Successful Collaboration in Agile Software Teams Martin Kropp, Magdalena Mateescu University of Applied Sciences Northwestern Switzerland School of Engineering & School of Applied Psychology
Agenda • Agile – a different View • Agile Communication & Collaboration in Practice – A Study Report • Conclusions
SPM FAW, 29.4.2014, Zurich
M. Kropp, M. Mateescu
2
• Wie fördern Sie die Zusammenarbeit in (agilen) Teams?
SPM FAW, 29.4.2014, Zurich
M. Kropp, M. Mateescu
3
Agenda • Agile – a different View • Agile Communication & Collaboration in Practice – A Study Report • Conclusions
SPM FAW, 29.4.2014, Zurich
M. Kropp, M. Mateescu
4
Scrum Agile • Not even half-way
SPM FAW, 29.4.2014, Zurich
M. Kropp, M. Mateescu
5
Agile Competences • Agile development requires many different competences on different levels Agile Values
Trust, motivation, courage, self-organization, …
Management Practices
Iterative, Incremental, team management,
Engineering Practices
TDD, Unit Testing, CI, Clean Code, automation, …
The Agile Competence Pyramid (Kropp et al, 2013) SPM FAW, 29.4.2014, Zurich
M. Kropp, M. Mateescu
6
The Agile Manifesto We are uncovering better ways of developing software by doing it and helping others do it. Through this work we have come to value: • • • •
Individuals and interactions over processes and tools Working software over comprehensive documentation Customer collaboration over contract negotiation Responding to change over following a plan
That is, while there is value in the items on the right, we value the items on the left more. Source: http://www.agilemanifesto.org/
SPM FAW, 29.4.2014, Zurich
M. Kropp, M. Mateescu
7
… and its Twelve Principles • Satisfy customer through early delivery • Welcome changing requirements • Deliver frequently • Business people and developers work together • Motivated individuals … • Face-to-face conversation
• • • • • •
Working software Sustainable development Attention to technical excellence Simplicity Self-organizing teams Regular reflection
Flexibility SPM FAW, 29.4.2014, Zurich
M. Kropp, M. Mateescu
Improvement 8
Agile is not a Process – it Defines a Culture
SPM FAW, 29.4.2014, Zurich
M. Kropp, M. Mateescu
9
Organizational Culture • What is the preferred culture in an agile team?
Michael Spayed, http://collectiveedgecoaching.com/2010/07/agile__culture/ (Spayed 2010) SPM FAW, 29.4.2014, Zurich
M. Kropp, M. Mateescu
10
Agile Collaboration is Challenging • Agile Principles sharply contrast to classical “Command-And-Control” leadership • Self-organization • Highly interactive • Close collaboration • Openness Different mind-set SPM FAW, 29.4.2014, Zurich
M. Kropp, M. Mateescu
11
What is Agile Collaboration?
SPM FAW, 29.4.2014, Zurich
M. Kropp, M. Mateescu
12
Agenda • Agile – a different View • Agile Communication & Collaboration in Practice – A Study Report • Conclusions
SPM FAW, 29.4.2014, Zurich
M. Kropp, M. Mateescu
13
Agile Collaboration in Practice • Main question of the Interview Study – How do (successful) agile teams collaborate and communicate?
• The Study Setup – group interviews (2h) in 10 agile companies with 41 participants – individual interviews (1) in one agile company with 3 participants SPM FAW, 29.4.2014, Zurich
M. Kropp, M. Mateescu
14
Method • All interviews were audiotaped • The transcribed interviews were segmented into small units of analysis and coded using MAXQDA • A category system for the analysis was developed and continuously refined SPM FAW, 29.4.2014, Zurich
M. Kropp, M. Mateescu
15
No successful agile project without
agile collaboration
SPM FAW, 29.4.2014, Zurich
M. Kropp, M. Mateescu
16
Agile Collaboration is … • • • • •
Face-to-face Regular Often Informal Openly
SPM FAW, 29.4.2014, Zurich
• • • • •
Under equals Focused Transparent Respectful Flexible
M. Kropp, M. Mateescu
17
Lessons learned from the interviews 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.
Put People Together Make Teams Self-organized Establish Continuity Foster Formal and Informal Communication Make Information Transparent Use Appropriate Agile Collaboration Tools
SPM FAW, 29.4.2014, Zurich
M. Kropp, M. Mateescu
18
1. Put People Together • Open work place • not only for work
SPM FAW, 29.4.2014, Zurich
M. Kropp, M. Mateescu
19
… and distributed teams? • Always a compromise • Generates extra effort – think about if it’s worth it
SPM FAW, 29.4.2014, Zurich
M. Kropp, M. Mateescu
20
…, the big challenge are two locations. Video conferencing, yes, but it is not always easy. It would be better to sit in the same room and talk to each other directly.
…. It was clear from the beginning, that we have to meet these people in certain phases here, so the connection remains…. It makes no difference if they check in or we, they have the same access rights as our team. …. That means, you have to know each other, and you should communicate with each other. This is easier if you see each other every now and then. Then we also planned to make “Joint Retros”, and we tried with workshops and Retros with teams at to different locations. But they are just not “fluently” possible. If have to hold each post-it … into the camera, so the other see, what was written, it is just boring. It doesn’t work well.
So with distributed teams, we always look, that the teams meet each other several times a year. … After a longer break, it starts to become harder again. SPM FAW, 29.4.2014, Zurich
M. Kropp, M. Mateescu
21
What you can do… • Integrate into daily stand-up • Use video-conferencing, skype, chat … • Organize face-to-face work phases (3-5 days) • fly them in or fly to them
SPM FAW, 29.4.2014, Zurich
M. Kropp, M. Mateescu
22
2. Make Team Self-Organized • No “hidden” leader • Can be difficult if the team leader is part of the agile team
SPM FAW, 29.4.2014, Zurich
M. Kropp, M. Mateescu
23
Under Equals Person 5: Ein gutes Daily für mich ist, wenn die Leute nicht am Grandmaster erzählen, wo sie sind, sondern, dass sie sich gegenseitig erzählen, wo sie sind. Und, dass die, die im Team schon ein Weile dabei sind, da muss man halt ein bisschen drein kommen in das Ganze. Wenn denn die Leute dann so matur sind und auch einmal sagen: „ich habe dazu etwas zu sagen.“ [...] Aber am Anfang, muss man sie fast ein bisschen dazu zwingen: "Hast du nicht auch noch ein Thema" Also das hat ein bisschen mit der Maturität zu tun. Wir haben natürlich vieles erlebt, wo dann auch negativ gewesen ist, weil man gewusst hat, es gibt Impediments aber diese sind nicht geäussert worden. Dann sind alle nach draussen und 10 Minuten später hat einer gesagt: "Oh nein, das geht nicht". Das ist dann schade, weil da investiert man in das Daily und aber die Leute kommen nicht aus sich raus. Ich denke aber, das ist ein einschleichen vom Team.
SPM FAW, 29.4.2014, Zurich
M. Kropp, M. Mateescu
24
3. Establish Continuity • Apply “Standard” meetings – all • • • •
Iteration planning, stand-ups, review, retro Keep them focused Keep them short Adapt as necessary
• Keep on with Retrospectives • Also in long lasting projects • Introduce variations (different locations, thematic retros)
SPM FAW, 29.4.2014, Zurich
M. Kropp, M. Mateescu
25
The Value of Meetings in Agile Collaboration • Agile teams value self-organization • The collaborative work is regulated and monitored through team meetings
SPM FAW, 29.4.2014, Zurich
M. Kropp, M. Mateescu
26
4. Foster Formal and Informal Meetings multiple Teams-Meetings
Classical Meetings
Technical Meetings
SPM FAW, 29.4.2014, Zurich
M. Kropp, M. Mateescu
27
Meetings: Success Factors Levels
SPM FAW, 29.4.2014, Zurich
M. Kropp, M. Mateescu
28
Meeting Level – Clear agenda and goals – Strict time boxing – Adjusted duration – Discussion platform – Appropriate tools Ja, was gehört alles dazu. Eine Einladung mit einer konkreten Agenda. Dann Einhalten der Zeit im Sinne der Time Box. (...)
SPM FAW, 29.4.2014, Zurich
M. Kropp, M. Mateescu
29
Individual Level
SPM FAW, 29.4.2014, Zurich
M. Kropp, M. Mateescu
30
Individual Level – Understanding of the meeting scope – Communications skills of each participant • Give and receive feedback • Willingness to talk about problems and impediments
– Active participation
"Aber wenn Sie fragen, was grundsätzlich schlechte Meetings sind, ja, agil lebt über die Transparenz. Und wenn jemand nicht willig ist, transparent zu sein und auch eine gewisse Fehlerkultur zu leben und nicht offen für gewisse Kritik ist, dann kann das Meeting geraucht werden .“
SPM FAW, 29.4.2014, Zurich
M. Kropp, M. Mateescu
31
Individual Level Person 2: Und der Qualitätstreiber vom Austausch, von den Meetings, von den Inhalten, die platziert werden, ist für mich schon bei den Menschen. Das ist ein wenig ein humaner Faktor. Ausser man hat wirklich solche technische Blocker wie Du hast. A fool with a tool is still a fool. Ich meine, das ist für mich immer wieder gültig, das sehe ich einfach immer wieder. Da kannst Du noch so fancy Tools haben. Wenn Du die Leute nicht zum sprechen bringst, um die Messages wirklich zu platzieren, dann war es auch für nichts. Person 3: Ja, ein Tool bietet einem als Person auch immer ein wenig die Möglichkeit, sich dahinter zu verstecken. Hingegen ohne Tools ist quasi jeder wie nackt. Das ist wichtig.
SPM FAW, 29.4.2014, Zurich
M. Kropp, M. Mateescu
32
Team Level
SPM FAW, 29.4.2014, Zurich
M. Kropp, M. Mateescu
33
Team Level – The whole team attends the meeting – Common understanding of the aim of the meeting and of the roles (shared mental model) – Transparent information – Ability to take decisions as a team …, as I have observed in most of my professional career, one talks with colleagues for one hour and at the end they all have a different picture in mind “… meetings that are not that efficient, are those, when after the meeting one says: ‘We sat and discussed things, but no decisions were made and the issues were still open [after the meeting]’ “ SPM FAW, 29.4.2014, Zurich
M. Kropp, M. Mateescu
34
Organization Level
SPM FAW, 29.4.2014, Zurich
M. Kropp, M. Mateescu
35
Organization Level – Institutionalized meetings – Clear decision-making process
Wenn man natürlich nicht so klar definierte Meetings hat, die auch nicht regelmässig stattfinden, dann läuft man natürlich immer Gefahr, dass es ein wenig ausartet. "Das Geheim-Rezept ist, wenn das Wissen am Tisch sitzt und die Entscheidungskompetenz am Tisch sitzt. Dann ist eigentlich die Sitzung schon fast erfolgreich. Und wenn die beiden nicht am Tisch sitzen, dann wird es mühsam." (I9, 192)
SPM FAW, 29.4.2014, Zurich
M. Kropp, M. Mateescu
36
4. Foster also Informal Meetings • Technical meetings • As needed architecture, design meetings • Pair programming • See 1. “Put people together!”
• Other meetings • User Story Groomings • Code Reviews (Git) • Test competitions
SPM FAW, 29.4.2014, Zurich
M. Kropp, M. Mateescu
37
5. Make Information Transparent • Use Boards – Physical or digital
• Instant availability • All-in-one view
SPM FAW, 29.4.2014, Zurich
M. Kropp, M. Mateescu
38
How about Agile Collab Tools? Yes, but …
Jeff Langr in Pragmatic Programmer Magazine http://pragprog.com/magazines /2011-09/the-only-agile-toolsyoull-ever-need
SPM FAW, 29.4.2014, Zurich
M. Kropp, M. Mateescu
39
How about Agile Collab Tools? Yes, but …
Jeff Langr in Pragmatic Programmer Magazine http://pragprog.com/magazines /2011-09/the-only-agile-toolsyoull-ever-need
SPM FAW, 29.4.2014, Zurich
M. Kropp, M. Mateescu
40
Use Appropriate Agile Collaboration Tools General Development Tools Agile Tools
Physical Tools Communication and Collaboration Tools
SPM FAW, 29.4.2014, Zurich
M. Kropp, M. Mateescu
41
Role of Email “…. however it is similar with the Email, frankly spoken, you cannot sent any assignments per email, it simply does not work. I must construe it (the meaning of the message), there is no feedback possible as to what and about the accuracy. This is similar to Daily, one has to interpret assets. I have to look the others in the eye. This is extremely important.” I11:362
SPM FAW, 29.4.2014, Zurich
M. Kropp, M. Mateescu
42
The Agile Tool Set is more … • Automation Infrastructure CI, VCS, Automation, Test (unit and acceptance), Deployment
• Collaboration Infrastructure Issue Tracker, Collaboration Platforms (wiki, forums), Instant messenger
SPM FAW, 29.4.2014, Zurich
M. Kropp, M. Mateescu
43
Physical boards In some things unbeatable • Flexible • Touchable • Transparent • All-in-one view • Usually in the office
SPM FAW, 29.4.2014, Zurich
But… • Not revisable • Not persistent • Not distributable • No links to the digital information
M. Kropp, M. Mateescu
44
How about Agile PM Tools? • Mostly used in combination with physical boards • Always extra effort • Think about benefit – E.g. for accounting, needed persistency
• Master-Slave problem • All variations applied • Just make clear which way you go
SPM FAW, 29.4.2014, Zurich
M. Kropp, M. Mateescu
45
Digital Master • Meetings with Beamer • One “writer” • Print out new US, tasks for physical board
• Print customized overviews • Physical task board for detailed task planning
SPM FAW, 29.4.2014, Zurich
M. Kropp, M. Mateescu
46
Physical Master • Team works with the physical board • Changes are added to digital tools afterwards by one person (PO, SM)
SPM FAW, 29.4.2014, Zurich
M. Kropp, M. Mateescu
47
Pro- and Cons of digital Agile PM Tools Pros • Persistence • Historization • Distributed • Traceability • Concurrent editing
Cons • Lack flexibility • Lack haptic experience • Not suited for team work • Lack visibility • Lack instant availability • Lack easy overview
Advantages of Physical Tools • • • • • • •
Provide good overview Foster internal and external visibility Availability of information Low cost Very flexible Activates team and brings it together Haptic experience
SPM FAW, 29.4.2014, Zurich
M. Kropp, M. Mateescu
49
Disadvantages of Physical Tools • • • • •
Only locally available Limited space Missing planning tools No connection to digital tools No documentation and history
SPM FAW, 29.4.2014, Zurich
M. Kropp, M. Mateescu
50
Advantages of Digital Tools • • • • • • •
Easy modification of information Historization Transparency/Controlling Provide rich information Adaptability/Extensability of tools Accessibility of information Other helpful features: statistics, etc.
SPM FAW, 29.4.2014, Zurich
M. Kropp, M. Mateescu
51
Disadvantages of Digital Tools • Complexity • High operation effort • Need customization • Missing control over tool • Visualization often not optimal • Missing overall overview / big picture • Missing permanent visibility • Not as fast as paper • Technical Limitations • No haptic experience To some extend contradicts agile philosophy (not for team work, detailed planning required) SPM FAW, 29.4.2014, Zurich
M. Kropp, M. Mateescu
52
Conclusion • Agile development is a cultural issue • Successful agile teams are self-organized, colocated, under equals, disciplined, reach for technical excellence, have intensive communication and very close collaboration • Agile collaboration is challenging, but good practices and tools can help • Appropriate digital tools are still missing SPM FAW, 29.4.2014, Zurich
M. Kropp, M. Mateescu
53
The Future!
Project SI-ATAM “Agile Technologies for Agile Methods” http://www.fhnw.ch/technik/imvs/forschung/projekte/si-atam/si-atam SPM FAW, 29.4.2014, Zurich
M. Kropp, M. Mateescu
54
Thanks for your attention!
[email protected] [email protected] SPM FAW, 29.4.2014, Zurich
M. Kropp, M. Mateescu
55
References • M. Kropp; A. Meier. Teaching Agile Software Development Competences The Agile Competence Pyramid. 9th European Computer Science Summit, 7.-9. Oct. 2013. ECSS '13, Amsterdam, Netherlands • M. Spayd. Survey – Agile & Cultuer, http://collectiveedgecoaching.com/2010/07/agile__culture/ , 29.4.2014 • William Schneider. The Reengineering Alternative. McGraw-Hill Companies; 1 edition (January 1, 2000).
SPM FAW, 29.4.2014, Zurich
M. Kropp, M. Mateescu
56
Workshop Results
SPM FAW, 29.4.2014, Zurich
M. Kropp, M. Mateescu
57
Workshop Results
SPM FAW, 29.4.2014, Zurich
M. Kropp, M. Mateescu
58
Workshop Results
SPM FAW, 29.4.2014, Zurich
M. Kropp, M. Mateescu
59
Workshop Results
SPM FAW, 29.4.2014, Zurich
M. Kropp, M. Mateescu
60
