Agile Prozesse und ein automatisiertes Kennzahlen-Cockpit Die ideale Kombination bei offshore/nearshore Projekten

Transkript

1 Agile Prozesse und ein automatisiertes Kennzahlen-Cockpit Die ideale Kombination bei offshore/nearshore Projekten Jörg Stimmer Agile World, Distributed Teams, Distributed Outsourcing München,

2 Background Ram up of Tech Mahindra in CE Large scale offshore SW development & maintenance Mainly RUP & waterfall Projects at o O 2 Germany o T-Mobile o Alcatel-Lucent o Founding of plixos in 2009 Optimised management of offshore / nearshore SW projects Industrialisation (automation & standardisation) of governance by tools Consultancy and prime contractorship in fitting cases o Offshore/nearshore SW development for SMEs o Cost effective prototype development Open discussion of experiences and ideas on an actual case (agile & offshore) 2

3 Typical best in class tools for Agile SW projects covering major sub-processes Process Requ. Mgmt. User Stories Explanation Effort Tracking Offshore SP LPS Team Risk Mgmt. SW Versioning Cont. Int. Quality Mgmt. Testing F & A Tool JIRA Explanation in Wiki JIRA PlugIn PlanView JIRA PlugIn Subversion (SVN) Hudson SONAR FITness, TOSCA MS Navision, EasyBudget BUT No fitting reporting on wanted KPIs and trends Wanted KPIs require multiple base parameters & sources Manual calculation: costs, delays and unwanted influence Source: Governance of agile Software projects by an automated KPI Cockpit in the Cloud, Dr. Udo Wilski, CTO and Member of the Board, Loyalty Partner Solutions, Swiss IT Sourcing Forum, Zuerich, 8 March

4 Focus KPI Cockpit: Overview and insights for project and executive management LPS LPS Executive Mgmt. LPS Vendor Mgmt. LPS Project Mgmt. Offshore SP SP Executive Mgmt. Accout Director SP Project Mgmt. Extended reporting with KPI Cockpit, e.g. by new KPIs, trends etc. Full access for LPS Limited subset for SP Sub Project Mgmt. Teams PMO/PDM/Scrum Champions Teams Use of development tools as is = structured and well documented = no unstructured communication Value KPI Cockpit Automated data collection, KPI calculation and presentation across tools Manpower used for interpretation of reports and action NOT data preparation Source: Governance of agile Software projects by an automated KPI Cockpit in the Cloud, Dr. Udo Wilski, CTO and Member of the Board, Loyalty Partner Solutions, Swiss IT Sourcing Forum, Zuerich, 8 March

5 26 KPIs for an agile offshore Software project 9 Business Case (BC) 4 Productivity (PR) Example: PR-2: Story Point per PD; PR-5: Velocity 5 Service Provider Relationship (SPR) 8 Quality Assurance (QA) Source: Governance of agile Software projects by an automated KPI Cockpit in the Cloud, Dr. Udo Wilski, CTO and Member of the Board, Loyalty Partner Solutions, Swiss IT Sourcing Forum, Zuerich, 8 March

6 Examples of further in build analysis PR-2: Progression of productivity Story Points / Efforts per individual Sprint offers transparency on evolution of SP s productivity over time ( learning curve ). BC-1: Spent vs. billed effort per month SP monthly costs calculated by LPS on Efforts logged in system vs. actual bills by SP. Source: Governance of agile Software projects by an automated KPI Cockpit in the Cloud, Dr. Udo Wilski, CTO and Member of the Board, Loyalty Partner Solutions, Swiss IT Sourcing Forum, Zuerich, 8 March

7 Evaluation of Cost per Story Point after first steady state Only efforts for technical tasks are considered Only closed and resolved Story Points and the related tasks are considered Blended rate as per internal calculation and estimation in which month the Sprint occurred, including freelancers deployed 80% of efforts by dedicated onsite team allocated for offshore support In average offshore Cost per Story Point seems to reach 70%, including a share of nearly 30% directly attributable to the onsite team supporting offshore Source: Governance of agile Software projects by an automated KPI Cockpit in the Cloud, Dr. Udo Wilski, CTO and Member of the Board, Loyalty Partner Solutions, Swiss IT Sourcing Forum, Zuerich, 8 March

8 Benchmarking of 2 comparable offshore projects Offshore Costs BM-1, Cost per Story Point Project Project2 Onsite Support for Offshore Different offshore Service Providers Different customer Teams Same technology Only "technical tasks" are considered (Development, QA, onsite team for support/governance of offshore team) Offshore productivity is ~XX% of respective Onsite baseline in both cases The Onsite/Offshore cost ratio varies (Project1 0,66 vs. Project2 1,18) and suggests further investigation The Cost per Story Point for the offshore delivery including onsite support & governance lies within a ~10% variance Source: Governance of agile Software projects by an automated KPI Cockpit in the Cloud, Dr. Udo Wilski, CTO and Member of the Board, Loyalty Partner Solutions, Swiss IT Sourcing Forum, Zuerich, 8 March

9 Motivation for Benchmarking Source: Dr. Andreas Maaser, VP Operation, Telefonica Germany & Head of Vendor Management, 2011 EOA Summit & Awards, Madrid, June

10 Motivation for Benchmarking Source: Dr. Andreas Maaser, VP Operation, Telefonica Germany & Head of Vendor Management, 2011 EOA Summit & Awards, Madrid, June

11 Tool integration with open service bus - GloBuS* Funded research project wit TU Munich and industry partners Integration of the plixos Outsourcing Director with leading 3rd party systems & tools by an independent and open service BUS Customers obtain all benefits of the comprehensive KPI reporting by still keeping the already existing tools in place * Global Bus System plixos GmbH, confidential 11

12 Conclusion & work in progress My conclusion: Agile & automated reporting: A winning combination for large scale offshore SW projects Work in progress Benchmarking (ongoing) Further e-2-e tool integration Vendor Consolidation 12

13

14 plixos about us and our vision plixos is a specialist provider of support and governance solutions which enable successful delivery of outsourced software development - be it onsite, near-shore or offshore. plixos offers innovative solutions throughout the software sourcing project life cycle. plixos helps its customers benefit from distributed / remote applications development through simplifying and standardising their outsourcing decisions. improving their control and management of outsourcing service providers. Our investors include, We are a highly innovative provider of SaaS solutions and build on strong investors 14

15 Ankündigung Inhalt Für Entwicklung und Wartung von SW geht an global verteilten Teams ( Offshoring, Nearshoring) oft kein Weg vorbei. Wird dies mit einer Fremdvergabe ( Outsourcing ) gekoppelt, erhöht sich die Komplexität noch weiter. Zahlreichen typischen Herausforderungen kann durch den Einsatz agiler Methoden wie z.b. SCRUM begegnet werden. Nichts desto trotz ist ein zeitnahes und fundiertes Reporting zur Steuerung der Projekte von hoher Bedeutung, eben gerade bei offshore/nearshore Outsourcing. Auch wenn die SW Entwicklung bzw. das Applikationsmanagement in einem hohen Maße ein kreativer Prozess ist, der manuelle Tätigkeiten beinhaltet, so können doch auch hier wesentliche Teile industrialisiert, also Automatisiert und Standardisiert werden. Ein Beispiel ist die Erhebung und Analyse von Kennzahlen (KPIs) für ein effektives und Management der Projekte, nahezu in Echtzeit. Richtig aufgesetzt, zeigen Trends über längere Zeiträume und Vergleiche zwischen Projekten (Benchmarks) weitere Optimierungspotenziale auf. 15

16 Zur Person Jörg Stimmer hat in verschiedenen Konzernen offshore/nearshore Outsourcing auf Seiten von Anbietern wie auch als Kunde über mehrere Jahre verantwortet. Die letzten Jahre verantwortete er als Vice President Central Europe die Geschäfte von Tech Mahindra. Herr Dr. Stimmer ist Gründer und Vorstand der European Outsourcing Association Germany e.v. und Geschäftsführer der plixos GmbH. In diesem Rahmen hat er sich intensiv mit der Kombination von agiler Entwicklung und der gleichzeitigen Steuerung mit automatisierten Kennzahlen bei großen offshore Projekten beschäftigt und auch mehrere erfolgreich umgesetzt. Er ist in einem von Anwendern gegründeten Arbeitskreis Benchmarking engagiert. 16