TEAM BUILDING IN AGILE SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT:

e

TEAM BUILDING IN AGILE SOFTWARE

DEVELOPMENT:

loer

rac

h.d

e

THE “PROJECT MANAGEMENT LABORATORY”

OF BA LOERRACH

w

ww

.dhb

w-l

OF BA LOERRACH

w

Prof Dr Eckhart Hanser

Prof. Dr. Eckhart Hanser

Duale Hochschule Baden-Württemberg Lörrach

Baden-Württemberg Cooperative State University

Head Department Applied Informatics/Bio-Systems Inform.

Head Department Applied Informatics/Bio Systems Inform.

Biosystem-Informatik

•

Stein des Anstoßes:

– Eigene Projekte in der Praxis

Fö d

d

T

bild

t

– Förderung des Teambildungsprozess unter

Studierenden an der DHBW Lörrach / Bereich

T

h ik

Technik:

• Informationstechnik (IT)

•

Biosystem-Informatik

•

Ziel:

Vorstellung des

Meta Agile Process Model (MAP)

Meta Agile Process Model (MAP)

Th

P

j

t

ith

There are Projects with …

project aim #3

ƒ

changing specifications

_{project aim #3}

ƒ

Refactoring necessary

ƒ

Documentation has a short lifetime!

project aim #2

project aim #2

Aim changes! #3

P j

t t t

Iteration 1

Iter. 2

Iter. 3

Original project aim

Aim changes! #2

Project start

Original project aim

Introduction -

Agile Manifesto

- eXtreme Programming – IT laboratory – Mini team size – Psychology - Conclusions

Agile Manifesto

Kent Beck, Alistair Cockburn, Martin Fowler, Jim Highsmith, Robert C. Martin et.al., 2001

http://www.agilemanifesto.org

Four principles:

Individuals and interactions

over processes and tools

•

Individuals and interactions

over processes and tools

•

Working software

over comprehensive documentation

•

Customer collaboration

over contract negotiation

g

Introduction - Agile Manifesto -

eXtreme Programming

– IT laboratory – Mini team size – Psychology - Conclusions

Famous agile representative: Kent Beck’s

eXtreme Programming (XP),

g

g (

)

Important XP rules to be analyzed:

• Designing User Stories

• Collective Code Ownership and Software Integration

• Collective Code Ownership and Software Integration

• Pair Programming

Introduction - Agile Manifesto - eXtreme Programming –

IT laboratory

– Mini team size – Psychology - Conclusions

IT laboratory / DHBW Lörrach

2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008

• 6

th

_{semester of Applied Computer Science / Information Technology}

• each spring: 11 sessions with 5 (4) hours

• each spring: 11 sessions with 5 (4) hours

=> Up to 800 project hours each spring.

• The size of each course determines the number of the team members

=> Up to 20 team members (students + prof.)

Introduction - Agile Manifesto - eXtreme Programming –

IT laboratory

– Mini team size – Psychology - Conclusions

Project:

Development of an eMail marketing software

Test content for the interPM

Hi $Title$ $Name$,

I‘ l d b h i Dü ld f

IT laboratory of

session 2005

Introduction - Agile Manifesto - eXtreme Programming –

IT laboratory

– Mini team size – Psychology - Conclusions

y

BA Loerrach

Prerequisites:

The lecturer fills the positions of project and quality

manager with suitable “managers” (i.e. students).

In the beginning the rest of the team has no structure,

should however form XP pairs.

Members know about process models, especially XP.

p

,

p

y

The customer (i.e. the lecturer) is a team member.

Development

platform:

MS Visual Studio .NET

platform:

Team aims:

Common programming of a “fully featured” email

keti

te

marketing system.

XP is required

(= decision of the lecturer).

Key questions, I want to investigate:

Introduction - Agile Manifesto - eXtreme Programming – IT laboratory –

Questions

– Psychology - Conclusions

Key questions, I want to investigate:

1. Roles of Project and Quality Manager in agile projects?

2. Which (XP) practices are not the result of the

„self-organization“ of the team?

3 I th

id

l

i i t

i

( th

th

2) f

f l

3. Is there an ideal mini team size (other than 2) for successful

Q1 Th

j

t

i

il

j

t

Introduction - Agile Manifesto - eXtreme Programming – IT laboratory –

Questions

– Psychology - Conclusions

Q1: The project manager in an agile project

(i.e. session 2005)

… characterizes his project role as

• coordinator of the project

• problem solver

• communicator

NET

t

• .NET expert

• co-designer of user stories

(together with the client)

Q1 Th

lit

i

il

j

t

Introduction - Agile Manifesto - eXtreme Programming – IT laboratory –

Mini team size

– Psychology - Conclusions

Q1: The quality manager in an agile project

(i.e. session 2005)

… characterizes his project role as

• product and project quality

(

i

t

ti

)

assurance (reviews, testing)

• problem solver

• communicator

communicator

• .NET expert

• co-designer of user stories

(t

th

ith th

li

t)

(together with the client)

Agrees with the view of the project manager!

Key questions, I want to investigate:

Introduction - Agile Manifesto - eXtreme Programming – IT laboratory –

Questions

– Psychology - Conclusions

Key questions, I want to investigate:

1. Roles of Project and Quality Manager in agile projects?

2. Which (XP) practices are not the result of the

„self-organization“ of the team?

3 I th

id

l

i i t

i

( th

th

2) f

3. Is there an ideal mini team size (other than 2) for

Q2 D

i

f

t

i

Introduction - Agile Manifesto - eXtreme Programming – IT laboratory –

Questions

– Psychology - Conclusions

Q2: Design of user stories

•

In every session only project manager, quality manager and

few

team

members where interested in creating user stories.

•

Only when the mini teams had chosen their story cards they began actively

•

Only when the mini teams had chosen their story cards, they began actively

to make a detailed low level design.

•

We saw

no readiness

in the team for collective design or code ownership.

N

ll

ti

d

hi

Q2: Integration

XP says: „Only a pair integrates code at a time.“

Introduction - Agile Manifesto - eXtreme Programming – IT laboratory –

Questions

– Psychology - Conclusions

Q

g

y

„

y

p

g

But our experience in all sessions:

•

Integration is not a result of the „self-organization“ of the team

(> 3 programmers)

.

•

2004 – 2008 integration only took place after heavy interventions of the customer.

•

The lecturer had to take over the role of a

communicator

not of a typical customer!

•

The lecturer had to take over the role of a

communicator

– not of a typical customer!

not to solve the problem, but to communicate its existence.

•

Integration had to be

g

„centralized“

.

Not only one machine but also one

team member (with full responsibility)

• New role:

Integration Engineer

A new team role:

Integration Engineer

Introduction - Agile Manifesto - eXtreme Programming – IT laboratory – Mini team size –

Psychology

- Conclusions

g

g

sits a little “aside“

sits a little aside …

Key questions, I want to investigate:

Introduction - Agile Manifesto - eXtreme Programming – IT laboratory –

Questions

– Psychology - Conclusions

Key questions, I want to investigate:

1. Roles of Project and Quality Manager in agile projects?

2. Which (XP) practices are not the result of the

„self-organization“ of the team?

3

P

ti

l

i

h

th t t

ith

b

t 5

b

3. Practical experience shows that teams with more as about 5 members

subdivide into „mini teams“:

1.

In XP such a mini team is called a „pair“ (2 members).

(

)

Are these pairs successful?

2.

Is there an ideal mini team size (other than 2)?

3.

Do we see a self-organization process of successful mini

teams?

4.

What is the member structure?

4.

What is the member structure?

Q3 Mi i t

i

Introduction - Agile Manifesto - eXtreme Programming – IT laboratory –

Mini team size

– Psychology - Conclusions

Q3: Mini team size

i

2004

i

2005 2008

session 2004

session 2005 - 2008

Mini teams with 3 members as

“starting point”.

XP pairs as initial mini teams.

Result: XP pairs do

not

occur.

Minimal mini team size remains

3

.

The most successful mini team has

4

members.

Project

Introduction - Agile Manifesto - eXtreme Programming – IT laboratory –

Mini team size

– Psychology - Conclusions

Q3 Mi i t

i

We see

Project

start

Q3: Mini team size

We see

3 pairs

…

A triplet

First pair grows

Introduction - Agile Manifesto - eXtreme Programming – IT laboratory –

Mini team size

– Psychology - Conclusions

2

k

2 weeks

later

But also one

Super

team

team

with

6 members

for

i t

ti

integration

4

k

Introduction - Agile Manifesto - eXtreme Programming – IT laboratory –

Mini team size

– Psychology - Conclusions

4 weeks

later

O l

1

Only

1

"classical“

XP pair

XP pairs

decrease!

decrease!

Mini Team Size

Introduction - Agile Manifesto - eXtreme Programming – IT laboratory –

Mini team size

– Psychology - Conclusions

session 2004

session 2005

Session 2008

Mini

teams

with

3

XP pairs as initial mini

XP pairs as initial mini

Mini Team Size

Mini

teams

with

3

members

as

“starting

point”.

XP pairs as initial mini

teams.

XP pairs as initial mini

teams.

Result: XP pairs do

not

Result: Number of XP Result:

3

XP

pairs

Result: XP pairs do

not

occur.

Result: Number of XP

pairs seems to decrease.

Result:

3

XP

pairs

“survive”.

Minimal mini team size

remains

3

.

Most mini teams grow in

size (3, 4 or more).

50% of the team are XP

pairs!

remains

3

.

size (3, 4 or more).

pairs!

The most successful mini

team has

4

members.

In special phases, e.g.

integration

, we see a

team size of

6

members.

Integration: several pairs

form a larger

integration

team

.

team size of

6

members.

team

.

Inter XP pair relations

(2008)

Introduction - Agile Manifesto - eXtreme Programming – IT laboratory –

Mini team size

– Psychology - Conclusions

Introduction - Agile Manifesto - eXtreme Programming – IT laboratory – Mini team size –

Psychology

- Conclusions

“Super team” explained:

• 5 members

• Integrates the code in a critical

Integration Engineer

phase.

• The members take responsibility

for the integration

for the integration.

• The project would fail, if they did

not succeed.

not succeed.

Introduction - Agile Manifesto - eXtreme Programming – IT laboratory – Mini team size –

Psychology

- Conclusions

Organizational psychology:

Organizational psychology:

Introduction - Agile Manifesto - eXtreme Programming – IT laboratory – Mini team size –

Psychology

- Conclusions

A successfull Mini Team

needs particularly

•

Creative Mind

•

Technical Expert

• Technical Problem Solver

• Quality Tester

Technical Expert

•

Team Worker

•

Communicator

Quality Tester

•

Communicator

Introduction - Agile Manifesto - eXtreme Programming – IT laboratory – Mini team size –

Psychology

- Conclusions

Details of the “super team“

Problem solver / integrator

“Lone wolf“

Integration Engineer

Team

worker

Expert,

creative

mind

Lone wolf

Project Manager

“external“

Communicator

(P j

t

Team

worker

mind

(Project

manager)

Expert,

creative

mind

“internal“

communicator,

creative mind

creative mind

Quality tester

IT-Labor 2007

– Prozess

Crystal Clear

Introduction - Agile Manifesto - eXtreme Programming – IT laboratory – Mini team size – Psychology –

Actual results

IT Labor 2007

Prozess

Crystal Clear

Bewertung des Prozess durch das Team / Umfrageergebnis:

Schulnoten!

Wissenschaftliche

Begleitung:

Crystal Clear 2007

Introduction - Agile Manifesto - eXtreme Programming – IT laboratory – Mini team size – Psychology –

Actual results

Crystal Clear 2007

(1) Note nur für interne Osmotische Kommunikation

nachvollziehbar

nachvollziehbar

(2) Reflektion nicht festgestellt.

(3) Lieferungen unregelmäßig

(3) Lieferungen unregelmäßig.

2007: Team fährt“ seinen eigenen agilen Prozess!

2007: Team „fährt seinen eigenen agilen Prozess!

„Meta Agile Process Model“ (MAP Methodology)

Introduction - Agile Manifesto - eXtreme Programming – IT laboratory – Mini team size – Psychology -

Conclusions

„Meta Agile Process Model (MAP Methodology)

A successful project in a small to medium-sized team needs the following “ingredients“:

C

t

•

Customer

• available to the team

O

t

C

i

ti

d

d fl

ibl

• One or two

Communication managers

, good and flexible

• for project and quality management

•

Integration engineer

• continuous software integration

•

Well-balanced project team

with a good psychological process

MAP

Referenzprojekt aus

der Chemie-Industrie:

Sep 2008:

Sep. 2008:

• Erfolgreiche Diplomarbeit

g

p

als „Feldversuch“ zur agilen

Methodology MAP

gy

• Laborergebnisse werden im

Wesentlichen bestätigt!

Rollen:

Rollen:

• Kunde

Rotes Telefon“

1 Person

• Kunde

1 Person

• Projektleiter

1

„Rotes Telefon

• Qualitätsmanager

1

• Entwickler

5 (im Schnitt 3)

• Integrierer

1 (hier = PL)

• Integrierer

1 (hier = PL)

Probleme mit Pair Programming

Probleme mit Pair Programming

bestätigt:

•

Voraussetzung:

Sozialkompetenz

•

Problem:

Effizienz

• PP im Team als nicht notwendig erachtet!

PP im Team als nicht notwendig erachtet!

Allg. Projekt mit IT-Fokus (Okt. 2008):

LKW Abfertigung in einer Ölraffinerie

LKW-Abfertigung in einer Ölraffinerie

•

Highlight:

Impl. eines

Zugangskontrollsystems

• Der Kunde kommt aus dem operativen Betreiber-Bereich

mit starken DV-Kenntnissen

P j ktl it

k

t

d

P j kt bt il

fü N

b

• Projektleiter kommt aus der Projektabteilung für

Neubau-Projekte (eigene Anlagenbauprojekte bis 15 M€ pro Proj.)

• hohe Schnittstellen zu vom Projekt Betroffenen Beteiligten

• hohe Schnittstellen zu vom Projekt Betroffenen, Beteiligten

und Interessierten; vor allem zu den Gewerken Tiefbau,

Elektrik und Mess- und Regeltechnik

Elektrik und Mess und Regeltechnik

•

MAP wird bestätigt!