PoddarCo

In February 2010 I attended a Scrum training course in NYC. Because of a snow storm, I only attended the first day of the two day training. While attending both days may have led to advanced insights, my day-1 experience was below expectations.

Training Offered By: Danube Technologies (now CollabNet, Inc.)
Instructor: Lyssa Adkins

Scrum Training Review - February 2010

Click here for a more detailed review of this training course with Lyssa Adkins

In April 2010, I attended the full two day training. This training was better than the one I attended in February, but I still have open questions on how to effectively implement scrum in certain environments. The detailed review here lists few open questions.

Training Offered By: Danube Technologies (now CollabNet, Inc.)
Instructor: Tamara Sulaiman

Scrum Training Review - April 2010

Click here for a more detailed review of this training course with Tamara Sulaiman

If you are looking for more than basic framework knowledge, take a course with one of the pioneers of scrum instead of going through software vendors that provide training services. I haven’t attended a course with other trainers, but based on discussions with several scrum masters, some good trainers to consider are: Jeff Sutherland, Sanjiv Augustine, Alistair Cockburn, Ken Schwaber, Mike Cohn, Esther Derby, Michele Sliger.

(On the homepage, click speech bubble next to the title to leave comments. On the post page, scroll down.)

Training Offered By: Danube Technologies (now CollabNet, Inc.)
Instructor: Tamara Sulaiman

When I first attended the scrum master course in February 2010, I could not attend the second day because of a snow storm. So I re-attended the two day training in April 2010. Overall, this training session was better than the one I attended in February. The instructor’s approach made a big difference (although the breakfast was a huge disappointment). The instructor started with a quick pulse on the attendees’ familiarity with scrum, effectively tying that to expectations one should have from the course (i.e. the course’s focus is on the basics of everything scrum, so don’t expect to get a solution to your complex scenarios).

The instructor did not spend time on evangelizing scrum or belittling waterfall and other methodologies. I particularly liked the instructor’s approach of using scrum to teach scrum. The instructor had prepared a product backlog of items that the team needed to get through in two days of training. She had assigned story points to each item, and moved stories from In-Progress to Done as we went through them. She even tracked work done and work left on a burn-down chart. For those who had never used scrum, this mode of teaching made it easier to see scrum in application. For those who had used scrum, it helped to see scrum functioning in a different setting.

The instructor had also set up a group exercise in which each team had to build a game using the fundamentals of scrum. This exercise was effective in experiencing firsthand the responsibilities of the product owner and scrum master. It also helped to create user stories, assign story points, play planning poker, assign priorities, track work on burn down charts, conduct product demos – all in actual time boxes as part of the game creation exercise. However, as beneficial as this exercise was, it also detracted attention from more pressing discussions. It would have helped to de-scope this exercise and simplify the goal so teams could see the same benefits in less time.

In conclusion, while I left more satisfied with the tips and tools picked up in these two days of training, I still had the same outstanding concerns as earlier – how to make scrum implementations work productively in matrix organizations where shared resources and distributed teams are the norm? How to get scrum masters to efficiently lead multiple scrum teams? How to measure effectiveness of scrum methods and performance of scrum masters?

Related Posts

• A detailed review of a scrum master course (Through CollabNet with Lyssa Adkins in February 2010)
• A summarized review of two scrum master courses: (1) With Lyssa Adkins in February 2010 and (2) With Tamara Sulaiman in April 2010

Summarizing Observations

Scrum Training Review - April 2010

(On the homepage, click speech bubble next to the title to leave comments. On the post page, scroll down.)

Training Offered By: Danube Technologies (now CollabNet, Inc.)
Instructor: Lyssa Adkins

In February 2010 I attended a scrum training class as I was keen to learn some new tricks and get the scrum master certification. While I certainly picked up at least two valuable exercises to use in my client engagements in just one day, a fair portion of the training was below satisfactory. I have been a scrum practitioner for almost five years, so maybe some of the material and insights were very rudimentary. Regardless of my level of familiarity with scrum, the training felt lacking in actionable insights that one could take back to the work place.

At times, it seemed as if some attendees were perceiving scrum to be less adaptive as the instructor often stressed the need to implement all of scrum’s rules for it to be effective. Many people were in this course because they believed in scrum’s merits and wanted to understand how to make it work in their environment. If the instructor did not spend so much energy on evangelizing scrum over alternate methodologies, but more energy on sharing lessons learned and actionable insights from implementing scrum in various organizations, the training would have been much more valuable.

For instance, the instructor mentioned that scrum is highly effective (optimal) only when fully functional teams are face-to-face. She highlighted that anything else is a coping strategy that will lead to minor benefits. Instead, it would have helped if she dived into some of the challenges of implementing scrum on a globally diversified team. With the increase in outsourcing and globalization, it’s not always viable to collocate one’s entire team. Even if scrum implementations will be sub-optimal for such teams, what can they do to get maximum value from scrum?

Another statement the instructor made was “A good scrum master can be the leader of three teams; a great scrum master can be the leader of one team”. In today’s lean and mean economy very few companies, if any, can afford the luxury of having one person dedicated to leading one project. Leading several projects, juggling multiple priorities and wearing many hats is a given. So instead of rejecting this view, it would have helped to understand what are some strategies scrum masters can build into their approach to be super stars even while managing multiple teams.

Because of a snow storm, I only attended day one of the two day training. While attending both days may have led to more advanced insights, my day-1 experience was below expectations.

Related Posts

• A detailed review of a scrum master course (Through CollabNet with Tamara Sulaiman in April 2010)
• A summarized review of two scrum master courses: (1) With Lyssa Adkins in February 2010 and (2) With Tamara Sulaiman in April 2010

Summarizing Observations

Scrum Training Review - February 2010

(On the homepage, click speech bubble next to the title to leave comments. On the post page, scroll down.)

Just couple weeks back, I was talking to a PMO Director at a large media and publishing company – we were discussing how to improve the quality of project plans put together by her team. One point she mentioned in our conversation was that of relevance. It is a simple yet extremely important concept, hence sharing it here.

She said that good, experienced PMs soon develop a knack for realizing which aspects of a project plan are important or relevant to the project at hand. For example, not all projects need detailed communication plans, stakeholder registers or extremely detailed project schedules. To manage one’s workload efficiently it is important for the PM to realize what applies and adds value to the project, and produce those components of the plan accordingly.

It is a simple thought but often overlooked. Click here to read a related post on what we identified as core things to look for in a basic project schedule

(On the homepage, click speech bubble next to the title to leave comments. On the post page, scroll down.)

Recently, I was working with a PMO Director on improving the quality of her team’s project schedules (built using MS Project). Note that these schedules were fairly basic, so we are not talking about complex cost tracking, WBS linkage and resource leveling. At this point, the goal was just to identify the most critical pieces to capture on a project schedule given this company’s structure and operations. Working in conjunction with other project managers on her team, we identified the following as critical components that even the most basic schedule should reflect:

1. Have adequate coverage of all activities and milestones critical to the project (see note below regarding what level to track at)
2. For each activity, clearly capture estimated duration and effort. In this organization getting an accurate indication of effort was quite challenging, so duration was used more often. While this presents some resource management challenges, it was an acceptable approach given the realities of the organization.
3. It is also important to indicate the dependencies / predecessors so all activities and milestones are clearly linked to each other. This not only makes it easier to administer changes to the plan but also to assess impact of any slippage very quickly.
4. For all activities identify the resource accountable for the activity’s completion. Dependent on how you do this, and how you set up other linkages in the MS Project file, assigning resources can also help you in estimating costs, in preparing budgets and in resource leveling.

One can do a lot more with MS Project, but we identified these as the most basic requirements given the organization’s and the project team’s needs.

Another important point underlying all this was the level at which to track activities in the project schedule. This depends on the needs of the project – some projects warrant detailed task level tracking, while for others, tracking by deliverables/milestones works just as well. The level at which you track is also a function of which methodology your organization is using as the rules of the game may differ. Although, the gist of it stays the same – what needs to be done, how long will it take, what are the dependencies, who is accountable.

Related posts that you might want to browse through -

• Managing Projects – by tasks or by deliverables and milestones

• Relevance as a skill for PMs

(On the homepage, click speech bubble next to the title to leave comments. On the post page, scroll down.)

Recently I attended an event led by a New York University Professor. Here I had the opportunity to listen to two of the best entrepreneurs in NYC (Barry Silbert – Founder and CEO of Second Market, and Marc Cenedella Founder and CEO of The Ladders). A lot of valuable insights came out of this, but one very simple piece of advice really stood out – and the best part is it can help everyone, no matter at what level of the organization.

Have you ever thought that things would improve if only you could change something in your organization but you did not know where or how to get started? Here’s the tip: Think, if you were to get fired, what would your replacement do? Would he or she run things the same way, or would they immediately change something and how would they go about it?

Perhaps this simple question will give you the drive you need to actually execute the change. Go for it – be the change agent your organization needs!

Also, I am planning to attend another exciting event soon! Click here to read more about it…!

Click the image to read about some of the speakers at this upcoming event -

The complete list of speakers at the event -

• DOUG AKIN Chief Engagement Officer, Mr Youth
• KRYSTAL BALL Congressional Candidate
• MATTHEW BISHOP New York Bureau Chief, The Economist
• JANE BUCKINGHAM Founder, Trendera
• JARED COHEN U.S. State Department, Project Lead: ‘Text Haiti to 90999′
• CINDY GALLOP Founder & CEO, IfWeRanTheWorld
• SCOTT GALLOWAY Founder, L2
• BEN KAUFMAN Entreprenuer-in-Chief, Quirky.com
• STERLING LANIER President, Chatter
• LAURA McEWEN Publisher, TeenVogue
• DR. JAY PARKINSON Founder, HelloHealth
• ERIN SCHRODE Founder, Teens Turning Green
• GREG SHOVE CEO, Halogen Network
• ADAM WALDEN General Manager, Noise Marketing
• ANDREW WAGNER Editor in Chief, ReadyMade
• MARK ZANDI Chief Economist, Moody’s Analytics

(On the homepage, click speech bubble next to the title to leave comments. On the post page, scroll down.)

This review was updated and republished as three separate posts on May 4, 2010.

The three posts are -

• A detailed review of a scrum master course (Through CollabNet with Tamara Sulaiman in April 2010)
• A detailed review of a scrum master course (Through CollabNet with Lyssa Adkins in February 2010)
• A summarized review of two scrum master courses: (1) With Lyssa Adkins in February 2010 and (2) With Tamara Sulaiman in April 2010

In February 2010 I attended a Scrum training course in NYC. Because of a snow storm, I only attended the first day of the two day training. While attending both days may have led to more advanced insights, my day-1 experience was below my expectations.

Training Offered By: Danube Technologies (now CollabNet, Inc.)
Instructor: Lyssa Adkins

Scrum Training Review - February 2010

Click here for a more detailed review of this training course with Lyssa Adkins

In April 2010, I attended the full two day training. While the training was better than the one I attended in February, I still have open questions on how to effectively implement scrum in certain environments.

Training Offered By: Danube Technologies (now CollabNet, Inc.)
Instructor: Tamara Sulaiman

Scrum Training Review - April 2010

Click here for a more detailed review of this training course with Tamara Sulaiman

In conclusion, if you are looking for more than basic framework knowledge, try to attend a scrum master course with thought leaders on the subject instead of software vendors that provide training services. Some trainers to consider are: Jeff Sutherland, Sanjiv Augustine, Alistair Cockburn, Ken Schwaber, Mike Cohn, Esther Derby, Michele Sliger.

(On the homepage, click speech bubble next to the title to leave comments. On the post page, scroll down.)

Generally in software development projects, it is no surprise that it is harder to release the first iteration of a software than future iterations.  The team is new, often the technology is new, requirements and processes are vague, uncertainties cloud post-release adoption, a fair share of skeptics spot the user landscape and in general it is hard for everyone to see true progress.

So, why mention version 1.0 software releases and how they relate to a project manager or to a project management organization (PMO)?

Well, version 1.0 releases generally require the project manager to tweak their normal project management approach and build more flexibility in almost all facets of the project. They require the project manager to wear multiple hats – often taking part in requirements capture, user interface design, market studies, application testing, training and other duties that might otherwise be deemed to be beyond day-to-day project management activities.

From a PMO’s perspective, the PMO leader should guide project managers in these areas as necessary. The PMO leader should also realize that the needs of such projects are different, and ensure that the PMO’s own processes do not stifle progress on the project.  Some areas to be conscious of in this regard are -

• a PMO that establishes a hard stance on no scope changes – requirements will shift constantly on 1.0 releases, so at times, scope will change too. The key is to re-prioritize what can be delivered in the software’s first release given all project constraints, and embrace the highest priority must-have changes.
• a PMO that has rigid processes around how and when code updates move through various environments (such as development, integration, quality assurance / testing, staging, production, disaster recovery) – it is understandable for organizations to have strict controls on what gets implemented in their staging, production or disaster recovery environments. However, IMO, it helps maintain momentum if code is allowed to move quickly from development to integration to quality assurance environments. This could be set up as an exception to the norm, only applicable for certain such projects.
• a PMO leader may need to provide additional coaching – for reasons mentioned earlier in this post a PMO leader may need to spend more time with project managers coaching them in areas outside their domain. Simple endeavors such as value stream mapping, building flowcharts and workflows, using dashboards with critical metrics to measure and communicate progress, and various other techniques mentioned in several project management publications can be very effective in building team morale, creating a common vision and balancing expectations, especially when uncertainty runs high prior to a software application’s first release!

In fact, balancing expectations is so crucial that its worth highlighting a few points on it. Depending on the nature of the project, you might have a sponsor that constantly micro manages every aspect of the project, or one that just wanted the finished goods yesterday.  In 9 out of 10 cases, I have observed that software applications in their first release or initial rounds of major cutting edge technological upgrades tend to be pretty close to a sponsor’s heart. It is important for the project manager to realize these situations, as they demand extra facilitation and frequent expectation reseting, whether it be in terms of budget, timeline or resources.

(On the homepage, click speech bubble next to the title to leave comments. On the post page, scroll down.)

Various publications term project management to be leadership without authority.  Authority or no authority, as leaders project managers constantly have to make decisions, and facilitate others to help them make decisions as well. Recently I read a good summary of various decision making levels and thought I’d share this with everyone.

Gordon, Miller and Mintzberg defined three levels of decision making: operative, administrative and strategic. Some of the characteristics of decisions at these levels are:

As a project manager, it helps to be aware of these decision making levels when you work with everyone on your team, on other teams or in different companies.  If you get a chance, try to read more about decision making.  In the near future, I’ll post another short blurb on some behavioral factors that influence decision making. 

(On the homepage, click speech bubble next to the title to leave comments. On the post page, scroll down.)

Background

A software development project requires rolling out a new software application to a user base of 3000 people globally in the first phase, and then expanding to another 2500 users potentially. This application uses SharePoint 2010 and Office 2010 as its technical foundation. The software also relies on a virtualization solution provided by another vendor. The users have Office 2003 and Windows XP on their computers. The company has about 15000 employees globally; most using a combination of Windows XP and Office 2003 or Office 2007 on their computers.

Situation

A part of the project team set up a software lab with Windows 7 and other Windows 7 dependent software based on their research. As people started using the lab for testing, and issues emerged, Windows 7 got highlighted as a cause for concern, primarily because of –

• complications involved in upgrading everyone (user base and other employees) to Windows 7
• training concerns in transitioning users from Office 2003 to Office 2010
• integration issues with other legacy hardware and software
• the virtualization vendor’s Windows 7 ready solution being too late for our deployment goals

What if?

Had the team that set up the lab involved others in their decision making process from the start, they could have saved time, effort and money.  At least a couple options would have been to either start with a Windows XP solution and upgrade to a Windows 7 solution when the broader organization was ready or to communicate early enough any impact to the deployment timeline.

Often in software development projects, those close to the technology push to use the latest available tools or things that are “cool”. While I do not blindly discourage such endeavors, I can’t emphasize enough the importance to work with other department heads to ensure that the organization as a whole (and not just the software’s user community) can meet the demands of the proposed solution.

It is also important to consider if any other vendors you are dependent on will be able to complete their deliverables in time. The project referenced here used a Virtualization solution provider whose application would not be Windows 7 ready till June 2010. That timeline would delay the software deployment, which, from the very start was not acceptable to the sponsors.

(On the homepage, click speech bubble next to the title to leave comments. On the post page, scroll down.)