Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.
Comparing Apples to Apples
Gilson Gaseorowski
Fernando Ostanelli
CI&T
São Paulo, Brazil
Apr 2016
Look at that, Larry!!
Is it that Agile stuff?
I dunno, Cliff!
But it’s freaking beautiful!
I want it now!
1995 2015
Agile
Lean IT
Enterprise
Agile
RUP
CMM5
2 decades
of learning
Business Value must be the north … always!
… but predictability still matters… a lot!
Report: Build The Right Things Bette...
No project has
unlimited resources
Have you ever been there?
“Cone of Uncertainty”
value
(intrinsic)
quality
(intrinsic)
Flexibility to adapt
The Agile Triangle
Constraints:
Scope, Time, Cost
Quality and v...
We'll ask for
estimates ...
… and then treat
them as deadlines
I have altered
the product scope
Pray I don't alter
it in the future
Much disagreement...
I sense...
Without a common language, scope complexity
is a matter of individual perspective.
Why does it always to
end like this?
Because you
keep adding
features!
and scope
agreements
are a matter of
What I
underst...
oops… different scales?
oops… reference changed?
WTF! Where’s my old pal?!
We need a common language
to normalize our perspectives!
2008 2012 2013 2015
NormalizedStoryPoints
DigitalMarketingRuleComplexityPointsRule
BusinessComplexityRule
FunctionPoints
L...
Business Complexity Normalization
Normalized Complexity
vs Risk vs Effort vs Experience
How to isolate complexity (or size) from other estimates aspects?
● unique, objective and easy to
apply
● universal business and software
engineering language
● decoupled from technical
as...
Business Complexity analysis rationale
NOVEMBER FEBRUARYDECEMBER JANUARY
2015 2016
SPRINT 0
5 WDs
0 CP’S
SPRINT 1
10 WDs
85 / 92 141 / 129 174 / 156
SPRINT 2
10 ...
#noestimates
CI&T and Business Complexity Points
Report: Build The Right Things Better And Faster With Modern Application Delivery Metr...
Licensing model
Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International
You are free to Share — copy and redistribute th...
learning while having fun!
ciandt.com
BUSINESS COMPLEXITY
RULE
Thank you!
References:
Build The Right Things Better And Faster With Modern Application Delivery Metrics (http://bit.ly/1Q...
Fernando
Ostanelli
Head of Operations
br.linkedin.com/in/ostanelli
ostanelli@ciandt.com
Contact Info
Gílson
Gaseorowski
Le...
Comparing Apples to Apples - A technique to normalize software complexity and reach consensus on scope for Agile projects
Comparing Apples to Apples - A technique to normalize software complexity and reach consensus on scope for Agile projects
Comparing Apples to Apples - A technique to normalize software complexity and reach consensus on scope for Agile projects
Comparing Apples to Apples - A technique to normalize software complexity and reach consensus on scope for Agile projects
Comparing Apples to Apples - A technique to normalize software complexity and reach consensus on scope for Agile projects
You’ve finished this document.
Download and read it offline.
Upcoming SlideShare
Software complexity
Next
Upcoming SlideShare
Software complexity
Next
Download to read offline and view in fullscreen.

Share

Comparing Apples to Apples - A technique to normalize software complexity and reach consensus on scope for Agile projects

Download to read offline

presentation delivered at Agile Trends conference, in São Paulo, Brazil, Apr 2016

In this talk we presented a technique we have developed to normalize scope and requirements comprehension that has been proven effective not just to overcome all the challenges and conflicts regarding scope agreements and planning in Agile projects, but also to determine software size in terms of functional complexity and enable a data-driven foundation for continuous improvement. We shared details of the framework including: how it was conceived, why its useful to address such challenges, how it works and how to apply it.

Related Books

Free with a 30 day trial from Scribd

See all

Comparing Apples to Apples - A technique to normalize software complexity and reach consensus on scope for Agile projects

  1. 1. Comparing Apples to Apples Gilson Gaseorowski Fernando Ostanelli CI&T São Paulo, Brazil Apr 2016
  2. 2. Look at that, Larry!! Is it that Agile stuff? I dunno, Cliff! But it’s freaking beautiful! I want it now!
  3. 3. 1995 2015 Agile Lean IT Enterprise Agile RUP CMM5 2 decades of learning
  4. 4. Business Value must be the north … always! … but predictability still matters… a lot! Report: Build The Right Things Better And Faster With Modern Application Delivery Metrics Authors: Diego Lo Giudice and Kurt Bittner Date released: July 28, 2015 “While I am very interested in knowing the business value my development teams generate, my board requires me to be predictable on how much we are spending and for what.” -- Dave West, chief product officer, Tasktop
  5. 5. No project has unlimited resources
  6. 6. Have you ever been there?
  7. 7. “Cone of Uncertainty”
  8. 8. value (intrinsic) quality (intrinsic) Flexibility to adapt The Agile Triangle Constraints: Scope, Time, Cost Quality and value are non-negotiable!
  9. 9. We'll ask for estimates ... … and then treat them as deadlines
  10. 10. I have altered the product scope Pray I don't alter it in the future
  11. 11. Much disagreement... I sense...
  12. 12. Without a common language, scope complexity is a matter of individual perspective.
  13. 13. Why does it always to end like this? Because you keep adding features! and scope agreements are a matter of What I understood VS What you understood
  14. 14. oops… different scales? oops… reference changed?
  15. 15. WTF! Where’s my old pal?!
  16. 16. We need a common language to normalize our perspectives!
  17. 17. 2008 2012 2013 2015 NormalizedStoryPoints DigitalMarketingRuleComplexityPointsRule BusinessComplexityRule FunctionPoints LinesofCode 2006 StoryPoints& T-Shirt Normalized Complexity - our Timeline . . .2014 Across-the-boardrollout
  18. 18. Business Complexity Normalization
  19. 19. Normalized Complexity vs Risk vs Effort vs Experience How to isolate complexity (or size) from other estimates aspects?
  20. 20. ● unique, objective and easy to apply ● universal business and software engineering language ● decoupled from technical aspects ● immutable over time and among different teams ● regardless of effort, risk and team experience ● common language among the whole team and with clients A model to normalize and determine software functional complexity Business Complexity Points Rule
  21. 21. Business Complexity analysis rationale
  22. 22. NOVEMBER FEBRUARYDECEMBER JANUARY 2015 2016 SPRINT 0 5 WDs 0 CP’S SPRINT 1 10 WDs 85 / 92 141 / 129 174 / 156 SPRINT 2 10 WDs SPRINT 3 10 WDs 133 / 148 SPRINT 4 10 WDs 39 / 0 R 2 7 WDs 15 Partner Type Bulk Upload 9 Chrome Landing Page 9 Android Landing Page 24 Partner Bulk Upload 22 Find Partner By Type 25 Show Partner 19 Advanced Find Partner 6 Geo ordering 83 Admin Auth 27 Partner Password Recovery 21 Partner Auth 46 Approve New Partner 20 Approve Partner Update 41 Partner Update 19 Highlight Premium Partner 18 Contact Us 59 Multiple offices 46 Create a Partner 51 Update Partner 18 Delete Partner Continuous UAT - User Acceptance Test Continuous Backlog Grooming - Scope Refinement Environment SETUP Team Set-up Tech Components R 1 3 WDs 38 / 0 OUT OF SCOPE 8 Make Address Not Required 17 Include Partner Focus Area Become a Partner 44 Security Issues 23Analytics28 UAT Improvem ents 23 UAT Improvem ents 15 Admin Bulk Upload 22 Inform Location Filter 23 Resend Approval E-mail 36 Adjust Approval Workflow 15 Approve New Partner - Assign 19 Contact Partner Foundation and non- functional requirements Functional requirements Performed / Baseline Uncovered by budget Continuous MTP 20 Adjust Footer Be transparent, share decisions and continuously manage expectations
  23. 23. #noestimates
  24. 24. CI&T and Business Complexity Points Report: Build The Right Things Better And Faster With Modern Application Delivery Metrics Authors: Diego Lo Giudice and Kurt Bittner Date released: July 28, 2015 Excerpts featuring CI&T Stakeholders want innovation but still value predictability. Pyrrhic victories are never popular. Business stakeholders want to win but with costs that provide profitable margins. Predictability is important, too. Modern applications are paired with changes in business processes that must be orchestrated with precision to be successful. Digital services firm CI&T, which contributed significantly to Coca- Cola’s Happiness Flag project for the 2014 World Cup, has defined its own methodology to calculate what it calls business complexity points to determine the cost of developing business features.
  25. 25. Licensing model Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International You are free to Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format Under the following terms: Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. NonCommercial — You may not use the material for commercial purposes. NoDerivatives — If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you may not distribute the modified material.
  26. 26. learning while having fun!
  27. 27. ciandt.com BUSINESS COMPLEXITY RULE
  28. 28. Thank you! References: Build The Right Things Better And Faster With Modern Application Delivery Metrics (http://bit.ly/1QDhFnP) Cone of Uncertainty (http://bit.ly/1SNmb7w) Business Complexity Rule - pdf (http://bit.ly/1TAMcau) Business Complexity Rule - Google Spreadsheet (http://bit.ly/1VEKd8D)
  29. 29. Fernando Ostanelli Head of Operations br.linkedin.com/in/ostanelli ostanelli@ciandt.com Contact Info Gílson Gaseorowski Lean/Agile Transformation Coach gilson@ciandt.com br.linkedin.com/in/gaseorowskigilson
  • ErikadeAssis1

    May. 21, 2021
  • RobertoPepiPMP

    Feb. 12, 2020
  • AndeasNYC

    Nov. 2, 2018
  • EduardoLimaPMP

    Nov. 1, 2017
  • armandorogeriojr

    Oct. 20, 2017

presentation delivered at Agile Trends conference, in São Paulo, Brazil, Apr 2016 In this talk we presented a technique we have developed to normalize scope and requirements comprehension that has been proven effective not just to overcome all the challenges and conflicts regarding scope agreements and planning in Agile projects, but also to determine software size in terms of functional complexity and enable a data-driven foundation for continuous improvement. We shared details of the framework including: how it was conceived, why its useful to address such challenges, how it works and how to apply it.

Views

Total views

1,855

On Slideshare

0

From embeds

0

Number of embeds

24

Actions

Downloads

49

Shares

0

Comments

0

Likes

5

×