Supporting Agile Software Development With Agile Team Work Space

Supporting

Agile Software Development With

Agile Team Work Space

Marty Anderson

EVP Workplace Research and Design Ratekin Consulting LLC

2012

2 Executive Summary

The pace of change in technology and competitive business pressures mean that companies spend billions of dollars annually to develop and modify software applications for both internal and customer-driven uses. To maintain competitive disadvantage, companies are increasingly exploring ways to reduce cost, improve time to market, produce higher product quality, and increase internal and external client satisfaction.

One solution is to increase the proportion of software development utilizing an agile development methodology. Today, a fraction of software

development is being done in an agile way with the range of 10% - 25%

reported by the case examples profiled in this report.

In the past, waterfall development methodology has been the dominate process. Serial in nature, it is highly reliant on well developed

documentation, and does not place a high premium on team member co- location as a key driver of success. As a result, typical associate space (offices, workstations and cubicles) supported by schedulable meeting space has provided an acceptable environment in which to operate.

By contrast, agile development requires continuous co-location of team members as a key driver of success. All phases of the process (planning, meeting, coding, QA/ Test, etc.) are conducted by the team within a dedicated space for the full duration of the project team’s existence.

The purpose of this paper is to develop and define the key design elements of future agile space solutions within the corporate environment. Measures of success include flexibility, adaptability within existing constraints, cost effectiveness, and speed of delivery. Current examples, coupled with industry best practices, inform these design elements and are expected to result in flexible solutions that help enable the principle objectives of reduced cost, improved time to market, higher product quality, and increased internal and external client satisfaction.

This report will do the following:

1. Document case examples of agile work environments

2. Identify the work patterns and key processes of the team and space solutions that enable success

3. Define key performance characteristics and design features that provide

flexibility, cost effectiveness and lead to higher levels of team productivity

3 History and Background

Agile software development refers to a group of software development

methodologies that promotes development iterations, open collaboration, and process adaptability throughout the life-cycle of the project. It chooses to do things in small increments, with minimal planning, rather than plan at length.

This helps to minimize the overall risk, and allows the project to adapt to changes more quickly. There is also an emphasis on stakeholder

involvement. Meaning: At the end of each iteration, the stakeholder is consulted about the product and feedback is integrated.

There are many agile development methods; most minimize risk by developing software in multiple repetitions (or 'iterations') of short time frames (known as 'timeboxes'). Software developed during one unit of time typically lasts from two to four weeks. Each iteration passes through a full software development cycle, including planning, requirements analysis, design, QA testing, then coding until the unit tests pass and a working product is demonstrated to stakeholders. This helps to minimize the overall risk, and allows the project to adapt to changes more quickly. At the end of each iteration stakeholders re-evaluate project priorities with a view to optimizing their return on investment.

Principles behind Agile methods

Some of the principles behind Agile

are:

• Customer satisfaction by rapid, continuous delivery of useful software

• Working software is delivered frequently (weeks rather than months)

• Working software is the principal measure of progress

• Even late changes in requirements are welcomed

• Close, daily cooperation between business unit representatives and developers

• Face-to-face conversation is the best form of communication, enhanced by co-location

• Projects are built around motivated individuals, who should be trusted

• Continuous attention to technical excellence and good design

• Simplicity

• Self-organizing teams

• Regular adaptation to changing circumstances

4 Agile contrasted with the waterfall model

Even now, the waterfall model is still in common use. The waterfall model is the most predictive of the methods, stepping through requirements capture, analysis, and design, coding, and testing in a strict, pre-planned sequence.

Progress is generally measured in terms of deliverable artifacts: requirement specifications, design documents, test plans, code reviews and the like.

Waterfall is the most dominant methodology used in Fidelity today.

Agile methods, in contrast, produce completely developed and tested features (but a very small subset of the whole) every few weeks. The emphasis is on obtaining the smallest workable piece of functionality to deliver business value early, and continually improving it/adding further functionality throughout the life of the project.

Suitability of agile methods

Some things that can negatively impact the success of an agile project are:

• Large scale development efforts (>20 developers)

• Distributed development efforts (non-co-located teams)

• Command-and-control company cultures

• Forcing an agile process on a development team

Several successful large scale agile projects have been documented. British Telecom, BT, has had several hundred developers situated in the UK, Ireland and India working collaboratively on projects and using agile methods

. While questions undoubtedly still arise about the suitability of some agile methods to certain project types, it would appear that scale or geography, by themselves, are not necessarily barriers to success.

References

1. ^ Agile Manifesto principles

2. Using an Agile Software Process with Offshore Development

5 Key Criteria

One factor in the success of agile programming processes is the close, daily cooperation within the team and between business customer and developers.

In its purest form, the team is co-located to allow frequent and effective face-to-face conversation to save time and improve understanding at every step of the process. A model has developed in which the entire team is

placed in a group work space called an “agile team room”. This team room is the primary workspace for each team member for the duration of the project Field studies experimenting with putting teams in agile team rooms showed a doubling of productivity, in part, because of the team’s easy access to each other to coordinate their work, learn from each other and keep the work product visible to all. The proximity of team members supports constant communication and overhearing each other which promotes spontaneous help, clarification and correction thereby avoiding wasted effort.

Observations showed nine different types of work occur within the team.

Recognizing these various types of work informs the planning of spaces that will support the team by maximizing the benefits of co-location and

minimizing its challenges.

Nine Kinds of Work in the Agile Team Space

1. Discussion to acquire customer input 2. Discussion of a political issue

3. Problem solving at the whiteboard

4. Status meeting using the to-do list (usually on a flip chart of whiteboard).

5. Team building discussion (social) 6. Training

7. Simultaneous problem solving meeting (subsets of team members) 8. Working solo (typically coding)

9. Private conversations with outsiders

The downside of constant communication and interaction is distraction. The level of distraction varies based upon the work being done and individual ability to tune-out distractions. Some team members report an adjustment period for working in a team space. From time to time, team members may need to retreat to quiet or separate space for some individual tasks or

private conversations (#8 and 9). In order to minimize the time away from the team, these spaces should be in close proximity of the team space. A list of performance criteria follow that should be used in the planning of the team workspace and address support for all nine types of work.

1

“How does Radical Collocation Help a Team Succeed?” Philadelphia, PA copyright 2000ACM 1-58113-

222-0/00/0012

6 Prototype Performance Specifications

Based upon the nine types of work, review of field study findings and other case studies clear requirements emerge for agile team rooms and adjacent supporting spaces. In addition to dedicated space for the team, room requirements are fairly simple: generous space, user reconfigurable furniture, and abundant wall space to plan, brainstorm and record team progress. What follows are more specifics to support the agile team.

Room Size and Features:

• Ideally 2-4 rooms should be located together to efficiently share required resources outside the agile team room

• Rooms should be generously sized to provide elbow room for a team that fluctuates in size and allow enough free floor space for the team to gather away from their work or in front of displayed materials (600- 900 SF or 60-70 SF per person)

• Proportions of the room should be squarer rather than long rectangles (minimum room width of 20 feet)

• One wall of window preferred

• Maximum wall space for whiteboard and other types of display (whiteboard should be 5-feet high X the width of the room)

• Perimeter of the room should be free of furniture to allow access to whiteboards and gathering space for the team

• Indirect lighting with bi-level switching

• Raised floor is ideal for power/data distribution and flexibility Room Components and Furniture

• Moveable tables 4-5-feet in length that team members may rearrange by themselves as needed, a minimum of one per team member

• Task chairs, minimum of one per team member

• Stacking chairs (4-6) for visitors

• Ceiling mounted projector and cable for laptop connection

• Ceiling mounted screen

• One file cabinet or storage cabinet for team files and supplies, 3-

drawer height

7 Prototype Performance Specifications (continued)

Additional requirements outside the team room are provided for efficiency of shared use with adjacent agile team rooms

• Just outside the room

o Personal storage for team members may be individual file drawers or small towers for individual records and personal items (this is their primary workspace)

o Open break-out space for short term conversations outside the main team room.

o Printer area

• Up to 30 feet away

o Touchdown spaces for occasional individual work as needed (approx 2 per team room)

o Phone room or huddle space for private conversation or phone calls accommodating 1-3 people (1/team room)

o Meeting room for 8-10 people (may be shared with up to 4 agile teams)

• Over 30 feet away (but no more than 100 feet) o Pantry for beverage or snacks

The conceptual sketch illustrating the specifications identified above:

8 Case Study 1 – Bank/Credit Card Company

Goals:

• Identify key components of agile team rooms to support co-located development teams

• Develop and evaluate flexible and fixed wall rooms for cost, speed to deliver and user satisfaction

Features:

• Typical room size about 800 SF accommodates 20 seats around tables in the center of the room (teams may be 10-14, but fluctuate and need wiggle room)

• Most wall surfaces are covered with whiteboard

• The layout is consistent between hard wall and flexible wall rooms.

• Initial pilot and survey included 102 individuals who occupied these rooms for a minimum of 6 months

• Have subsequently (over past two years) built 100 rooms on one campus that serves about 4000 employees

What they learned:

• Two common use types (1) a team that comes together for 2- 4 months or longer and then disbands.

(2) a team stays together and work comes to them

• Over 95% of

associates believe the agile solution is better than traditional

project rooms (The rooms are in demand by all kinds of project teams, not just agile, because they work so well)

• Results are similar for both hard wall and flexible wall rooms including a sense of team innovation

• Open rooms cost less and take less time to deliver ($40K and 8 weeks for open vs. $120K and 16 weeks for hard wall)

• Agile rooms score high for team outcomes including access to team

members, quality of collaboration, efficiency of teamwork, teams

ability to accommodate change, team innovation, performance against

project timelines

9 Case Study 1 – Bank/Credit Card Company (continued)

• Agile rooms score well on the individual ability to control the

environment, individual productivity, access to information and access to data and power connections

• Agile rooms score poorly for ability to concentrate when necessary and as a tidy environment (wire management)

• Find approximately 80% of the rooms remain in place, 20% get moved Recommendations:

• Rooms are best grouped to leverage secondary spaces on the floor such as team room, phone rooms and touchdown spaces. Otherwise, these items need to be part of the package

• Open rooms are recommended when speed, cost and flexibility are a priority

• Closed rooms are used when permanence, confidentiality and security are a priority

• A decision chart was created to be completed by the customer and CRE together

• Currently doing a utilization study, hoping to avoid building more rooms

• Issues are ownership, scheduling and prioritization

10 Case Study 2 – Technology Company

Goals:

• Transparency for customers and internal organization; the work process is a deliverable in itself

• Space for customer interaction; face to face meetings in a conference room setting

• The space should reinforce the brand

• The development process is highly collaborative

• The space should enable connecting local, national, and international resources, creating a virtual community

Features:

• Central divisible/reconfigurable group/war room workspace flanked by private and shared individual workspaces and a variety of meeting and collaboration spaces

• Touchdown space outside the room for vendors and occasional solo work

What they learned:

• Consider building one building with all team rooms that teams would rotate through. This would allow for more flexibility, as well as a way to test and evaluate different features

• Team rooms are highly regarded. Often teams are located in ad-hoc

spaces (decommissioned conference and server rooms, clusters of

offices with walls knocked down, abandoned cubicle farms)

11 Case Study 2 – Technology Company (continued)

• Other participants come from teams that practice agile processes out of private offices, and have team meetings in a hallway, open meeting areas, or decommissioned private offices. All participants feel that co- locating the team is desirable

• There is a learning curve; one participant stated that it was

challenging to move from a private office to a team room because it required learning how to tune in or out, as needed

Recommendations:

• Provide a way to “partition” off part of the team room for a smaller group

• Flexible walls seem to be ideal; explore product features

• Room does not necessarily need to be fully enclosed, but should be isolated acoustically from other teams

12 Case Study 3 – Financial Services Company

Goals: Create effective co-located team space for internal technology teams Features shared by all rooms:

• Abundant white board

• Loose tables and chairs, reconfigurable by the team

• Walls free of furniture so whiteboard and displays are accessible

• Adjacent small meeting rooms and open space for private conversations and break from the team

• Audio visual display built into the room

• Power and data access in the floor in the center of the room

• Two room sizes:

o One full size team room – 500 SF (25’ X 20’) o Four smaller team rooms – 360 SF (15’ X 24’)

(Two large team rooms were divided with hard walls to create the four rooms)

Small Team Room

What they learned:

• Rooms are smaller and more rectangular than recommended which limits the use of side walls and team size

• Maximum team of 6 is accommodated when used as work space

• Room size and shape does not allow for separation of tasks or sub- groups

• Resulting use is primarily for meetings and presentations

13 Case Study 3 – Financial Services Company (continued)

Large Team Room

What they learned:

• Nearly square proportions allow flexibility of layout

• Adequate room around the perimeter for team members to gather at a white board or display for discussion

• Adequate room for multiple groupings of tables

• Large enough for 12 full time team

members.

Recommendations:

• Large Team Room demonstrates many recommended features

• Retain consistency in room size

• Rather than create two room sizes, provide “soft division” such as moveable walls or panels is a more flexible solution to temporarily subdivide a large room

• Extra elbow room or “wiggle room” is desirable, allowing for sub-

groups and simultaneous meetings to occur within the large team

room