next best increment to build and then review the outcome once we are complete. The stakeholders either accept or reject the outcome of the iteration and work with the team to decide the next best set of features to build.

Because we want to maintain the ability to adjust the product as we learn more about the emerging solution, we focus on making and meeting commitments in smaller increments. Scope verification is done based on the outcome of these small increments of product and how they align with the product vision and the goals of the release.

Scope Control

PMI Definition: Controlling changes to project scope

Agile teams take a value driven approach to delivery rather than an activity based, or even deliverables based, approach to delivering projects. The product owner can change the scope of the product at will, but is always focused on delivering the most value possible given the available times and resources.

Agile teams give the product owner a tremendous amount of discretion over how the system is constructed and even accommodate changes even late into the life of the project. It is understood by Agile teams that changing scope involves tradeoffs. The product owner is substituting features that add greater value for those that provide less. To add one thing, something often has to be taken away.

Next Up… Communications Management

Subscribe to this blog

Project Management is Not Enough

Are you a software project manager? If so, your job is changing. It is no longer enough to keep the risk list up to date. It is not enough being the person to schedule the meetings and do the minutes. Knowing how to calculate earned value and critical path is the price you pay to even call yourself a project manager.

Great project managers take those skills for granted. Great project managers are defined by how well they lead their teams. Great software project managers establish context. They create organizational alignment and guide their projects toward successful project outcomes. Great project managers focus on team building, they open lines of communication, they trust people, respect and empower them, and maintain sufficient control to hold everyone accountable for project outcomes.

In my experience, project managers tend to look at themselves in one of two ways. Some PMs want to be at the center of the project, in control of everything, in the middle of every decision. Like the illustration on the right, they try to be the center of the wheel with all team members connecting through them.

Others lead from the boundaries, they create the context. They establish the parameters of the project, the outer limits. They trust the project team to deliver the desired outcomes within those limits. These project managers build teams, get them what they need to be successful, and remove any barriers that could stand in their way. The project manager on the left is intentional about creating and maintaining connections between team members and acting as the buffer to the rest of the organization.

Traditional project management tends to focus more on the science of project management and less on the leadership and team aspects. Agile can sometimes focus too much on the softer side. It's my view that the process driven, scientific side of project management should be a given. That is your ticket in the door. Its time we start hiring great project leaders. It's up to us to get serious about becoming great leaders.

Otherwise, don’t call yourself a project manager.

Here is a link to my post on Agile Chronicles: http://blog.versionone.net/blog/2008/06/project-managem.html

Subscribe to this blog

Photo Credit: http://www.projectstrategy.com

Refactor Your PMP: Cost Management

Next up is cost management. According to PMI, cost management includes the processes involved in planning, estimating, budgeting, and controlling costs so that the project can be completed within the approved budget. This knowledge area only includes three process, but as you might expect, we are going to put a little different spin on them and see what we can do to make them more agile.

Cost Estimating

PMI Definition: Developing an approximation of the costs of the resources needed to complete the project activities

We discussed in the last post that agile projects typically start with time and cost as the primary constraints and float scope through the life of the project. While this is true, there should always be some sort of assessment at the beginning of the project to determine what value the customer might expect at what level of investment.

The product owner might approach the team with a high level backlog of features that need to make the next release. The team would then estimate the backlog and calculate how many iterations they expect the work to take. There would be a negotiation of scope, team composition, and release duration as everyone comes to consensus around what is possible.

The cost of the project is then established as the product of team size and project duration.

Cost Budgeting

PMI Definition: Aggregating the estimated costs of individual activities or work packages to establish a cost baseline

Agile teams assess the relative size of each item in the backlog. Some teams also put a numeric value on the expected ROI of each feature in the backlog. In aggregate, the size of the backlog determines how many features can be delivered and thus the overall value of the release. Because costs are assumed to be a constraint, cost budgeting on an agile team is much more a statement of how much value can be delivered, over the life the project, for the approved budget.

The budgeted amount of value for the project is represented in the release backlog.

Cost Control

PMI Definition: Influencing the factors that create cost variances and controlling changes to the project budget

With the cost of the project now established as a project constraint, agile project are not nearly as concerned with controlling the costs and variances of individual work items. Agile teams are most concerned with how quickly the project begins delivering value and at what rate. We need to monitor how well we are delivering the anticipated features and if we have deviated from the rate we had originally expected.

If the project is not progressing as well as we might have hoped, we may need to remove less important features from the backlog. This will decrease the value to the customer and implicitly increase the cost per feature. If the product owner chooses to extend the duration of the project, to realize all of the anticipated value, this would increase the real costs to the project.

Delivered value is tracked primarily by measuring project burndown. Here we assess the total value of the release, what value the team had expected to deliver at the end of every iteration, and compare the actual value delivered against the ideal.

By monitoring project burndown the team can assess and control the cost impact to the overall project.

Next up... Scope Management

Subscribe to this blog

Refactor Your PMP: Time Management

The first knowledge area we are going to tackle is Time Management. According to PMI, time management involves those processes that contribute to the on-time completion of the project. This knowledge area includes six project management processes designed to accomplish this goal. We'll explore all six and see how we can adapt these processes to make them a little more Agile.

Activity Definition

PMI Definition: Identifying the specific schedule activities that need to be performed to produce the various project deliverables.

To make this process more agile, you first need to think in terms of defining the features of the system, not the activities. Up front we want to know how the system is going to behave. These feature specifications need to be small and independent of each other. Agile teams usually call these features a user story or a backlog item. Collectively the list of product features is called the product backlog. The backlog represents the scope of an agile project.

Activity Sequencing

PMI Definition: Identifying and documenting dependencies among schedule activities

While discussing activity definition, we stated that the backlog items need to be independent of each other. The reason they need to be independent is because we want to have the ability to change requirements as our understanding of the evolving system changes. By definition we are seeking to minimize the dependencies between the work items on our project. Sequencing on an agile project is based less on dependencies and more on risk and business value. We want to focus on sequencing based on which features are going to reduce the most risk and deliver the most value as early in the project as possible.

Activity Resource Estimating

PMI Definition: Estimating the type and quantities of resources required to perform each schedule activity.

In traditional project management approaches, we are usually trying to determine the type and quantities of resources when we know the least about what it is we are going to build. Spending time and money to get a better understanding of these variables is not going to yield a substantial return. Agile approaches use a technique of estimating that relies on the collective understanding of the team to determine a relative size estimate of the feature, often measured in units such as story points or ideal engineering hours. These units only asses the size of the feature relative to the other features in the backlog.

Activity Duration Estimating

PMI Definition: Estimating the number of work periods that will be needed to complete individual schedule activities

We've discussed that each feature in the backlog needs to be small. Our goal is to have every backlog item small enough that it can be delivered within a single iteration. Agile teams build in this constraint and then measure how many features they are able to complete in a given iteration. By measuring how many story points, or ideal hours, they are able to complete each iteration, the team can predict how many iterations it will take to complete the backlog.

Schedule Development

PMI Definition: Analyzing activity sequences, durations, resource requirements, and schedule constraints to create the project schedule

Typical agile projects begin with a time constraint, iterations are fixed periods of time and release schedules are usually established at some fixed interval. Each of these are set by the team and the product owner, but once set do not change. That language might sound a little strong but agile is about building trust with your customer. Good agile teams can always make their date, it is the scope that will vary.

Schedule Control

PMI Definition: Controlling changes to the project schedule

Because the iteration and release timeframes are fixed, it all comes down to a discussion around scope. These discussions are a constant collaborative effort between the product owner and the team. The product owner always has the option of adding additional iterations to include more features. Because the features are discrete, and the team is always working on the highest priority features first, the product owner also has the option of calling the project complete at the end of any iteration.

As always, if you think there is anything I left out, or should have dealt with in more detail, please let me know via response to this post. I speak on this subject quite a bit so anything you have to contribute to make this brief explanation more understandable would be really appreciated.

Next up we'll deal with cost management processes.

Here is a link to my post on Agile Chronicles:
http://blog.versionone.net/blog/2008/06/refactor-your-p.html

Subscribe to this blog

The Agile Edge Conference

Next week Valtech and VersionOne are co-sponsoring a one day conference called the Agile Edge. This will be an intense introduction to Agile designed to give attendees tools they can use to drive organizational transformation and breakthrough performance. David Anderson will be kicking off the event so it should prove to be a very informative and exciting day.

The conference will offer three tracks, each covering a different role on the project: product owners, developers, and project managers. I have the honor of doing the talks on the Agile Management track. We've prepared three presentations that are geared toward traditional project managers making the switch to agile.

Refactoring your PMPs
Successfully moving to Agile Project Management will hinge largely on how well we adopt new ways of thinking about project structure and control. Building on the principles of PMI and the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK) we will explore how a PMP can adapt their knowledge and experience to become an effective Agile Project Manager.

The Agile Power Shift
Agile methods build high-performing project cultures and put a great deal of emphasis on trust, empowerment, and self-organization. Agile moves us away from command and control project structures and toward structures that help us tap into the passion, creativity, and enthusiasm of the team. This team centric approach can leave the traditional project manager wondering about their new role on an agile project. This talk will explain the essentials of agile team dynamics, how teams contribute to project success, and what we must learn to become effective agile project leaders.

Agile Project Management Explained
Agile represents a dramatic shift in thinking about project management. It also represents a pretty radical shift in what a project manager does. At some point project managers have to transition from thinking about Agile to actually making it happen. This talk will explain the mechanics of running an Agile project and how these techniques support the principles behind Agile methodologies.

For those that cannot make the talk next week in DC, we'll be offering this conference in other cities around the country. Next up is New York on June 25th. Click here for more information and to register for the event. Looking forward to seeing everyone there!

Subscribe to this blog

Agile Risk Management - Logistical Risk

This is the final installment of a three part series on Risk Management. Part one discussed how I think about business risk. Part two dealt with how to think about technical risk. This post will address some things to think about when considering logistical risk.

Logistical Risk

Logistical risk deals timing and team member availability. These are your people and money risks. Once the business risks are mitigated and we have proven there is a viable solution, this is where the team can really scale the project and build out the bulk of the solution. Here we are answering questions about having the people to do the work. We are monitoring to see if we are making the progress we expected at the beginning. Are we going to have to make any tradeoffs to hit our market date?

Logistical Risks deal with people. Do we have enough people to do the work and are our original assumptions about their capacity going to hold?

In reality, you are dealing with all three types of risk all through the project. The focus becomes logistical risk once you have tackled the other high risk areas of the project and are ready to get down to the business of building out the product. On a large team, you have probably broken your core team up to seed other small teams on the project. As the project scales, you are working to make sure the interactions between the teams are running smoothly. You are concerned with establishing a stable team velocity, grooming the backlog, and making sure that you are regularly delivering business value.

You are working to make sure that the team has everything it needs to be successful. You are actively removing impediments, and interacting with other parts of the business to prepare for your final product delivery. You are probably coordinating the availability of extended team members, managing external dependencies, and possibly dealing with unexpected departures. Logistical risk is about managing the team through the life of project execution.

In Conclusion

I have witnessed too many Project Managers dealing with risk as something external to the project. It is as if the project is on one track and risk management is on another. Risk management is not a separate process that lives outside the way we build software. Risk management needs to be built into the very fabric of the project itself.

Delivering product to customers mitigates all kinds of risk, let's do that a lot. Continuous integration mitigates risk, let's do that too. Continuous testing mitigates risk, let's test all the time. These are not things that the technical team just does, they are things that project managers need to make sure is happening. We need to make sure they are built into the foundation of our project management approach.

Subscribe to this blog

Agile Risk Management - Technical Risk

This is part two of a mini-series on risk management. Part one discussed how I think about business risk. This post will address some things to think about when considering technical risk.

Technical Risk

Technical risk deals with those unproven assumptions in your emerging design that might significantly impact your ability to deliver the solution. Are we planning to use any unproven technologies to build the solution? Have we exercised the significant interfaces between systems? Can we demonstrate a working skeleton of the system? What about performance? What about security? Any technical decisions not validated by working software count as technical risks.

Technical risk deals with feasibility. In other words, have we proven there is a solution that can be delivered within the time and cost constraints of the project?

Technical risk is also dealt with early in the project immediately after you have a handle on the critical business risks. This is where the team really gets engaged for the first time. You bring your resources to bear to build out the system and validate any assumptions you made during planning. The backlog should be prioritized with an eye toward technical risk. Build out those features early that are most likely to validate your architectural assumptions and stabilize your emerging design.

It is worth emphasizing here that technical risk should always be mitigated in the context of working software. We build features to mitigate risk. Proving interfaces, or that one system can talk to another, outside the context of delivered business value does little to prove anything or mitigate any real risk. Testing is an integral part of risk mitigation. Untested features deliver no value.

As we build features, we will certainly learn more about the architecture and more about what it is going to take to build out the proposed solutions. Stay open to this new information. Re-estimate the backlog if necessary. Share this information with your product owner. Allow them the opportunity to learn along with you and adjust their plans and expectations accordingly. Look for technical tradeoffs that will allow you to deliver within the agreed upon time and cost.

What happens if you prove there is not a solution that can be delivered within the time and cost constraints of the project? Sounds we've just identified a pretty significant business risk. Mitigate your technical risks early and ensure feasibility while your overall investment is still relatively low.

Click here to read my previous post on Business Risk. Next post we'll address Logistical Risk

Subscribe to this blog

Agile Risk Management - Business Risk

As project managers, we must understand how to identify risk and how to put strategies in place to mitigate their effects. To put an effective strategy in place, it is necessary to consider what factors are leading to the risk and when these factors are most likely to impact your project. Over the next few posts we'll talk about three common categories of risk, how we distinguish them from each other, and what we can do to make sure they don't negatively impact our project.

Business Risk

Do we have reason to believe the features we've scheduled for the upcoming release will deliver the value we have planned? Do we have reason to believe the team can deliver that value within the time and cost constraints we have established? What about our customers, have they weighed in that we are building the right product? Is everyone on the team organized around a clearly articulated product vision? Answering these kinds of questions is what it means to mitigate business risk.

Business risk deals with value. In other words, can our project deliver the value we have promised to the business?

Business risk is one of the first kinds of risk to consider on a project. This is often addressed before the entire team really gets going on the project. In this stage, you are setting goals, chartering the project, and getting the project funded. Once the vision is set, make sure that the features you define in the product backlog are focused on delivering that vision. Weed out requirements that are not necessary to deliver that vision, keep things as simple as possible.

Establish a high level architectural approach for the product and use this common understanding as a baseline for estimating and planning. Estimate your backlog, keep it prioritized, and work on the highest value features first. Measure the throughput of the team and assess progress against your backlog. If your team's throughput is less than expected, deal with these issues immediately. Give your product owners the opportunity to adjust the scope of the release or negotiate detailed feature functionality.

Constantly reevaluate the product backlog in light of what we are learning from the emerging solution. Don't assume that the original features are the right features to deliver the vision. Stay open to new information and be willing to learn. If you find that what you are learning is moving you away from the original product vision, ask the hard questions about the project and help the business decide if this new direction is consistent with the organizations goals. If not, what does this mean for the product?

Dealing with business risk involves balancing the product vision, market needs, and the emerging solution. Maintaining the right balance between these three factors is how we guide the project into a successful outcome.

Next post... Technical Risk

Link to my post on Agile Chronicles:
http://blog.versionone.net/blog/2008/05/agile-risk-mana.html

Subscribe to this blog

Straw Men and Red Herrings

Whenever I get into a discussion on Agile Project Management, I inevitably find myself contrasting Agile methods with "Traditional Project Management". I use the phrase "Traditional Project Management" as a label for that style of project management advocated by the PMI, documented in the PMBOK, and certified through the PMP. It's the kind of project management we often characterize as big up front planning followed by a blind adherence to the plan.

Setting up the conversation this way gives me an easy way to establish contrast and teach about Agile methods. The problem with this approach is that reality is never quite so simple.

A well run "Traditional" project does adapt and respond to its environment. A good "Traditional" Project Manager does lead and empower their teams. While good "Agile" teams are structured and disciplined, many are unstructured and chaotic. Establishing an us vs. them mentality isn't going to lead us any closer toward developing more adaptive project managers or more adaptive project management practices.

We will always be able to find examples of misapplied process no matter what management or leadership philosophy we happen to hold.

Rather than setting up the "Traditional" crowd to take the fall for all our project management problems, we should acknowledge that there is a time and place where it does make sense to apply a more "Traditional" approach. Let's focus on making the Project Management community aware of those domains where it doesn't. If we can clearly communicate what makes some software projects different, in a language the "Traditional" crowd understands, we will be better positioned to open minds.

Agile is pretty risky for people that have been immersed in 30-40 years of conventional project management wisdom. As Agile becomes more mainstream, we are going to need to deal with people that are not ready to drink the Kool-Aid. If we want the PMOs out there to see Agile as a viable project management approach, we need to meet people where they are and guide them gently into this new way of thinking.

So here is my new formula for having a discussion on agile project management

1. Validate the traditional project management processes
2. Explain why these processes break down in certain problem domain
3. Listen for objections and understand their point of view
4. Explain how agile project management solves some of these problems.

What do you think?

Subscribe to this blog

What About Me?

We've spent the better part of the past few decades building software organizations around individuals with very specialized skillsets. We have people that do the analysis and design, others that do the coding, another group to do the testing, and yet another to do the doc.

We have a specialized group of people to manage the people with the specialized skillsets and to manage the complex interdependencies all this specialization creates. We have project managers, and program managers, configuration managers, deployment managers, and release managers.

Agile software development basically calls for two roles… the product owner and the team. Okay… Scrum has three… product owner, team member, and ScrumMaster. As agile methods become mainstream we had better understand what we plan to do with everyone else.

Specialized skills are not required on the project all of the time. Specialization requires us to understand when folks are needed and when they'll be free. Answering these questions leads us down the path of predictive project planning and complex portfolio models to manage the interdependencies.

Eventually we start thinking more about matrices and less about teams. If we are truly committed to the idea that great teams can deliver more than a collection of talented individuals, specialization presents a real problem.

Our teams needs all the skills required to deliver working software. In an ideal world we have people that are capable of performing in more than one role. This flexibility allows the team to adjust to the changing needs of the project. Less specialization leads to less constraints, and therefore, less complexity and faster delivery.

Traditional software teams need to address this issue head-on as they consider adopting agile methods. Business analysts, quality testers, and technical writers should be full time members of the development team. Team members should be encouraged to diversify their skillsets so they can help in other areas as necessary.

Do we know what is all of this going to mean for the individual, their development plans, and their career path? If not, we owe it to our people to figure it out.

Some team members will want to stay specialists. Often, what we do becomes part of who we are and change can be uncomfortable. Like any kind of organizational change, this change needs to be managed. We need to shepherd people through the transition, get them the tools they will need to be successful, and encourage them along the way. Some will decide agile is not for them and leave in spite of your best efforts. Wish them well.

We must be intentional about helping everyone make the transition to agile, otherwise we will create a vocal group of detractors that will oppose our efforts to lead change. Let's define the path, point the way, and hope everyone is willing to come along for the ride.

Link to my post on Agile Chronicles:
http://blog.versionone.net/blog/2008/04/what-about-me.html

Subscribe to this blog

Inverting the Iron Triangle

I'm curious. Do we all agree that you cannot predetermine the time, cost, and scope of a project and have any hope of being successful? Is it not an axiom of project management that you can fix any two of the constraints but the third has to be variable? Up until recently I had always assumed this was the first law of project physics, the one rule that could not be broken. For some reason I thought that everyone understood this concept.

It is amazing to me how often I find myself talking to people about the triple constraints of project management. I am usually off talking to a group about Agile Project Management when someone raises their hand and asks THE QUESTION:

How does this work on my project where time, cost, and scope are all fixed?

The simple answer is this… it doesn't. The reality is that no project management methodology works when you try to lock all three of the constraints. If this is really true, why is it that Project Managers are constantly asked to manage projects with all three constraints determined in advance? As project managers, why are we so willing to go along when we know we're on a path to failure.

I want everyone to know that I totally understand the desire to have it all figured out up front. It is incredibly appealing to think that we can do enough due diligence and planning such that all three constraints become perfectly clear and manageable. The reality is that it just doesn't work that way. Claiming that this is our reality does not make it so.

Project Managers are in a tough spot. When you have a team of execs that are convinced we can plan our way into certainty, it is very difficult to be the person that raises the flag. Being the guy that draws attention to the elephant in the room is not a formula for career advancement. Put your head down, do the best you can, and hope for the best. Maybe we'll get lucky.

The data is showing us that more often than not... we don't get lucky.

If we are willing to accept the reality of the triple constraints, maybe we can begin to have a reasonable discussion about the kinds of decisions we are making about our projects. Let's talk honestly about what is really flexible and what is not. If we have no room to adjust the plan, what does that mean about the risk to our initiative?

When considering Agile methods, there is a fundamental shift in what we are choosing to assume about our project constraints.

Traditional project management usually starts with a discussion of scope, as in "what's the scope of the project?" From there we estimate the amount of work required to deliver the scope, set the project budget and resources, and determine the timeline. If your lucky, you get some room to negotiate on the front side. More often than not, the discussion ends with someone telling you to get it all done by next Tuesday. Even with room to negotiate, the goal is to lock the constraints and get moving.

Agile Project Management starts with a discussion of time to market and cost, as in "when do we need to get a working product to market and how much are we willing to invest." From there we begin the process of estimating how much scope we think can fit into the window. That estimate is not a fixed commitment. We started with the assumption we wanted to fix time and cost. Scope has to be negotiable.

There are implications to taking this approach. We'll need to look at how we structure contracts, how we forecast revenue, and how we make commitments to our customers. When we plan our portfolios, we have to ask if we can realize sufficient ROI - understanding we might not get every feature we originally hoped for. This is what is means to REALLY manage our projects.

Dealing with reality is not always easy. Agile is not a silver bullet. Pretending is not an answer.

For an interesting metaphor about dealing with uncertainty, take a look at Brian Sondergaard's post on Progressive Refinement of Estimates:
http://blog.softwarearchitecture.com/2008/03/progressive-refinement-of-estimates-aka.html

Link to my post on Agile Chronicles:

http://blog.versionone.net/blog/2008/04/what-about-me.html

Subscribe to this blog

Assumptions are Made to be Validated

"Every project is conceived and developed based on a set of hypotheses, scenarios, or assumptions. Assumptions analysis is a tool that explores the validity of assumptions as they apply to a project. It identifies risks to the project from inaccuracy, inconsistency, or incompleteness of assumptions." - A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge, Third Edition

Making assumptions is essential in project management. Assumptions simplify our understanding of the problem domain and allow us to move forward in the face of uncertainty. Without the ability to make assumptions, our projects would become paralyzed, unable to deliver the value for which they were created.

The success of our projects is largely determined by the quality of our assumptions. Therefore, by making assumptions on our projects, we are accepting some degree of risk that our assumptions could be wrong. Anytime we assume risk, we need to understand the probability the risk will be realized and it's potential cost to our project. In other words, it is not enough to make assumptions, we need to understand the risks associated with those assumptions, and have a plan should they prove invalid.

Systematic and thorough validation of our project assumptions is the foundation of good project management.

Traditional project management (by that I mean project management as prescribed by the PMI, documented in the PMBOK, and certified through the PMP) makes one key assumption that no one seems to want to address. We routinely assume that our projects are predictable. We assume that with enough planning, with enough forethought, that we can come up with a strategy that will hold through the life of the project.

While I am certain there are some project domains where this assumption holds true, I am equally certain there are many domains where it does not. As project managers, we owe it to our stakeholders to thoroughly assess the likelihood that this assumption is valid and have a mitigation strategy in place if it is not.

If we operate in an environment where market needs change, requirements change, technologies change, and individual performance can vary exponentially; spending effort trying to create a static project plan is wishful thinking. It is just not good project management. We need a mitigation strategy, we need an alternate approach to deliver our projects in the face of overwhelming uncertainty.

Agile methods give us a way of handling projects when the assumptions about predictability just don’t hold. Agile methods give us a way of delivering the most project value, in the least amount of time, with the least investment possible. Agile methods represent a risk mitigation strategy for when our fundamental assumptions about project management no longer prove valid.

Let's apply good project management technique, validate our assumptions, and work to mitigate our risks. Don't be afraid to challenge the assumptions behind our understanding of PM best practice. The assumptions you fail to consider are the most likely to cause you problems in the end.

Click here for my post on Agile Chronicles:
http://blog.versionone.net/blog/2008/04/assumptions-are.html

Subscribe to this blog

One Team

Why is teamwork such an important part of the agile value system?

As people work together over time they learn each other's abilities and communication styles. They learn how to interact with each other in ways that are more productive. Teams develop a culture and establish norms that allow for very efficient communication. They learn to leverage each other's strengths. Over time, this allows a team to establish predictable throughput and a regular pattern of delivery.

We often underestimate what it takes to bring people into relationship with each other. We seem to think that we can matrix people into teams and expect them to start performing right away. We seem to discount the fact that teams need time to form and get to know each other before they can be productive. We overlook personality and chemistry between team members and expect everyone to operate as if they've worked together for years.

The belief that we can breakdown and reform teams on the fly is a belief in local optimization. It is a belief that if we optimize the abilities of the individual through specialization and optimize the process through definition of best practice, people become interchangeable. Aside from the interpersonal issues we've just discussed, this has led our industry toward an ever increasing level of resource management, project management, and portfolio management complexity.

Our challenge is that we focus too much of our limited time and energy managing complex resource interdependencies rather than solving our real business problems. Simplifying means we focus less on developing individual specialties and more on the overall capability of the team. To optimize our teams we will have to broaden the teams collective skill. We have to let go of our addiction to individuals with specialized knowledge that become a single points of failure. We need more people that know more things.

This will require courage and a commitment to broadening the skills of our people. It will require a commitment to team building. It will require commitment to the belief that a well functioning team can deliver more than a collection of talented individuals.

Link to my post on Agile Chronicles:
http://blog.versionone.net/blog/2008/04/one-team.html

 Subscribe to this blog

Herding Project Managers

Last week Glen Alleman published a post called "The Role of Project Management". Glen has been exploring some of the concerns people have with the PMI and the PMP certification. He is challenging us to tell him what process groups and knowledge areas we should leave out. What should we NOT be doing that the PMI prescribes? If we think that the PMI has it wrong, what should we be doing differently?

It dawned on me after reading his post that most Agile Practitioners I talk with don't really have much first hand knowledge of the PMI, the PMP, or the PMBOK. They know of these things through the people that they have worked with over the years. Quite a few folks I meet have had pretty bad experiences with PMP certified project managers and therefore think that it must be the PMI or the PMP that is making them bad.

For the sake of helping everyone rise to Glen's challenge, I have attached the PMI Process Groups, the Knowledge Areas, and as an added bonus, the Project Management Processes. My guess is that the Process Groups and Knowledge Areas are going to make the cut. What about the PM processes? Any low hanging fruit? Activity sequencing maybe? What about activity resource estimating? How about managing the team?

This is looking to be a pretty tough assignment.

PMI Process Groups
(these are the high level components of the process)
Initiating
Planning
Executing
Monitoring and Controlling
Closing

PMI Knowledge Areas
(these are the areas we are managing within the process groups)
Integration
Scope
Time
Cost
Quality
Human Resources
Communications
Risk
Procurement

PMI Project Management Processes
(these are the actual process prescribed in the PMBOK)
Develop project charter
Develop preliminary project scope statement
Develop project management plan
Scope planning
Scope definition
Create WBS
Activity definition
Activity sequencing
Activity resource estimating
Activity duration estimating
Schedule development
Cost estimating
Cost budgeting
Quality planning
Human resource planning
Communications planning
Risk management planning
Risk identification
Qualitative risk analysis
Quantitative risk analysis
Risk response planning
Plan purchases and acquisitions
Plan contracting
Direct and manage project execution
Perform quality assurance
Acquire project team
Develop project team
Information distribution
Request seller responses
Select sellers
Monitor and control project work
Integrated change control
Scope verification
Scope control
Schedule control
Cost control
Perform quality control
Manage project team
Performance reporting
Manage stakeholders
Risk monitoring and control
Contract administration
Close project
Contract closure

Check out this link just for fun: http://www.ibiblio.org/Dave/Dr-Fun/df200210/df20021001.jpg

 Subscribe to this blog

We're Agile, Now What?

You’re a PM working with a team that has just gone agile. Here are a few tips to help you be successful managing agile projects:

Understand agile team dynamics

Agile is about creating an environment where team members are fully engaged and empowered to make decisions. A good agile team is transparent and apolitical. It is a fun and safe place to work. A big part of your job as an agile project manager is to create this environment for your project team. The more you can understand about what makes agile teams work, the better positioned you will be to help them be successful.

Champion the project vision

Sometimes the team is going to get in the weeds. Your job is to help them stay focused on the big picture. Own the project vision. Keep it front and center during planning meetings. Use the vision to make sure the team stays on course. Keeping everyone focused on the goals of the organization is a huge contribution to your team and the business.

Remove obstacles

Listen to your team. Understand what they are telling you. Become an enabler by helping the team deal with the problems that are slowing them down. Be proactive and help anticipate risks. Deal with issues before they become impediments. Create a network of informed company leaders that can help resolve issues when they get too big for the team to deal with locally.

Focus on team building

Create opportunities for the team to have a shared experience. Create an environment where people can develop strong relationships at work. Help develop a sense of shared purpose and camaraderie. Great teams work together and like each other. Great teams are sensitive to each other’s needs. Don't let this happen by accident, be intentional about it.

Build consensus through facilitation

You have created a high performance team focused on the business vision. Get out of the way an let them deliver. At this point you become a facilitator for the team. Learn techniques that help people come to consensus and resolve conflict in a healthy way. Recognize ways to help ensure everyone on the team is able to contribute. Help the team find common ground and get moving.

Develop talent through coaching

Become a teacher. Help set expectations for the team. Most importantly, put people in position to be successful and give them the tools to deliver. One of the best ways to do this is to develop your coaching skills. Learn positive ways to give feedback. Create non confrontational ways to guide and instruct. Build relationships and be open to feedback in return.

Encourage structure and discipline

Maintaining structure and discipline requires energy. One of your primary responsibilities is to help the team maintain focus and protect the process. Encourage participation in planning meetings, daily stand-ups, and retrospectives. Help your product owners find time to maintain the backlog. Encourage discipline around agile engineering practices. Help the team understand how all the practices work together.

Help the team commit

Agile is about delivering on time… every time. On time delivery requires commitment. It requires the commitment of the team to deliver the sprint and the commitment of the product owners to adjust as we learn more about the evolving solution. As an agile project manager you can help create a sense of shared ownership and a culture of collaboration and cooperation amongst all the team members.

Get help when you need it

Having a good support system is essential . Find people on the same road to share the journey with you. Seek out people that have travelled the road before you. Join user groups and share your ideas. Join organizations and find ways to contribute. You will learn much along the way. Never hesitate to ask for advice.

Be patient and stay the course

You are going to have challenges and you are going to make mistakes. There is a learning curve and some old habits will die hard. Hold yourself accountable and learn from your mistakes. Most importantly, don't give up.

Being an agile project manager is about being a great leader. It is about accepting input from reality and responding to it. It is about looking out for the best interest of the team. Seeking out what is not being said. Helping to bridge gaps in understanding. Exposing what is hidden.

There is no success for anyone unless we are all successful. By working for the success of the team, you are working for your own success. You cannot have one without the other.

Here is a link to my post on Agile Chronicles: http://blog.versionone.net/blog/2008/03/were-agile-now.html

 Subscribe to this blog

The Agile Power Shift