Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
SlideShare a Scribd company logo

Agile Maturity Assessments

•Download as PPTX, PDF•
•
David Hanson
David Hanson

Have you tried assessing the maturity of your Agile teams? Have you developed your own unique approach or adopted an approach found online? Have you found the assessments valuable and continued them? This material introduces a very simple, straightforward approach for Agile and Scrum maturity assessments without the complexity and pitfalls of numerous more sophisticated approaches. The author has used five different approaches to assess Agile maturity over the past decade, three developed by Agile coaching staff and two developed by himself, before adopting this simpler retrospective Agile maturity assessment. Shared at Agile New England as an Agile 101 topic in June 2023.

1 of 64
Agile Maturity Assessments Simple Templates for Scrum and Agile June 2023 David Hanson
2 Have you tried assessing the maturity of your Agile teams? Have you developed your own unique approach or adopted an approach found online? Have you found the assessments valuable and continued them? This session introduces a very simple, straightforward approach for Agile and Scrum maturity assessments without the complexity and pitfalls of numerous more sophisticated approaches. David has used five different approaches to assess Agile maturity over the past decade, three developed by Agile coaching staff and two developed by himself, before adopting this simpler retrospective Agile maturity assessment. David is currently an Agile coach at Mass General Brigham. Agile Maturity Assessments David Hanson dphanson63@yahoo.com | https://www.linkedin.com/in/david-hanson/ | https://www.slideshare.net/DavidHanson5 David Hanson | ANE 101 01:12
3 Tried five different Agile maturity assessments before developing this retrospective approach. First approach was Eliassen’s 36x5 rating matrix with 180 detailed descriptions for each possible rating which proved too time-consuming. Second approach shifted the details from rating to topic (only 36 detailed descriptions). In the end, still too sophisticated and too discouraging. Third approach was a simple 36-question yes or no checklist. Might have worked, but didn’t provide insights towards improvement. Fourth approach was State Street’s Agile maturity stories. Teams could earn Bronze, Silver, Gold and Platinum badges. Solid but required serious investment in time and effort. Fifth approach was a checklist of questions created by an Agile coaching staff. The least mature teams evaluated high and the most mature teams evaluated low. These experiences have led me to this sixth approach with a simple retrospective on the Scrum framework. My Maturity Assessment Experience David Hanson | ANE
Who has tried an Agile maturity assessment? How did it work out?
Why bother with Agile maturity assessments?
6 Eliassen’s Maturity Matrix, 2011-13 My Maturity Matrix, 2017 My Original Inspiration https://info.eliassen.com/agile-maturity-matrix David Hanson | ANE Benefits to the team Current Level Impeded (0) In transition (1) Sustainable (2) Agile (3) Ideal (4) Comments Being Agile No understanding of the spirit of Agile Doing the mechanics 80% of the team can explain the benefits of Agile, believe in the benefits of Agile, understand the spirit of Agile. The team is making improvements on a regular basis Working in an Agile manner Actively pursuing new ways of working in an Agile manner Productivity, Quality Morale Blame game, finger pointing, denial, anger, shouting, backstabbing, passive aggressive, turn-over and other behaviors on a regular basis. Desire to go back to the old ways, active resistance to change, scapegoating. There is churn or people are frequently making references to quitting or how much they dislike their work or work environment. There are still elements of previous state, but there is steady progress away from those behaviors, problems are being actively addressed, and there is a general feeling that morale is improving For the most part people are getting along and happy at work. There is very little if any talk about "going back" and it is generally believed that things are either better than before or at least not worse The team generally believes that their work life is significantly better than before. They are happy, engaged, productive, and genuinely enjoy working together. Most team members feel like this is one of the best teams they have ever worked on, they are excited to come in to work and are looking forward to the next day when they leave. Productivity, Quality Tuckman Stage Forming Storming Norming Have been performing consistently for at least 8 weeks Have been performing consistently for the past 6 months Productivity, Quality Working agreement Non-existent Some defacto team norms that are generally recognized, but haven't yet been written down and agreed on by the team. Written down, agreed on by the team, clearly visible in a public area such as the team room. Followed by the team Followed naturally, very short list, highly visible, exceptions are quickly identified and addressed. Team size >20 people on team It is recognized that a smaller team size is needed and there is either a near term plan or the team is actively being reduced in size. < 20 people on the team < 10 people on the team 7 +/- 2 people on the team Productivity, predictability, customer satisfaction, employee Dedicated resources Most team members are on multiple teams or working on multiple projects Most people are 50% dedicated to the team. Nobody is less than 30% dedicated to the team. Most people are 70% dedicated to the team. Nobody is less than 50% dedicated to the team. Most people are 90% dedicated to the team. Nobody is less than 70% dedicated to the team. Most people are 100% dedicated to the team, nobody is less than 60% dedicated to the team. Productivity, employee satisfaction, predictability, customer Continuity / Standing team Constant churn of people on the team and/or team was formed for a single release or a single major initiative and will be disbanded after There is an understanding that this is important, progress is being made, and further steps are being taken to get to the next stage 50%+ of the team is constant over the past 9 months and team has made multiple production releases or worked on multiple major initiatives without being reformed each time. More than 70% of the team is constant over the past 9 months and team has made multiple production releases and worked on multiple major initiatives without being reformed each time. More than 90% of the team has been constant over the past 12 months Productivity, predictability, quality Cross functional A significant portion of what is needed to get the stories to done exists outside of the team Some of the skills necessary to get the stories to done exists outside of the team All of the necessary skills for performing the work exist on the team All of the necessary skills for performing the work exist on the team and there is some cross training of skills All of the necessary skills for performing the work exist on the team and most of the team is cross trained on most of those skills Productivity, responsiveness and time to Collocation Team members have very little proximity to each other. Plans are in place to move team members as close to each other as is currently feasible. Most team members are accessible to any other team member within 30 seconds Most team members sit within hearing distance of each other Most team members are sitting in a team area together. Employee satisfaction, productivity Self organization Most people do not have the ability to choose what they work on, estimates are not determined by the team. Team does not feel like it can make decisions on its own. Some members just want to be told Some of the behaviors from the next stage are being discussed, encouraged, or tried Teams are pulling work from the product backlog themselves, doing their own team-based estimation, choosing what to work on themselves, and using the definitions of ready and done to guide interaction with those outside the team. The roles and responsibilities of the Scrum Master are shared by the entire team and the need for a designated and/or dedicated Scrum Master is significantly reduced. When some members of the team are not present, the team is able to adjust and continue getting stories done. The team is self organized Quality, employee satisfaction Sustainable pace People are tired, irritable, burnt out, working overtime on a regular basis. Current situation is considered business as usual. There is a recognition that the current pace is not sustainable and steps are being taken to improve the situation. Consensus is that the team is working at a pace that is close to sustainable indefinitely, though the workload is still inconsistent with bursts of heavy work loads Consensus is that the team is working at a pace that is sustainable indefinitely, though there is still occasional crunch time Steps are actively taken by the organization and the team to make sure that the team has a high morale, works no more than 40 hours per week, takes all vacation days and is a high performing team Quality, productivity, customer satisfaction Multi-team synchronizati on Synchronization with other teams that are working together toward a common deliverable is either ad- hoc or done primarily through up- front planning and setting iteration content towards a planned integration phase Team synchronizes with other teams using at least one of the methods in level 4 Team uses as least 2 of the methods from level 4 and integrates their work with the whole product at least every 4 weeks Team uses at least 3 of the methods in level 4 or equivalent, and there is little or no pre-planning of iteration content towards a planned integration phase (integration is continuous) Team synchronizes with other teams by having common iteration start/stop dates (or use Kanban), standup-of-standups (or similar), retro-of-retros (or similar), and participates in a whole-product review on a frequent basis. Productivity, Quality Impediments Invisible and/or ignored. Fear of reprisals. Reluctance to raise impediments. Impediments that are raised are not resolved. Raising impediments is actively encouraged and is frequently done. Some impediments are resolved. The team is beginning to see the benefits of this practice and feel comfortable practicing it. Raising impediments is becoming routine and there is a high degree of comfort in doing it. Impediments are usually resolved. Root cause analysis is sometimes performed and there is a growing recognition of the value of raising impediments. Impediment raising and resolution are a cultural norm. Individual and team impediments that can be addressed at those levels are addressed. Root cause analysis is frequently performed and acted on. Root cause analysis and resolution is a cultural norm Predictability, quality, productivity, customer satisfaction Shippability No stories shippable in less than four weeks from ready to done Shippability is measured and visible Team strives for shippability 60% of story points go from ready to done in less than four weeks 90% of story points go from ready to done in less than two weeks Predictability, quality, productivity, customer satisfaction End-to-end cycle time A year or more from concept to ready to release Can get from concept to ready to release in 6 months Can get from concept to ready to release in 3 months Can get from concept to ready to release in weeks Days from concept to ready to release Quality, predictability, productivity, customer satisfaction Product vision Not defined It is written down somewhere or the product owner or similar person knows what it is There is a written definition which is accurate and well known by everyone involved There is a compelling product vision which can be clearly articulated by the product owner or similar person Simple, clear, compelling, everyone involved can articulate it well. Quality, predictability, productivity, employee satisfaction Stories follow INVEST No knowledge of INVEST Team understands INVEST and is starting to follow parts of it on some stories. Following most of INVEST on many stories Following INVEST for most stories Following INVEST for all stories Quality, predictability, productivity, employee satisfaction Definition of ready Does not exist There is an understanding of the need for a definition of ready and/or there is a tacit agreement for the content of one There is a fairly good definition of ready which resulted from the collaboration between multiple members of the team. Definition of ready includes existence of acceptance criteria There is a strong, clear, comprehensive (yet simple) definition of ready which resulted from the collaboration of most of the members, agreement and input from all, and it is publicly posted In place, comprehensive, periodically reviewed and updated, strictly followed Quality, predictability, productivity, customer satisfaction Definition of done Does not exist There is an understanding of the need for a definition of done and/or there is a tacit agreement for the content of one There is a fairly good definition of done which resulted from the collaboration between multiple members of the team There is a strong, clear, comprehensive (yet simple) definition of done which resulted from the collaboration of most of the members, agreement and input from all, and it is publically posted In place, comprehensive, periodically reviewed and updated, strictly followed Quality, predictability, employee satisfaction, productivity Story size Random The team is starting to see the relationship between small stories and success. Team has a rule of thumb encouraging small stories Most stories can be done in a week or less Most stories shippable in 1-3 days Quality, predictability, employee satisfaction, productivity Backlog grooming Stories are rarely ready to be worked on prior to the team starting to work on those stories It is understood that consistent and frequent grooming is an important goal and steps are being taken to get there. 60%+ of the time there are stories ready when needed There are usually just enough stories ready There are always more than enough stories ready Quality, productivity, customer satisfaction Stories use vertical slices No knowledge of vertical slices or they can't be done due to external constraints Using vertical slices for an increasing percentage of stories Using vertical slices for 50%+ of stories Using vertical slices for 70%+ of stories Using vertical slices for 90%+ of stories Employee satisfaction, productivity, quality, predictability Work in progress Amount of WIP unknown. No knowledge of one piece flow (e.g. small batch size) WIP is tracked and visible. One piece flow is understood and there is interest in doing it. Most of the time, members are working on 2 or more stories at a time. One piece flow is actively being pursued, WIP limits are set, most of the time members are working on at most 2 stories and usually only one. Sometimes, multiple members are working on the same story. WIP limits are set and respected. Most of the time members are only working on one story and frequently more than one member is working on the same story. Only as much work that can be done simultaneously without increasing the cycle time of any of the work in progress. Most of the time multiple members are working on the same story. Employee satisfaction, productivity, quality, customer satisfaction Standups, check-ins, huddles, or similar. Not being held Being held regularly and on their way to stage 2. 80% of the team shows up every day, the 3 questions are covered in less than 20 minutes, real impediments are raised on a regular basis, participants stay for the entire meeting, the team understands that the meeting is for them, not the Scrum Master, manager, or project manager. Daily, short, effective. Runs well with or without the presence of the Scrum Master. Team also does an on- the-spot analysis of how things are going and takes corrective action if needed. Positively adapted to the needs of the team Employee satisfaction, productivity, quality Retrospective s Not being held Held, but not regularly or not frequently enough Held regularly, well attended, produces action items. Action items are frequently acted on Held regularly, well attended, enjoyable, produces action items that are recorded and generally acted on Creatively run, format varied from time to time, forward looking, often produces breakthrough ideas that are acted on and produce results Predictability, employee satisfaction, customer All work based on user stories Not being followed It is understood that it is important to use user stories for all work and steps are being taken to get there. User stories exist for 50%+ of the work, but still using other artifacts for some work or translating some user stories to other artifacts for some work. User stories exist for 80%+ of work, but still using other artifacts for some work or translating some user stories to other artifacts for some work. All work based on user stories Predictability, employee satisfaction Estimation Ad-hoc, done by a few people, based on hours, or entirely task- based Done on a regular basis The whole team participates in estimation, real story points are used. Some members still thinking in hours. Still a fair amount of focus on tasks. 90+% of the time there is no discussion of hours or tasks Consistently done by the whole team thinking in story points. No discussion of hours or tasks. Customer satisfaction, employee satisfaction, responsiveness and time to market Progress tracking Not implemented Progress is tracked and known using burnup, burndown, CFD or similar method and sometimes iinfluences behavior of the team. Progress is tracked and frequently influences the behavior of the team Progress information usually influences the behavior of the team The team proactively uses progress information to head off potential problems Customer satisfaction, employee satisfaction, responsiveness and time to market Reviews Not happening, not happening on a regular basis, or happening less often than once in 6 weeks Happening at least once every six weeks, but some or all of the following are happening: not reviewing all stories, ill-prepared to do the review, trying to "sell" what was done as opposed to finding missed expectations and encouraging feedback Happening at least once every four weeks, most stories are reviewed, team is fairly well prepared, feedback is encouraged and incorporated into future stories Reviews are a cultural norm. Every story is reviewed and the team is very well prepared. Active feedback is encouraged, the reviews are well attended and perceived as valuable to stakeholders. The team proactively involves stakeholders on a regular basis and frequently delights stakeholders during reviews. The team and stakeholders work closely together and often discover unexpected value as a result of that interaction. Customer satisfaction, employee satisfaction Architecture Primarily done by designated architects up-front prior to implementation Team starting to work with architects and architects starting to delegate more decisions to the team 50% of architectural decisions made by the team. 50% of architectural decisions made just-in-time 80% of architectural decisions made by the team. 80% of architectural decisions made just-in-time Primarily done on a just-in-time basis by the team in consultation with the architecture team. Quality, predictability, productivity Proximity of testing to implementati on Long after implementation Within eight weeks Mostly within four weeks Mostly within two weeks and mostly before the next story is started For software projects, TDD with UI-based testing done immediately after story is coded Quality, employee satisfaction Holistic testing (sw projects) Different kinds of testing (unit, functional, integration, etc.) all done without coordination There is a recognition that holistic testing is a good thing and steps are being taken to move towards it. For 50%+ of user stories, the developers and testers coordinated their testing efforts For 80%+ of user stories, the developers and testers coordinated their testing efforts All testing coordinated ahead of coding and based around user stories Quality, predictability, productivity, responsiveness and time to market Test automation (sw projects) Not being used 30%+ code coverage via test automation and plans are in place to increase this level 50%+ code coverage for all new user stories via test automation 50%+ code coverage via test automation 90% + code coverage via test automation Quality, predictability, productivity, responsiveness and time to market Continuous Integration (sw projects) Not implemented Set up, but manually run. Failures not fixed right away. Run every hour. Failures fixed fairly quickly. Run every 10 minutes. Drop everything on failures until fixed. Run on every check-in. Quality, predictability, productivity, responsiveness and time to market Unit testing (sw projects) Not being used Some coding involves unit testing. There is an understanding that unit testing produces better code and reduces overall effort All new stories involve some amount of unit testing All new stories involve the responsible amount of unit testing. Unit testing of stories included in the definition of done. Hard to imagine a shop that is better at unit testing. Deep knowledge of the latest unit testing techniques, using mock objects, etc. Quality, predictability, productivity, responsiveness and time to market Refactoring (sw projects) Not understood and/or not being done Some understanding of single responsibility principle (SRP) and open/closed principle. Some amount of refactoring done as needed when implementing stories. Refactoring around SRP and O/C principle. Doing the appropriate amount of refactoring with most user stories Deep understanding of refactoring. True refactoring is a cultural norm. Hard to imagine a shop that is better at refactoring. Deep knowledge of the latest refactoring techniques. Refactoring to patterns. Copyright 2011-2013 Eliassen Group, All Rights Reserved Agile Process Mechanics Agile Engineering Practices Product Team Structure Team Dynamics Team Level Maturity Matrix Scrum Team A Date 1 60% 2.0 Recommendations: Team B 60% 2.0 highlight strength to reinforce highlight opportunity for improvement 60% 2.0 60% 2.0 60% 2.0 60% 2.0 60% 2.0 Metric Description Evaluation Definition Strength Weakness Evaluation Being Agile (Shu, Ha, Ri) rejecting rules > accepting rules > following rules > bending rules > being rules; progress through each phase skipping only first Impeded rejecting, impeded or not started 0% 0 highlight strength or reason for higher score highlight weakness or reason for lower score Impeded Tuckman Stages forming > storming > norming > performing > outperforming; deforming and reforming possible; poorly formed team may not progress Transitioning accepting and learning 40% 1 Impeded Self- organized, Self-managed not externally managed; not PO or SM managed; PO explains what, not how; SM owns blocks, not work; members pull work, leads do not push work Sustainable practicing and refining 70% 2 Impeded Working Agreement defined, known, visible, followed, refined; short, meaningful; principles over policies; how more than what; formed by team, monitored by SM Agile skilled and adaptive 90% 3 Impeded Transparent, Inspect & Adapt transparent w/ team, management, business; regularly inspect & adapt internal & external, what & how; continuously improving Advanced innovating and influential 100% 4 Impeded Scrum Values members display commitment, focus, openness, respect, courage first w/ PO, SM, team and then w/ external resources, management, business NA not applicable or not assessed Impeded Product Owner business-sponsored, empowered, not manager; single, dedicated, available, colocated; sets priorities, clarifies requirements, knows domain Impeded rejecting, impeded or not started 0% 0 Transitioning Scrum Master IT-sponsored, servant leader, coach & mentor, not manager; dedicated, active learner, owns process, resolves blocks, knows Agile, interfaces w/ IT Transitioning accepting and learning 40% 1 Transitioning Development Team 4 to 9 members, dedicated, stable, cross-functional, entire vertical, continuously improve, volunteer, cross- train, blending development-tester roles Sustainable practicing and refining 70% 2 Transitioning Business Users early adopters attend reviews, provide feedback, willingly engaged, value incremental delivery, self prioritize, may attend planning or grooming Agile skilled and adaptive 90% 3 Transitioning Shared Resources kanban methodology, consistently staffed, specialized skills, support <6 teams, short lead & cycle time, just-in- time, <10% team effort Advanced innovating and influential 100% 4 Transitioning Management support self-organization, quality focus, long term investments, team goals & reviews; coach & mentor; members report externally NA not applicable or not assessed Transitioning Product Vision & Roadmap vision known and compelling; roadmap outlined, followed and refined; quarterly goals; team understands mission Impeded rejecting, impeded or not started 0% 0 Sustainable Product Backlog couple sprints ready stories; prioritized and evolving; minimum viable increments; reject or defer noise; estimate just enough Transitioning accepting and learning 40% 1 Sustainable Sprint Backlog based on team velocity; defined sprint goal; fixed during sprint; finished end of sprint; tracks everything; limit WIP based on story priority Sustainable practicing and refining 70% 2 Sustainable Sprint Increment shippable & valuable; promoted at least quarterly, best sprintly; acceptance & releases externally managed, mostly automated, or on sprint cadence Agile skilled and adaptive 90% 3 Sustainable User Stories story: independent, negotiable, valuable, estimable, small, testable; acceptance: specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, timebound Advanced innovating and influential 100% 4 Sustainable Definitions of Ready & Done ready and done defined, known, visible, concise, meaningful, followed, honored, refined; formed by team and monitored by scrum master NA not applicable or not assessed Sustainable Team Dynamics Team Structure Product Backlog Agile Ceremonies Agile Processes Team Dynamics Team Structure Product Backlog Agile Ceremonies Agile Processes Engineering Practices Team Structure Team Dynamics Product Backlog TD TS PB Engineering Practices
7 My Scrum Framework Assessment • Starts with the Scrum framework • Adds a simple retrospective • Uses my original ratings David Hanson | ANE 01:12
8 3 Roles Developers Product Owner Scrum Master 5 Events Sprint Sprint Planning Daily Scrum Sprint Review Sprint Retrospective 3 Artifacts with Commitments Product Backlog with Product Goal Sprint Backlog with Sprint Goal Increment with Definition of Done Scrum 3-5-3 Framework David Hanson | Agile Coach 5-7-4….if it was up to me…more later
9 Good – Improve – Ideas Retrospective David Hanson | ANE
10 Ratings Evaluation Score Range Characteristics 0-NA: - - not assessed or not applicable 1-Impeded: 0% 0-30% rejecting or impeded 2-Transitioning: 40% 30-55% accepting and learning 3-Sustainable: 70% 55-75% practicing and refining 4-Agile: 90% 75-90% skilled and adaptive 5-Advanced: 100% 90-100% innovative and influential Trend ↔: steady ↗: improving ↘: worsening ↕: mixed * NA not included in statistics David Hanson | Agile Coach
Scrum Framework Assessment Team 2023 Evaluator: Agile Coach, Scrum Master, or Scrum Team 01:12
12 Agile Assessment: Roles Roles Good Improve Idea Assessment Scrum Team: Working Agreement 1-Impeded ↗ Product Owner 2-Transitioning ↔ Team Members 3-Sustainable ↕ Scrum Master 4-Agile ↔ Stakeholders 5-Advanced ↘ David Hanson | Agile Coach
13 Agile Assessment: Events Events Good Improve Idea Assessment Sprint 1-Impeded ↗ Sprint Planning 2-Transitioning ↕ Sprint Tasking* 2-Transitioning ↔ Daily Scrum 3-Sustainable ↕ Sprint Review 4-Agile ↔ Sprint Retrospective 4-Agile ↕ Refinement Activity 5-Advanced ↘ David Hanson | Agile Coach * My term for Sprint Planning Topic 3 (How); too often passed over when planning.
14 Agile Assessment: Artifacts Artifacts: Commitment Good Improve Idea Assessment Product Backlog: Product Goal 2-Transitioning ↔ Sprint Backlog: Sprint Goal 3-Sustainable ↗ Backlog Items: Definition of Ready 3-Sustainable ↘ Sprint Increment: Definition of Done 4-Agile ↕ David Hanson | Agile Coach
15 Key Evaluation Score Range Characteristics 1-Impeded: 0% 0-30% rejecting or impeded 2-Transitioning: 40% 30-55% accepting and learning 3-Sustainable: 70% 55-75% practicing and refining 4-Agile: 90% 75-90% skilled and adaptive 5-Advanced: 100% 90-100% innovative and influential Aggregate score* Team, date: 62.5%, 3.0-Sustainable ↕ Recommended actions: • Role improvement opportunity • Event improvement opportunity • Artifact improvement opportunity * Average (mean) individual scores to get overall score; take most common trend as average (mode) David Hanson | Agile Coach
Simple Scaled Assessment Team 2023 Evaluator: Agile Coach, Scrum Master, or Scrum Team 01:12
17 Agile Assessment: Scaling Scaling Good Improve Idea Assessment Scaled Roles 0-NA ↔ Scaled Events 0-NA ↔ Scaled Artifacts 0-NA ↔ SM Cycle 0-NA ↔ PO Cycle 0-NA ↔ Developer Cycle* 0-NA ↔ David Hanson | Agile Coach This simple scaling is intended to be used with Scrum framework assessment for individual teams. Intent is to assess whether the individual team’s needs for scaling are met. *Optional developer cycle intended to assess scaled technology, architecture, infrastructure, operations and design components; not included with Scrum @ Scale.
Agile Principles Assessment Organization 2023 Evaluator: Agile Coach, Scrum Master or Leadership 01:12
19 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 process 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 [after over], we value the items [before over] more. We follow these principles: Build projects around motivated individuals; give them the environment and support they need, and trust them to get the job done. Deliver working software frequently, from a couple of weeks to a couple of months, with a preference to the shorter timescale. Business people and developers must work together daily throughout the project. At regular intervals, the team reflects on how to become more effective, then tunes and adjusts its behavior accordingly. Agile processes promote sustainable development; the sponsors, developers, and users should be able to maintain a constant pace indefinitely. Working software is the primary measure of progress. The most efficient and effective method of conveying information to and within a development team is face-to-face conversation. Welcome changing requirements, even late in development; Agile processes harness change for the customer’s competitive advantage. The best architectures, requirements, and designs emerge from self-organizing teams. Simplicity—the art of maximizing the amount of work not done— is essential. Our highest priority is to satisfy the customer through early and continuous delivery of valuable software. Continuous attention to technical excellence and good design enhances agility. Values Principles
20 Agile Principles Customer Focus Principle Good Improve Idea Assessment Satisfy customer through continuous delivery 4-Agile ↔ Harness change for competitive advantage 3-Sustainable ↕ Deliver working software frequently 2-Transitioning ↘ Business and developers work together daily 1-Impeded ↗ Customer leaning principles David Hanson | Agile Coach
21 Agile Principles Management Focus Principle Good Improve Idea Assessment Support and trust motivated individuals 4-Agile ↗ Convey information face-to-face 3-Sustainable ↕ Working software is primary progress 2-Transitioning ↘ Promote sustainable pace indefinitely 1-Impeded ↔ Manager leaning principles David Hanson | Agile Coach
22 Agile Principles Team Focus Principle Good Improve Idea Assessment Continuous attention to excellence and design 4-Agile ↗ Simplicity, maximizing work not done 3-Sustainable ↘ Best emerges from self-organizing teams 2-Transitioning ↕ Team reflects and adjusts behavior 1-Impeded ↔ Team leaning principles David Hanson | Agile Coach
23 Key Evaluation Score Range Characteristics 1-Impeded: 0% 0-30% rejecting or impeded 2-Transitioning: 40% 30-55% accepting and learning 3-Sustainable: 70% 55-75% practicing and refining 4-Agile: 90% 75-90% skilled and adaptive 5-Advanced: 100% 90-100% innovative and influential Aggregate score* Team, date: 50%, 2.5-Transitioning ↕ Recommended actions • Customer focused improvement • Management focused improvement • Team focused improvement Agile Mindset is much harder to adopt than Agile practices; however Agile Mindset is much more consequential David Hanson | Agile Coach
Too Simple? 01:12
Alternative Assessments Zombie Scrum Survey Mountain Goat Elements of Agile Agility Health Radars Kniberg’s Scrum Checklist 01:12
26 Zombie Scrum Survey Mountain Goat Elements of Agile Online Assessments Zombie Scrum Survey is scientific based, aggregates responses for teams, and provides actionable advice. Similarly Mountain Goat’s Elements of Agile will provide a list of actionable advice after responding to 70 questions. David Hanson | ANE
27 Team Agility Team of Teams Agility Agility Health Radars https://agilityhealthradar.com/radars/ David Hanson | ANE Enterprise Agility Individual Role Agility
28 Bottom Line: 3 items Core Scrum: 43 items Recommended: 28 items Scaling: 3 items Positive Indicators: 3 items Total: 80 items Henrik Kniberg’s Scrum Checklist https://scruminc.wpenginepowered.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/scrum-checklist.pdf David Hanson | ANE
29 Scaled Agile Assessment Template Assumes Scrum @ Scale David Hanson | ANE 01:12
30 Minimum viable bureaucracy Lowest decision latency Structure for “linear” scaling Scales Agile by scaling Scrum Less prescriptive, more transformative Product Owner Cycle led by Executive Meta Scrum focused on business, priorities, what Scrum Master Cycle led by Executive Action Team focused on technology, process, how Scrum @ Scale David Hanson | ANE
31 Symbol Description t No Impediments O Minor Impediments, No Measurable Impact ↗ Some Impediments, Situation Improving ↔ Some Impediments, Situation Stable ↘ Some Impediments, Situation Worsening X Major Impediments, Team Totally Blocked Heatmap Key https://marcrodriguezsanz.medium.com/scrum-scales-scaling-heatmap-34b012bb1496 Component Assessment Mega: Organizational Refactoring t PO: Executive Meta Scrum O PO: Strategic Vision O PO: Backlog Prioritization O PO: Backlog Decomposition & Refinement O PO: Release Planning O SM: Executive Action Team ↗↔↘ SM: Continuous Improvement ↗↔↘ SM: Impediment Removal ↗↔↘ SM: Cross-team Coordination ↗↔↘ SM: Delivery ↗↔↘ PO/SM: Team Process X PO/SM: Metrics & Transparency X PO/SM: Product & Release Feedback X PO/SM: Product Increment X
32 Scaled Agile Current State Heatmap Mega Issue, PO Cycle or SM Cycle Component 1st Team 2nd Team 3rd Team Team of Teams Mega: Organizational Refactoring ↘ tO↗↔↘X tO↗↔↘X ↘ PO: Executive Meta Scrum ↔ tO↗↔↘X tO↗↔↘X ↔ PO: Strategic Vision ↔ tO↗↔↘X tO↗↔↘X ↔ PO: Backlog Prioritization ↔ tO↗↔↘X tO↗↔↘X ↗ PO: Backlog Decomposition & Refinement O tO↗↔↘X tO↗↔↘X O PO: Release Planning X tO↗↔↘X tO↗↔↘X X SM: Executive Action Team X tO↗↔↘X tO↗↔↘X X SM: Continuous Improvement ↘ tO↗↔↘X tO↗↔↘X ↔ SM: Impediment Removal ↘ tO↗↔↘X tO↗↔↘X X SM: Cross-team Coordination t tO↗↔↘X tO↗↔↘X t SM: Delivery ↔ tO↗↔↘X tO↗↔↘X ↘ PO/SM: Team Process O tO↗↔↘X tO↗↔↘X O PO/SM: Metrics & Transparency ↗ tO↗↔↘X tO↗↔↘X ↘ PO/SM: Product & Release Feedback X tO↗↔↘X tO↗↔↘X X PO/SM: Product Increment X tO↗↔↘X tO↗↔↘X X Symbol Description t No Impediments O Minor Impediments, No Measurable Impact ↗ Some Impediments, Situation Improving ↔ Some Impediments, Situation Stable ↘ Some Impediments, Situation Worsening X Major Impediments, Team Totally Blocked
33 Strategic Importance t O ↗ ↔ ↘ X Highest Metrics & Transparency Higher Strategic Vision Executive Action Team High Executive Meta Scrum Organizational Refactoring Product Increment Moderate Team Process Continuous Improvement Impediment Removal Low Cross-team Coordination Backlog Prioritization Delivery Lower Backlog Decomposition & Refinement Product & Release Feedback Lowest Release Planning Focus on the top right first Ideally should be done collectively Could be repeated at the individual team level Viewpoints may differ Transformation Backlog Prioritization Symbol Description t No Impediments O Minor Impediments, No Measurable Impact ↗ Some Impediments, Situation Improving ↔ Some Impediments, Situation Stable ↘ Some Impediments, Situation Worsening X Major Impediments, Team Totally Blocked
Kanban and XP simple retrospective approach easily extended 01:12
Scrum Master Service Assessment & Goals 01:12
36 Service to… Good Improve Ideas Assessment Service to… Good Improve Ideas Assessment Service to Scrum Team Service to Product Owner Service to Organization Service to Self Scrum Master Service Assessment David Hanson | Agile Coach
37 Objective: what Key Results: - how - how - how Outcome: why Timeline: when Quarterly Reviews: where Service to Scrum Team: who Service to Product Owner: who Objective: what Key Results: - how - how - how Outcome: why Timeline: when Quarterly Reviews: where Scrum Master Service Goals SMART: specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, timebound David Hanson | Agile Coach
38 Objective: what Key Results: - how - how - how Outcome: why Timeline: when Quarterly Reviews: where Service to Organization: who Service to Self: who Objective: what Key Results: - how - how - how Outcome: why Timeline: when Quarterly Reviews: where Scrum Master Service Goals SMART: specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, timebound David Hanson | Agile Coach
39 Early on, my attempts at an Agile maturity matrix captured my knowledge. Now, my attempt is to provide a framework for teams to chart their own course. Perhaps, a reflection of my evolution from facilitator to trainer to mentor to coach. Myself Your thoughts What was valuable for you here? What was missing? What would you like to see next? Reflection Please don’t forget to provide your feedback on the session; thank you! David Hanson | ANE 01:12
40 David Hanson | ANE 101 David Hanson dphanson63@yahoo.com https://www.linkedin.com/in/david-hanson/ https://www.slideshare.net/DavidHanson5 ANE 101 Survey
Appendix: Sample assessment for my best team from 2017 My original organizational and leadership assessments Sample Excel radar plot visualization XP adoption planning game Kanban maturity assessment template 01:12
Scrum Framework Sample Assessment My Best Team 2017 01:12
43 Agile Assessment: Roles Roles Good Improve Idea Assessment Scrum Team: Working Agreement Highest profile project, collocated Working agreement and duration together Embrace XP practices 3-Sustainable ↗ Product Owner Lean certified, Agile mindset; makes rounds, strong vision for product Reports to IT manager, not business manager Move to same floor as users; change reporting to support manager 4-Agile ↗ Team Members Do not report to PO or SM; good cross-functional mix; coders pair w/ testers Minimal TDD; afraid to commit so ask for spikes, then say done Swap out developer that liked to work solo in silo 3-Sustainable ↔ Scrum Master Natural; experience as BA, QA; quality focused; makes rounds, gets involved Influence with management and clients Find opportunities to showcase talent with management 4-Agile ↗ Stakeholders Engaged, available to PO, analysts; embrace incremental delivery Management discouraged engagement between users and team Invite users to reviews with full team or invite full team to reviews with users 3-Sustainable ↕ David Hanson | Agile Coach
44 Agile Assessment: Events Events Good Improve Idea Assessment Sprint 9 day sprint; every sprint usable value; Scrumban 3 sprint release cycle; goal not explicitly stated Release every sprint 5-Advanced ↔ Sprint Planning Serious, focused, efficient, repetitive Goal might be implicit, not discussed Propose goal, then engage team in selection of stories 4-Agile ↔ Sprint Tasking Done on first day Done in pairs or individually Include time for tasking in 2nd half of planning 3-Sustainable ↔ Daily Scrum Stood; flagged blocks, issues on whiteboard; 15m Could be a bit more aggressive resolving blocks SoS 3 times a week and EAT 2 times a week 4-Agile ↔ Sprint Review Demoed every story, every acceptance no exceptions 2nd higher level review with users w/o team members Invite user to team review; invite team to user review 4-Agile ↕ Sprint Retrospective Entire team engaged; actionable items identified Retros could be more varied and more interactive Assess team happiness 3-Sustainable ↔ Refinement Activity Quick, effective, efficient; everyone spoke up Overuse of spikes Try actual poker planning cards 4-Agile ↔ David Hanson | Agile Coach
45 Agile Assessment: Artifacts Artifacts: Commitment Good Improve Idea Assessment Product Backlog: Product Goal Extensive backlog, well- ordered, known roadmap Product vision known but implied; too much clutter Embrace story mapping w/ users and team 3-Sustainable ↔ Sprint Backlog: Sprint Goal Deliverable value every sprint; usually all done Unstated goal Make goal explicit 3-Sustainable ↔ Backlog Items: Definition of Ready Extremely disciplined; MoSCoW acceptance Too much effort estimating epics Defer or reject 50% of product backlog 4-Agile ↕ Sprint Increment: Definition of Done Extremely disciplined; done was done Accepted UAT as post sprint activity Focus on CI/CD and test automation 4-Agile ↔ David Hanson | Agile Coach
46 Agile Assessment: Scaling Scaling Good Improve Idea Assessment Scaled Roles Visionary CPO and CSM; scaled DBE and architect; common “house rules” Reporting relationship not ideal; collaboration with data and support teams Recruit UX lead; distribute database staff across teams 4-Agile ↕ Scaled Events SoS, MetaScrum; Reverse Scrum w/ user base; cross- team knowledge share Lacked EAT and EMS for team of team of teams Training in Scrum at Scale (2017: not yet available) 5-Advanced ↔ Scaled Artifacts Common backlog & metrics; custom tooling; integrated product release One team gamed metrics, leading to misdirected questions Embrace Agile & DevOps tool suite; cut backlog 4-Agile ↕ SM Cycle SoS, CoP, delivery, metrics; Scrumban, shared resource Kanban, led CI/CD Lacked true EAT to address org impediments Training for management; streamline status reports 3-Sustainable ↗ PO Cycle Roadmap, decomposition, release, metrics, feedback More feedback on usage to drive priorities Vision known but not stated 3-Sustainable ↗ David Hanson | Agile Coach
47 Key Evaluation Score Range Characteristics 1-Impeded: 0% 0-30% rejecting or impeded 2-Transitioning: 40% 30-55% accepting and learning 3-Sustainable: 70% 55-75% practicing and refining 4-Agile: 90% 75-90% skilled and adaptive 5-Advanced: 100% 90-100% innovative and influential Aggregate score Team, date: 82%, 3.7-Agile ↗, 2017 Recommended actions: • Role improvement opportunity: embrace XP practices, hire accordingly • Event improvement opportunity: set goal to release every sprint • Artifact improvement opportunity: leverage story mapping to engage users and team • Scaling improvement opportunity: training on, then not yet version 1, Scrum at Scale David Hanson | Agile Coach
More of My Originals 01:12
49 Organizational Assessment Leadership Assessment My Original Organizational and Leadership Assessments Inspired by Eliassen’s organizational maturity matrix and Sally Elatta’s individual role assessment David Hanson | Agile Coach Leadership Attribute Leadership Description Overall Assessment 75% 50% Shared Vision what: compelling, shared, collaborative Sustainable practicing and refining 70% Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Transitioning Implementation Strategy how: compelling, shared, collaborative Sustainable practicing and refining 70% Sustainable practicing and refining 70% Sustainable Business Outcome why: compelling, shared, collaborative Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Impeded Success Metrics measure value and growth Impeded rejecting or impeded 0% Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Impeded Agile Principles embraces Agile values & principles Advanced innovating and influential 100% Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Impeded Team Design cross-functional, fully-dedicated; scaled Agile skilled and adaptive 90% Sustainable practicing and refining 70% Impeded Clear Priorities ordered, balanced, transparent, known Sustainable practicing and refining 70% Sustainable practicing and refining 70% Transitioning Acceptance Criteria specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, timed Agile skilled and adaptive 90% Sustainable practicing and refining 70% Transitioning Enables Focus limit WIP, minimize distractions Agile skilled and adaptive 90% Sustainable practicing and refining 70% Impeded Engagement hoping > telling > selling > participating > delegating Agile skilled and adaptive 90% Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Transitioning Develop People 1-on-1s, feedback, coaching, delegating; scaling Agile skilled and adaptive 90% Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Impeded Build Teams high-performing, self-organized, stable Sustainable practicing and refining 70% Impeded rejecting or impeded 0% Impeded Lean Practioner map value stream, eliminate waste, optimize whole Agile skilled and adaptive 90% Sustainable practicing and refining 70% Impeded Organizational Obstacles identify, remove; courageous, influential Sustainable practicing and refining 70% Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Transitioning Customer Focus knows customer, domain, business value Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Impeded rejecting or impeded 0% Sustainable Model Culture demonstrates desired culture Advanced innovating and influential 100% Sustainable practicing and refining 70% Impeded Change Leader challenges status quo; knows best practices Agile skilled and adaptive 90% Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Impeded Servant Leader serves teams and direct reports; shares power Sustainable practicing and refining 70% Sustainable practicing and refining 70% Transitioning Seeks Feedback eagerly seeks and willingly receives feedback Sustainable practicing and refining 70% Sustainable practicing and refining 70% Sustainable Coach & Mentor coach for team goal; mentor for individual career Agile skilled and adaptive 90% Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Transitioning Character Leader 1 Leader 2 Leader 3 Vision Execution Value Attribute Description Org A Date 1 30% Org A Date 2 60% Org B Date 1 20% Org B Date 2 Culture ownership culture; collaborative; supports measured risks & transparency Sustainable practicing and refining 70% Sustainable practicing and refining 70% Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Transitioning accepting and learning Agile Values organization supports Agile values & principles Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Sustainable practicing and refining 70% Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Impeded rejecting or impeded Lean Principles client focus; continuous improvement; maximize value; eliminate waste Sustainable practicing and refining 70% Agile skilled and adaptive 90% Sustainable practicing and refining 70% Sustainable practicing and refining Vision clear, compelling, shared vision w/ implementation strategy Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Transitioning accepting and learning Goals SMART goals in support of vision; limited in number; assessed quarterly Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Agile skilled and adaptive 90% Impeded rejecting or impeded 0% Impeded rejecting or impeded Structure stable, cross-functional teams supporting product delivery Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Agile skilled and adaptive 90% Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Sustainable practicing and refining Funding funding adjusted quarterly based on metrics; deliver value quarterly Impeded rejecting or impeded 0% Impeded rejecting or impeded 0% Impeded rejecting or impeded 0% Impeded rejecting or impeded Projects limit projects in progress; 1 team no more than 1 project; prioritized queue Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Sustainable practicing and refining 70% Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Impeded rejecting or impeded Metrics metrics track value and growth; funding and rewards based on metrics; visible Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Sustainable practicing and refining 70% Impeded rejecting or impeded 0% Transitioning accepting and learning Rewards compensation based on team performance and project delivery Impeded rejecting or impeded 0% Impeded rejecting or impeded 0% Impeded rejecting or impeded 0% Impeded rejecting or impeded Space physical & virtual space supports team & peer collaboration; video conference rooms Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Sustainable practicing and refining 70% Impeded rejecting or impeded 0% Transitioning accepting and learning Tools integrated continuous integration and Agile collaboration tools widely used Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Sustainable practicing and refining 70% Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Transitioning accepting and learning Infrastructure infrastructure as code supports proper sub environments & developer toolsets Impeded rejecting or impeded 0% Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Impeded rejecting or impeded 0% Transitioning accepting and learning DevOps DevOps team & community to support continuous integration & delivery Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Sustainable practicing and refining 70% Impeded rejecting or impeded 0% Transitioning accepting and learning Learning knowledge sharing activities and training readily available and supported Impeded rejecting or impeded 0% Agile skilled and adaptive 90% Impeded rejecting or impeded 0% Transitioning accepting and learning Adoption genuine adoption widespread; services include launch, scaling, assessment, CI Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Impeded rejecting or impeded 0% Impeded rejecting or impeded Governance Agile governance for Scrum and Kanban defined, followed, audited; just enough Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Sustainable practicing and refining 70% Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Sustainable practicing and refining Scaling Agile scaling approach and support available; actively implemented Impeded rejecting or impeded 0% Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Sustainable practicing and refining Communities various communities of practice where best practices shared Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Agile skilled and adaptive 90% Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Sustainable practicing and refining Impediments organizational obstacles raised and addressed at multiple levels Impeded rejecting or impeded 0% Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Transitioning accepting and learning Business trained in Agile and support activities; sponsor true product owners Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Impeded rejecting or impeded 0% Impeded rejecting or impeded Executive trained in Agile, set Agile goals, allocate budget, recognize improvement Impeded rejecting or impeded 0% Sustainable practicing and refining 70% Impeded rejecting or impeded 0% Impeded rejecting or impeded Management trained in Agile, define Agile objectives, remove obstacles, monitor progress Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Impeded rejecting or impeded 0% Impeded rejecting or impeded Team Managers managers external to Scrum team; actively coach & mentor Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Sustainable practicing and refining 70% Impeded rejecting or impeded 0% Impeded rejecting or impeded Leadership organization supports leadership at all levels; teams trusted to self-organize Impeded rejecting or impeded 0% Sustainable practicing and refining 70% Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Transitioning accepting and learning Cultural Organization Execution Process Management
50 Leverage Excel radar plots to visualize maturity for team of teams or for one team over time Radar Plot Visualization Example above from my original template David Hanson | Agile Coach
XP Adoption Planning Game 01:12
XPAdoption Stories 52 As an owner, we practice System Metaphor to communicate ideas about code clearly. As a team, we practice Planning Game to schedule the most important work. As an owner, we practice Sustainable Pace to go home tired, but not exhausted. As a team, we practice On-siteCustomer to address user concerns accurately and directly. As a pair, we practice Refactoring to find the code’s optimal design. As a team and a pair, we practice Test First to prove that the code works as it should. As a pair, we practice Pair Programming to spread knowledge, experience, and ideas. As an owner, we practice Continuous Integration to reduce the impact of adding new features. As a team, we practice Small Releases to return the customer’s investment often. As an owner, we practice CollectiveOwnership to share responsibility for code and design. As an owner, we practice Coding Standards to communicate ideas clearly through code. As a team, we practice Simple Design to produce software that’s easy to change. As anAgile team, we adopt XP Practices to deliver higher value, at lower cost, with shorter timelines, while maintaining quality.
XPAdoption Planning Game 53 System Metaphor Planning Game Sustainable Pace Should On-siteCustomer 1 Estimate Must Refactoring 2 Estimate Must Test First 5 (split) Guess Pair Programming Continuous Integration Should Small Releases 2 Known Less Certain Effort Risk More Certain Lower Story Value Higher Could CollectiveOwnership 1 Known Coding Standards Could Simple Design 3 Guess Value XP Practice Effort Risk Must/Should/Could XP Practice 1/2/3 Known/Estimate/Guess Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4
Kanban Maturity Assessment Team 2023 Evaluator: Agile Coach, Scrum Master, or Scrum Team 01:12
55 Kanban Assessment: Principles* Principles Good Improve Idea Assessment Start Where You Are 4-Agile ↔ Respect Current Process and Roles 3-Sustainable ↕ Agree to Change 2-Transitioning ↘ Distribute Leadership 1-Impeded ↗ David Hanson | Agile Coach *Evaluation on the principles optional
56 Kanban Assessment: Core Practices Practices Good Improve Idea Assessment Visualize Work 4-Agile ↘ Limit WIP 3-Sustainable ↕ Manage Flow 2-Transitioning ↗ David Hanson | Agile Coach Primary Focus
57 Kanban Assessment: Extended Practices Practices Good Improve Idea Assessment Explicit Process 4-Agile ↔ Improve Empirically 3-Sustainable ↕ Establish Cadence 2-Transitioning ↘ Regular Feedback 1-Impeded ↗ David Hanson | Agile Coach Secondary Focus
58 Key Evaluation Score Range Characteristics 0-NA: - - not assessed or not applicable 1-Impeded: 0% 0-30% rejecting or impeded 2-Transitioning: 40% 30-55% accepting and learning 3-Sustainable: 70% 55-75% practicing and refining 4-Agile: 90% 75-90% skilled and adaptive 5-Advanced: 100% 90-100% innovative and influential Trends: ↗ improving; ↔ steady; ↘ worsening; ↕ mixed Team score: 54.5%, 2.6-Transitioning ↕, May 2023 Actions Note: individual assessments will vary; the score is less important than noting what’s going well, where can improve, and what actions can be taken. David Hanson | Agile Coach
Scrum Framework Assessment Room Exercise June 2023 Evaluator: 101 Participants
60 Scrum Framework Assessment: Roles Roles Good Improve Idea Assessment Scrum Team: Working Agreement 1 2 3 4 5 ↔ ↕ ↗ ↘ Product Owner 1 2 3 4 5 ↔ ↕ ↗ ↘ Team Members 1 2 3 4 5 ↔ ↕ ↗ ↘ Scrum Master 1 2 3 4 5 ↔ ↕ ↗ ↘ Stakeholders 1 2 3 4 5 ↔ ↕ ↗ ↘ David Hanson | ANE
61 Scrum Framework Assessment: Events Events Good Improve Idea Assessment Sprint 1 2 3 4 5 ↔ ↕ ↗ ↘ Sprint Planning 1 2 3 4 5 ↔ ↕ ↗ ↘ Sprint Tasking 1 2 3 4 5 ↔ ↕ ↗ ↘ Daily Scrum 1 2 3 4 5 ↔ ↕ ↗ ↘ Sprint Review 1 2 3 4 5 ↔ ↕ ↗ ↘ Sprint Retrospective 1 2 3 4 5 ↔ ↕ ↗ ↘ Refinement Activity 1 2 3 4 5 ↔ ↕ ↗ ↘ David Hanson | ANE
62 Scrum Framework Assessment: Artifacts Artifacts: Commitment Good Improve Idea Assessment Product Backlog: Product Goal 1 2 3 4 5 ↔ ↕ ↗ ↘ Sprint Backlog: Sprint Goal 1 2 3 4 5 ↔ ↕ ↗ ↘ Backlog Items: Definition of Ready 1 2 3 4 5 ↔ ↕ ↗ ↘ Sprint Increment: Definition of Done 1 2 3 4 5 ↔ ↕ ↗ ↘ David Hanson | ANE
63 Key Evaluation Score Range Characteristics 1-Impeded: 0% 0-30% rejecting or impeded 2-Transitioning: 40% 30-55% accepting and learning 3-Sustainable: 70% 55-75% practicing and refining 4-Agile: 90% 75-90% skilled and adaptive 5-Advanced: 100% 90-100% innovative and influential Aggregate score* Date: average rating and trend Improvement opportunities • Role: • Event: • Artifact: * Average (mean) individual scores to get overall score; take most common trend as average (mode) David Hanson | ANE
Agile Maturity Assessments

More Related Content

Agile Maturity Assessments

  • 1. Agile Maturity Assessments Simple Templates for Scrum and Agile June 2023 David Hanson
  • 2. 2 Have you tried assessing the maturity of your Agile teams? Have you developed your own unique approach or adopted an approach found online? Have you found the assessments valuable and continued them? This session introduces a very simple, straightforward approach for Agile and Scrum maturity assessments without the complexity and pitfalls of numerous more sophisticated approaches. David has used five different approaches to assess Agile maturity over the past decade, three developed by Agile coaching staff and two developed by himself, before adopting this simpler retrospective Agile maturity assessment. David is currently an Agile coach at Mass General Brigham. Agile Maturity Assessments David Hanson dphanson63@yahoo.com | https://www.linkedin.com/in/david-hanson/ | https://www.slideshare.net/DavidHanson5 David Hanson | ANE 101 01:12
  • 3. 3 Tried five different Agile maturity assessments before developing this retrospective approach. First approach was Eliassen’s 36x5 rating matrix with 180 detailed descriptions for each possible rating which proved too time-consuming. Second approach shifted the details from rating to topic (only 36 detailed descriptions). In the end, still too sophisticated and too discouraging. Third approach was a simple 36-question yes or no checklist. Might have worked, but didn’t provide insights towards improvement. Fourth approach was State Street’s Agile maturity stories. Teams could earn Bronze, Silver, Gold and Platinum badges. Solid but required serious investment in time and effort. Fifth approach was a checklist of questions created by an Agile coaching staff. The least mature teams evaluated high and the most mature teams evaluated low. These experiences have led me to this sixth approach with a simple retrospective on the Scrum framework. My Maturity Assessment Experience David Hanson | ANE
  • 4. Who has tried an Agile maturity assessment? How did it work out?
  • 5. Why bother with Agile maturity assessments?
  • 6. 6 Eliassen’s Maturity Matrix, 2011-13 My Maturity Matrix, 2017 My Original Inspiration https://info.eliassen.com/agile-maturity-matrix David Hanson | ANE Benefits to the team Current Level Impeded (0) In transition (1) Sustainable (2) Agile (3) Ideal (4) Comments Being Agile No understanding of the spirit of Agile Doing the mechanics 80% of the team can explain the benefits of Agile, believe in the benefits of Agile, understand the spirit of Agile. The team is making improvements on a regular basis Working in an Agile manner Actively pursuing new ways of working in an Agile manner Productivity, Quality Morale Blame game, finger pointing, denial, anger, shouting, backstabbing, passive aggressive, turn-over and other behaviors on a regular basis. Desire to go back to the old ways, active resistance to change, scapegoating. There is churn or people are frequently making references to quitting or how much they dislike their work or work environment. There are still elements of previous state, but there is steady progress away from those behaviors, problems are being actively addressed, and there is a general feeling that morale is improving For the most part people are getting along and happy at work. There is very little if any talk about "going back" and it is generally believed that things are either better than before or at least not worse The team generally believes that their work life is significantly better than before. They are happy, engaged, productive, and genuinely enjoy working together. Most team members feel like this is one of the best teams they have ever worked on, they are excited to come in to work and are looking forward to the next day when they leave. Productivity, Quality Tuckman Stage Forming Storming Norming Have been performing consistently for at least 8 weeks Have been performing consistently for the past 6 months Productivity, Quality Working agreement Non-existent Some defacto team norms that are generally recognized, but haven't yet been written down and agreed on by the team. Written down, agreed on by the team, clearly visible in a public area such as the team room. Followed by the team Followed naturally, very short list, highly visible, exceptions are quickly identified and addressed. Team size >20 people on team It is recognized that a smaller team size is needed and there is either a near term plan or the team is actively being reduced in size. < 20 people on the team < 10 people on the team 7 +/- 2 people on the team Productivity, predictability, customer satisfaction, employee Dedicated resources Most team members are on multiple teams or working on multiple projects Most people are 50% dedicated to the team. Nobody is less than 30% dedicated to the team. Most people are 70% dedicated to the team. Nobody is less than 50% dedicated to the team. Most people are 90% dedicated to the team. Nobody is less than 70% dedicated to the team. Most people are 100% dedicated to the team, nobody is less than 60% dedicated to the team. Productivity, employee satisfaction, predictability, customer Continuity / Standing team Constant churn of people on the team and/or team was formed for a single release or a single major initiative and will be disbanded after There is an understanding that this is important, progress is being made, and further steps are being taken to get to the next stage 50%+ of the team is constant over the past 9 months and team has made multiple production releases or worked on multiple major initiatives without being reformed each time. More than 70% of the team is constant over the past 9 months and team has made multiple production releases and worked on multiple major initiatives without being reformed each time. More than 90% of the team has been constant over the past 12 months Productivity, predictability, quality Cross functional A significant portion of what is needed to get the stories to done exists outside of the team Some of the skills necessary to get the stories to done exists outside of the team All of the necessary skills for performing the work exist on the team All of the necessary skills for performing the work exist on the team and there is some cross training of skills All of the necessary skills for performing the work exist on the team and most of the team is cross trained on most of those skills Productivity, responsiveness and time to Collocation Team members have very little proximity to each other. Plans are in place to move team members as close to each other as is currently feasible. Most team members are accessible to any other team member within 30 seconds Most team members sit within hearing distance of each other Most team members are sitting in a team area together. Employee satisfaction, productivity Self organization Most people do not have the ability to choose what they work on, estimates are not determined by the team. Team does not feel like it can make decisions on its own. Some members just want to be told Some of the behaviors from the next stage are being discussed, encouraged, or tried Teams are pulling work from the product backlog themselves, doing their own team-based estimation, choosing what to work on themselves, and using the definitions of ready and done to guide interaction with those outside the team. The roles and responsibilities of the Scrum Master are shared by the entire team and the need for a designated and/or dedicated Scrum Master is significantly reduced. When some members of the team are not present, the team is able to adjust and continue getting stories done. The team is self organized Quality, employee satisfaction Sustainable pace People are tired, irritable, burnt out, working overtime on a regular basis. Current situation is considered business as usual. There is a recognition that the current pace is not sustainable and steps are being taken to improve the situation. Consensus is that the team is working at a pace that is close to sustainable indefinitely, though the workload is still inconsistent with bursts of heavy work loads Consensus is that the team is working at a pace that is sustainable indefinitely, though there is still occasional crunch time Steps are actively taken by the organization and the team to make sure that the team has a high morale, works no more than 40 hours per week, takes all vacation days and is a high performing team Quality, productivity, customer satisfaction Multi-team synchronizati on Synchronization with other teams that are working together toward a common deliverable is either ad- hoc or done primarily through up- front planning and setting iteration content towards a planned integration phase Team synchronizes with other teams using at least one of the methods in level 4 Team uses as least 2 of the methods from level 4 and integrates their work with the whole product at least every 4 weeks Team uses at least 3 of the methods in level 4 or equivalent, and there is little or no pre-planning of iteration content towards a planned integration phase (integration is continuous) Team synchronizes with other teams by having common iteration start/stop dates (or use Kanban), standup-of-standups (or similar), retro-of-retros (or similar), and participates in a whole-product review on a frequent basis. Productivity, Quality Impediments Invisible and/or ignored. Fear of reprisals. Reluctance to raise impediments. Impediments that are raised are not resolved. Raising impediments is actively encouraged and is frequently done. Some impediments are resolved. The team is beginning to see the benefits of this practice and feel comfortable practicing it. Raising impediments is becoming routine and there is a high degree of comfort in doing it. Impediments are usually resolved. Root cause analysis is sometimes performed and there is a growing recognition of the value of raising impediments. Impediment raising and resolution are a cultural norm. Individual and team impediments that can be addressed at those levels are addressed. Root cause analysis is frequently performed and acted on. Root cause analysis and resolution is a cultural norm Predictability, quality, productivity, customer satisfaction Shippability No stories shippable in less than four weeks from ready to done Shippability is measured and visible Team strives for shippability 60% of story points go from ready to done in less than four weeks 90% of story points go from ready to done in less than two weeks Predictability, quality, productivity, customer satisfaction End-to-end cycle time A year or more from concept to ready to release Can get from concept to ready to release in 6 months Can get from concept to ready to release in 3 months Can get from concept to ready to release in weeks Days from concept to ready to release Quality, predictability, productivity, customer satisfaction Product vision Not defined It is written down somewhere or the product owner or similar person knows what it is There is a written definition which is accurate and well known by everyone involved There is a compelling product vision which can be clearly articulated by the product owner or similar person Simple, clear, compelling, everyone involved can articulate it well. Quality, predictability, productivity, employee satisfaction Stories follow INVEST No knowledge of INVEST Team understands INVEST and is starting to follow parts of it on some stories. Following most of INVEST on many stories Following INVEST for most stories Following INVEST for all stories Quality, predictability, productivity, employee satisfaction Definition of ready Does not exist There is an understanding of the need for a definition of ready and/or there is a tacit agreement for the content of one There is a fairly good definition of ready which resulted from the collaboration between multiple members of the team. Definition of ready includes existence of acceptance criteria There is a strong, clear, comprehensive (yet simple) definition of ready which resulted from the collaboration of most of the members, agreement and input from all, and it is publicly posted In place, comprehensive, periodically reviewed and updated, strictly followed Quality, predictability, productivity, customer satisfaction Definition of done Does not exist There is an understanding of the need for a definition of done and/or there is a tacit agreement for the content of one There is a fairly good definition of done which resulted from the collaboration between multiple members of the team There is a strong, clear, comprehensive (yet simple) definition of done which resulted from the collaboration of most of the members, agreement and input from all, and it is publically posted In place, comprehensive, periodically reviewed and updated, strictly followed Quality, predictability, employee satisfaction, productivity Story size Random The team is starting to see the relationship between small stories and success. Team has a rule of thumb encouraging small stories Most stories can be done in a week or less Most stories shippable in 1-3 days Quality, predictability, employee satisfaction, productivity Backlog grooming Stories are rarely ready to be worked on prior to the team starting to work on those stories It is understood that consistent and frequent grooming is an important goal and steps are being taken to get there. 60%+ of the time there are stories ready when needed There are usually just enough stories ready There are always more than enough stories ready Quality, productivity, customer satisfaction Stories use vertical slices No knowledge of vertical slices or they can't be done due to external constraints Using vertical slices for an increasing percentage of stories Using vertical slices for 50%+ of stories Using vertical slices for 70%+ of stories Using vertical slices for 90%+ of stories Employee satisfaction, productivity, quality, predictability Work in progress Amount of WIP unknown. No knowledge of one piece flow (e.g. small batch size) WIP is tracked and visible. One piece flow is understood and there is interest in doing it. Most of the time, members are working on 2 or more stories at a time. One piece flow is actively being pursued, WIP limits are set, most of the time members are working on at most 2 stories and usually only one. Sometimes, multiple members are working on the same story. WIP limits are set and respected. Most of the time members are only working on one story and frequently more than one member is working on the same story. Only as much work that can be done simultaneously without increasing the cycle time of any of the work in progress. Most of the time multiple members are working on the same story. Employee satisfaction, productivity, quality, customer satisfaction Standups, check-ins, huddles, or similar. Not being held Being held regularly and on their way to stage 2. 80% of the team shows up every day, the 3 questions are covered in less than 20 minutes, real impediments are raised on a regular basis, participants stay for the entire meeting, the team understands that the meeting is for them, not the Scrum Master, manager, or project manager. Daily, short, effective. Runs well with or without the presence of the Scrum Master. Team also does an on- the-spot analysis of how things are going and takes corrective action if needed. Positively adapted to the needs of the team Employee satisfaction, productivity, quality Retrospective s Not being held Held, but not regularly or not frequently enough Held regularly, well attended, produces action items. Action items are frequently acted on Held regularly, well attended, enjoyable, produces action items that are recorded and generally acted on Creatively run, format varied from time to time, forward looking, often produces breakthrough ideas that are acted on and produce results Predictability, employee satisfaction, customer All work based on user stories Not being followed It is understood that it is important to use user stories for all work and steps are being taken to get there. User stories exist for 50%+ of the work, but still using other artifacts for some work or translating some user stories to other artifacts for some work. User stories exist for 80%+ of work, but still using other artifacts for some work or translating some user stories to other artifacts for some work. All work based on user stories Predictability, employee satisfaction Estimation Ad-hoc, done by a few people, based on hours, or entirely task- based Done on a regular basis The whole team participates in estimation, real story points are used. Some members still thinking in hours. Still a fair amount of focus on tasks. 90+% of the time there is no discussion of hours or tasks Consistently done by the whole team thinking in story points. No discussion of hours or tasks. Customer satisfaction, employee satisfaction, responsiveness and time to market Progress tracking Not implemented Progress is tracked and known using burnup, burndown, CFD or similar method and sometimes iinfluences behavior of the team. Progress is tracked and frequently influences the behavior of the team Progress information usually influences the behavior of the team The team proactively uses progress information to head off potential problems Customer satisfaction, employee satisfaction, responsiveness and time to market Reviews Not happening, not happening on a regular basis, or happening less often than once in 6 weeks Happening at least once every six weeks, but some or all of the following are happening: not reviewing all stories, ill-prepared to do the review, trying to "sell" what was done as opposed to finding missed expectations and encouraging feedback Happening at least once every four weeks, most stories are reviewed, team is fairly well prepared, feedback is encouraged and incorporated into future stories Reviews are a cultural norm. Every story is reviewed and the team is very well prepared. Active feedback is encouraged, the reviews are well attended and perceived as valuable to stakeholders. The team proactively involves stakeholders on a regular basis and frequently delights stakeholders during reviews. The team and stakeholders work closely together and often discover unexpected value as a result of that interaction. Customer satisfaction, employee satisfaction Architecture Primarily done by designated architects up-front prior to implementation Team starting to work with architects and architects starting to delegate more decisions to the team 50% of architectural decisions made by the team. 50% of architectural decisions made just-in-time 80% of architectural decisions made by the team. 80% of architectural decisions made just-in-time Primarily done on a just-in-time basis by the team in consultation with the architecture team. Quality, predictability, productivity Proximity of testing to implementati on Long after implementation Within eight weeks Mostly within four weeks Mostly within two weeks and mostly before the next story is started For software projects, TDD with UI-based testing done immediately after story is coded Quality, employee satisfaction Holistic testing (sw projects) Different kinds of testing (unit, functional, integration, etc.) all done without coordination There is a recognition that holistic testing is a good thing and steps are being taken to move towards it. For 50%+ of user stories, the developers and testers coordinated their testing efforts For 80%+ of user stories, the developers and testers coordinated their testing efforts All testing coordinated ahead of coding and based around user stories Quality, predictability, productivity, responsiveness and time to market Test automation (sw projects) Not being used 30%+ code coverage via test automation and plans are in place to increase this level 50%+ code coverage for all new user stories via test automation 50%+ code coverage via test automation 90% + code coverage via test automation Quality, predictability, productivity, responsiveness and time to market Continuous Integration (sw projects) Not implemented Set up, but manually run. Failures not fixed right away. Run every hour. Failures fixed fairly quickly. Run every 10 minutes. Drop everything on failures until fixed. Run on every check-in. Quality, predictability, productivity, responsiveness and time to market Unit testing (sw projects) Not being used Some coding involves unit testing. There is an understanding that unit testing produces better code and reduces overall effort All new stories involve some amount of unit testing All new stories involve the responsible amount of unit testing. Unit testing of stories included in the definition of done. Hard to imagine a shop that is better at unit testing. Deep knowledge of the latest unit testing techniques, using mock objects, etc. Quality, predictability, productivity, responsiveness and time to market Refactoring (sw projects) Not understood and/or not being done Some understanding of single responsibility principle (SRP) and open/closed principle. Some amount of refactoring done as needed when implementing stories. Refactoring around SRP and O/C principle. Doing the appropriate amount of refactoring with most user stories Deep understanding of refactoring. True refactoring is a cultural norm. Hard to imagine a shop that is better at refactoring. Deep knowledge of the latest refactoring techniques. Refactoring to patterns. Copyright 2011-2013 Eliassen Group, All Rights Reserved Agile Process Mechanics Agile Engineering Practices Product Team Structure Team Dynamics Team Level Maturity Matrix Scrum Team A Date 1 60% 2.0 Recommendations: Team B 60% 2.0 highlight strength to reinforce highlight opportunity for improvement 60% 2.0 60% 2.0 60% 2.0 60% 2.0 60% 2.0 Metric Description Evaluation Definition Strength Weakness Evaluation Being Agile (Shu, Ha, Ri) rejecting rules > accepting rules > following rules > bending rules > being rules; progress through each phase skipping only first Impeded rejecting, impeded or not started 0% 0 highlight strength or reason for higher score highlight weakness or reason for lower score Impeded Tuckman Stages forming > storming > norming > performing > outperforming; deforming and reforming possible; poorly formed team may not progress Transitioning accepting and learning 40% 1 Impeded Self- organized, Self-managed not externally managed; not PO or SM managed; PO explains what, not how; SM owns blocks, not work; members pull work, leads do not push work Sustainable practicing and refining 70% 2 Impeded Working Agreement defined, known, visible, followed, refined; short, meaningful; principles over policies; how more than what; formed by team, monitored by SM Agile skilled and adaptive 90% 3 Impeded Transparent, Inspect & Adapt transparent w/ team, management, business; regularly inspect & adapt internal & external, what & how; continuously improving Advanced innovating and influential 100% 4 Impeded Scrum Values members display commitment, focus, openness, respect, courage first w/ PO, SM, team and then w/ external resources, management, business NA not applicable or not assessed Impeded Product Owner business-sponsored, empowered, not manager; single, dedicated, available, colocated; sets priorities, clarifies requirements, knows domain Impeded rejecting, impeded or not started 0% 0 Transitioning Scrum Master IT-sponsored, servant leader, coach & mentor, not manager; dedicated, active learner, owns process, resolves blocks, knows Agile, interfaces w/ IT Transitioning accepting and learning 40% 1 Transitioning Development Team 4 to 9 members, dedicated, stable, cross-functional, entire vertical, continuously improve, volunteer, cross- train, blending development-tester roles Sustainable practicing and refining 70% 2 Transitioning Business Users early adopters attend reviews, provide feedback, willingly engaged, value incremental delivery, self prioritize, may attend planning or grooming Agile skilled and adaptive 90% 3 Transitioning Shared Resources kanban methodology, consistently staffed, specialized skills, support <6 teams, short lead & cycle time, just-in- time, <10% team effort Advanced innovating and influential 100% 4 Transitioning Management support self-organization, quality focus, long term investments, team goals & reviews; coach & mentor; members report externally NA not applicable or not assessed Transitioning Product Vision & Roadmap vision known and compelling; roadmap outlined, followed and refined; quarterly goals; team understands mission Impeded rejecting, impeded or not started 0% 0 Sustainable Product Backlog couple sprints ready stories; prioritized and evolving; minimum viable increments; reject or defer noise; estimate just enough Transitioning accepting and learning 40% 1 Sustainable Sprint Backlog based on team velocity; defined sprint goal; fixed during sprint; finished end of sprint; tracks everything; limit WIP based on story priority Sustainable practicing and refining 70% 2 Sustainable Sprint Increment shippable & valuable; promoted at least quarterly, best sprintly; acceptance & releases externally managed, mostly automated, or on sprint cadence Agile skilled and adaptive 90% 3 Sustainable User Stories story: independent, negotiable, valuable, estimable, small, testable; acceptance: specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, timebound Advanced innovating and influential 100% 4 Sustainable Definitions of Ready & Done ready and done defined, known, visible, concise, meaningful, followed, honored, refined; formed by team and monitored by scrum master NA not applicable or not assessed Sustainable Team Dynamics Team Structure Product Backlog Agile Ceremonies Agile Processes Team Dynamics Team Structure Product Backlog Agile Ceremonies Agile Processes Engineering Practices Team Structure Team Dynamics Product Backlog TD TS PB Engineering Practices
  • 7. 7 My Scrum Framework Assessment • Starts with the Scrum framework • Adds a simple retrospective • Uses my original ratings David Hanson | ANE 01:12
  • 8. 8 3 Roles Developers Product Owner Scrum Master 5 Events Sprint Sprint Planning Daily Scrum Sprint Review Sprint Retrospective 3 Artifacts with Commitments Product Backlog with Product Goal Sprint Backlog with Sprint Goal Increment with Definition of Done Scrum 3-5-3 Framework David Hanson | Agile Coach 5-7-4….if it was up to me…more later
  • 9. 9 Good – Improve – Ideas Retrospective David Hanson | ANE
  • 10. 10 Ratings Evaluation Score Range Characteristics 0-NA: - - not assessed or not applicable 1-Impeded: 0% 0-30% rejecting or impeded 2-Transitioning: 40% 30-55% accepting and learning 3-Sustainable: 70% 55-75% practicing and refining 4-Agile: 90% 75-90% skilled and adaptive 5-Advanced: 100% 90-100% innovative and influential Trend ↔: steady ↗: improving ↘: worsening ↕: mixed * NA not included in statistics David Hanson | Agile Coach
  • 11. Scrum Framework Assessment Team 2023 Evaluator: Agile Coach, Scrum Master, or Scrum Team 01:12
  • 12. 12 Agile Assessment: Roles Roles Good Improve Idea Assessment Scrum Team: Working Agreement 1-Impeded ↗ Product Owner 2-Transitioning ↔ Team Members 3-Sustainable ↕ Scrum Master 4-Agile ↔ Stakeholders 5-Advanced ↘ David Hanson | Agile Coach
  • 13. 13 Agile Assessment: Events Events Good Improve Idea Assessment Sprint 1-Impeded ↗ Sprint Planning 2-Transitioning ↕ Sprint Tasking* 2-Transitioning ↔ Daily Scrum 3-Sustainable ↕ Sprint Review 4-Agile ↔ Sprint Retrospective 4-Agile ↕ Refinement Activity 5-Advanced ↘ David Hanson | Agile Coach * My term for Sprint Planning Topic 3 (How); too often passed over when planning.
  • 14. 14 Agile Assessment: Artifacts Artifacts: Commitment Good Improve Idea Assessment Product Backlog: Product Goal 2-Transitioning ↔ Sprint Backlog: Sprint Goal 3-Sustainable ↗ Backlog Items: Definition of Ready 3-Sustainable ↘ Sprint Increment: Definition of Done 4-Agile ↕ David Hanson | Agile Coach
  • 15. 15 Key Evaluation Score Range Characteristics 1-Impeded: 0% 0-30% rejecting or impeded 2-Transitioning: 40% 30-55% accepting and learning 3-Sustainable: 70% 55-75% practicing and refining 4-Agile: 90% 75-90% skilled and adaptive 5-Advanced: 100% 90-100% innovative and influential Aggregate score* Team, date: 62.5%, 3.0-Sustainable ↕ Recommended actions: • Role improvement opportunity • Event improvement opportunity • Artifact improvement opportunity * Average (mean) individual scores to get overall score; take most common trend as average (mode) David Hanson | Agile Coach
  • 16. Simple Scaled Assessment Team 2023 Evaluator: Agile Coach, Scrum Master, or Scrum Team 01:12
  • 17. 17 Agile Assessment: Scaling Scaling Good Improve Idea Assessment Scaled Roles 0-NA ↔ Scaled Events 0-NA ↔ Scaled Artifacts 0-NA ↔ SM Cycle 0-NA ↔ PO Cycle 0-NA ↔ Developer Cycle* 0-NA ↔ David Hanson | Agile Coach This simple scaling is intended to be used with Scrum framework assessment for individual teams. Intent is to assess whether the individual team’s needs for scaling are met. *Optional developer cycle intended to assess scaled technology, architecture, infrastructure, operations and design components; not included with Scrum @ Scale.
  • 18. Agile Principles Assessment Organization 2023 Evaluator: Agile Coach, Scrum Master or Leadership 01:12
  • 19. 19 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 process 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 [after over], we value the items [before over] more. We follow these principles: Build projects around motivated individuals; give them the environment and support they need, and trust them to get the job done. Deliver working software frequently, from a couple of weeks to a couple of months, with a preference to the shorter timescale. Business people and developers must work together daily throughout the project. At regular intervals, the team reflects on how to become more effective, then tunes and adjusts its behavior accordingly. Agile processes promote sustainable development; the sponsors, developers, and users should be able to maintain a constant pace indefinitely. Working software is the primary measure of progress. The most efficient and effective method of conveying information to and within a development team is face-to-face conversation. Welcome changing requirements, even late in development; Agile processes harness change for the customer’s competitive advantage. The best architectures, requirements, and designs emerge from self-organizing teams. Simplicity—the art of maximizing the amount of work not done— is essential. Our highest priority is to satisfy the customer through early and continuous delivery of valuable software. Continuous attention to technical excellence and good design enhances agility. Values Principles
  • 20. 20 Agile Principles Customer Focus Principle Good Improve Idea Assessment Satisfy customer through continuous delivery 4-Agile ↔ Harness change for competitive advantage 3-Sustainable ↕ Deliver working software frequently 2-Transitioning ↘ Business and developers work together daily 1-Impeded ↗ Customer leaning principles David Hanson | Agile Coach
  • 21. 21 Agile Principles Management Focus Principle Good Improve Idea Assessment Support and trust motivated individuals 4-Agile ↗ Convey information face-to-face 3-Sustainable ↕ Working software is primary progress 2-Transitioning ↘ Promote sustainable pace indefinitely 1-Impeded ↔ Manager leaning principles David Hanson | Agile Coach
  • 22. 22 Agile Principles Team Focus Principle Good Improve Idea Assessment Continuous attention to excellence and design 4-Agile ↗ Simplicity, maximizing work not done 3-Sustainable ↘ Best emerges from self-organizing teams 2-Transitioning ↕ Team reflects and adjusts behavior 1-Impeded ↔ Team leaning principles David Hanson | Agile Coach
  • 23. 23 Key Evaluation Score Range Characteristics 1-Impeded: 0% 0-30% rejecting or impeded 2-Transitioning: 40% 30-55% accepting and learning 3-Sustainable: 70% 55-75% practicing and refining 4-Agile: 90% 75-90% skilled and adaptive 5-Advanced: 100% 90-100% innovative and influential Aggregate score* Team, date: 50%, 2.5-Transitioning ↕ Recommended actions • Customer focused improvement • Management focused improvement • Team focused improvement Agile Mindset is much harder to adopt than Agile practices; however Agile Mindset is much more consequential David Hanson | Agile Coach
  • 25. Alternative Assessments Zombie Scrum Survey Mountain Goat Elements of Agile Agility Health Radars Kniberg’s Scrum Checklist 01:12
  • 26. 26 Zombie Scrum Survey Mountain Goat Elements of Agile Online Assessments Zombie Scrum Survey is scientific based, aggregates responses for teams, and provides actionable advice. Similarly Mountain Goat’s Elements of Agile will provide a list of actionable advice after responding to 70 questions. David Hanson | ANE
  • 27. 27 Team Agility Team of Teams Agility Agility Health Radars https://agilityhealthradar.com/radars/ David Hanson | ANE Enterprise Agility Individual Role Agility
  • 28. 28 Bottom Line: 3 items Core Scrum: 43 items Recommended: 28 items Scaling: 3 items Positive Indicators: 3 items Total: 80 items Henrik Kniberg’s Scrum Checklist https://scruminc.wpenginepowered.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/scrum-checklist.pdf David Hanson | ANE
  • 29. 29 Scaled Agile Assessment Template Assumes Scrum @ Scale David Hanson | ANE 01:12
  • 30. 30 Minimum viable bureaucracy Lowest decision latency Structure for “linear” scaling Scales Agile by scaling Scrum Less prescriptive, more transformative Product Owner Cycle led by Executive Meta Scrum focused on business, priorities, what Scrum Master Cycle led by Executive Action Team focused on technology, process, how Scrum @ Scale David Hanson | ANE
  • 31. 31 Symbol Description t No Impediments O Minor Impediments, No Measurable Impact ↗ Some Impediments, Situation Improving ↔ Some Impediments, Situation Stable ↘ Some Impediments, Situation Worsening X Major Impediments, Team Totally Blocked Heatmap Key https://marcrodriguezsanz.medium.com/scrum-scales-scaling-heatmap-34b012bb1496 Component Assessment Mega: Organizational Refactoring t PO: Executive Meta Scrum O PO: Strategic Vision O PO: Backlog Prioritization O PO: Backlog Decomposition & Refinement O PO: Release Planning O SM: Executive Action Team ↗↔↘ SM: Continuous Improvement ↗↔↘ SM: Impediment Removal ↗↔↘ SM: Cross-team Coordination ↗↔↘ SM: Delivery ↗↔↘ PO/SM: Team Process X PO/SM: Metrics & Transparency X PO/SM: Product & Release Feedback X PO/SM: Product Increment X
  • 32. 32 Scaled Agile Current State Heatmap Mega Issue, PO Cycle or SM Cycle Component 1st Team 2nd Team 3rd Team Team of Teams Mega: Organizational Refactoring ↘ tO↗↔↘X tO↗↔↘X ↘ PO: Executive Meta Scrum ↔ tO↗↔↘X tO↗↔↘X ↔ PO: Strategic Vision ↔ tO↗↔↘X tO↗↔↘X ↔ PO: Backlog Prioritization ↔ tO↗↔↘X tO↗↔↘X ↗ PO: Backlog Decomposition & Refinement O tO↗↔↘X tO↗↔↘X O PO: Release Planning X tO↗↔↘X tO↗↔↘X X SM: Executive Action Team X tO↗↔↘X tO↗↔↘X X SM: Continuous Improvement ↘ tO↗↔↘X tO↗↔↘X ↔ SM: Impediment Removal ↘ tO↗↔↘X tO↗↔↘X X SM: Cross-team Coordination t tO↗↔↘X tO↗↔↘X t SM: Delivery ↔ tO↗↔↘X tO↗↔↘X ↘ PO/SM: Team Process O tO↗↔↘X tO↗↔↘X O PO/SM: Metrics & Transparency ↗ tO↗↔↘X tO↗↔↘X ↘ PO/SM: Product & Release Feedback X tO↗↔↘X tO↗↔↘X X PO/SM: Product Increment X tO↗↔↘X tO↗↔↘X X Symbol Description t No Impediments O Minor Impediments, No Measurable Impact ↗ Some Impediments, Situation Improving ↔ Some Impediments, Situation Stable ↘ Some Impediments, Situation Worsening X Major Impediments, Team Totally Blocked
  • 33. 33 Strategic Importance t O ↗ ↔ ↘ X Highest Metrics & Transparency Higher Strategic Vision Executive Action Team High Executive Meta Scrum Organizational Refactoring Product Increment Moderate Team Process Continuous Improvement Impediment Removal Low Cross-team Coordination Backlog Prioritization Delivery Lower Backlog Decomposition & Refinement Product & Release Feedback Lowest Release Planning Focus on the top right first Ideally should be done collectively Could be repeated at the individual team level Viewpoints may differ Transformation Backlog Prioritization Symbol Description t No Impediments O Minor Impediments, No Measurable Impact ↗ Some Impediments, Situation Improving ↔ Some Impediments, Situation Stable ↘ Some Impediments, Situation Worsening X Major Impediments, Team Totally Blocked
  • 34. Kanban and XP simple retrospective approach easily extended 01:12
  • 36. 36 Service to… Good Improve Ideas Assessment Service to… Good Improve Ideas Assessment Service to Scrum Team Service to Product Owner Service to Organization Service to Self Scrum Master Service Assessment David Hanson | Agile Coach
  • 37. 37 Objective: what Key Results: - how - how - how Outcome: why Timeline: when Quarterly Reviews: where Service to Scrum Team: who Service to Product Owner: who Objective: what Key Results: - how - how - how Outcome: why Timeline: when Quarterly Reviews: where Scrum Master Service Goals SMART: specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, timebound David Hanson | Agile Coach
  • 38. 38 Objective: what Key Results: - how - how - how Outcome: why Timeline: when Quarterly Reviews: where Service to Organization: who Service to Self: who Objective: what Key Results: - how - how - how Outcome: why Timeline: when Quarterly Reviews: where Scrum Master Service Goals SMART: specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, timebound David Hanson | Agile Coach
  • 39. 39 Early on, my attempts at an Agile maturity matrix captured my knowledge. Now, my attempt is to provide a framework for teams to chart their own course. Perhaps, a reflection of my evolution from facilitator to trainer to mentor to coach. Myself Your thoughts What was valuable for you here? What was missing? What would you like to see next? Reflection Please don’t forget to provide your feedback on the session; thank you! David Hanson | ANE 01:12
  • 40. 40 David Hanson | ANE 101 David Hanson dphanson63@yahoo.com https://www.linkedin.com/in/david-hanson/ https://www.slideshare.net/DavidHanson5 ANE 101 Survey
  • 41. Appendix: Sample assessment for my best team from 2017 My original organizational and leadership assessments Sample Excel radar plot visualization XP adoption planning game Kanban maturity assessment template 01:12
  • 42. Scrum Framework Sample Assessment My Best Team 2017 01:12
  • 43. 43 Agile Assessment: Roles Roles Good Improve Idea Assessment Scrum Team: Working Agreement Highest profile project, collocated Working agreement and duration together Embrace XP practices 3-Sustainable ↗ Product Owner Lean certified, Agile mindset; makes rounds, strong vision for product Reports to IT manager, not business manager Move to same floor as users; change reporting to support manager 4-Agile ↗ Team Members Do not report to PO or SM; good cross-functional mix; coders pair w/ testers Minimal TDD; afraid to commit so ask for spikes, then say done Swap out developer that liked to work solo in silo 3-Sustainable ↔ Scrum Master Natural; experience as BA, QA; quality focused; makes rounds, gets involved Influence with management and clients Find opportunities to showcase talent with management 4-Agile ↗ Stakeholders Engaged, available to PO, analysts; embrace incremental delivery Management discouraged engagement between users and team Invite users to reviews with full team or invite full team to reviews with users 3-Sustainable ↕ David Hanson | Agile Coach
  • 44. 44 Agile Assessment: Events Events Good Improve Idea Assessment Sprint 9 day sprint; every sprint usable value; Scrumban 3 sprint release cycle; goal not explicitly stated Release every sprint 5-Advanced ↔ Sprint Planning Serious, focused, efficient, repetitive Goal might be implicit, not discussed Propose goal, then engage team in selection of stories 4-Agile ↔ Sprint Tasking Done on first day Done in pairs or individually Include time for tasking in 2nd half of planning 3-Sustainable ↔ Daily Scrum Stood; flagged blocks, issues on whiteboard; 15m Could be a bit more aggressive resolving blocks SoS 3 times a week and EAT 2 times a week 4-Agile ↔ Sprint Review Demoed every story, every acceptance no exceptions 2nd higher level review with users w/o team members Invite user to team review; invite team to user review 4-Agile ↕ Sprint Retrospective Entire team engaged; actionable items identified Retros could be more varied and more interactive Assess team happiness 3-Sustainable ↔ Refinement Activity Quick, effective, efficient; everyone spoke up Overuse of spikes Try actual poker planning cards 4-Agile ↔ David Hanson | Agile Coach
  • 45. 45 Agile Assessment: Artifacts Artifacts: Commitment Good Improve Idea Assessment Product Backlog: Product Goal Extensive backlog, well- ordered, known roadmap Product vision known but implied; too much clutter Embrace story mapping w/ users and team 3-Sustainable ↔ Sprint Backlog: Sprint Goal Deliverable value every sprint; usually all done Unstated goal Make goal explicit 3-Sustainable ↔ Backlog Items: Definition of Ready Extremely disciplined; MoSCoW acceptance Too much effort estimating epics Defer or reject 50% of product backlog 4-Agile ↕ Sprint Increment: Definition of Done Extremely disciplined; done was done Accepted UAT as post sprint activity Focus on CI/CD and test automation 4-Agile ↔ David Hanson | Agile Coach
  • 46. 46 Agile Assessment: Scaling Scaling Good Improve Idea Assessment Scaled Roles Visionary CPO and CSM; scaled DBE and architect; common “house rules” Reporting relationship not ideal; collaboration with data and support teams Recruit UX lead; distribute database staff across teams 4-Agile ↕ Scaled Events SoS, MetaScrum; Reverse Scrum w/ user base; cross- team knowledge share Lacked EAT and EMS for team of team of teams Training in Scrum at Scale (2017: not yet available) 5-Advanced ↔ Scaled Artifacts Common backlog & metrics; custom tooling; integrated product release One team gamed metrics, leading to misdirected questions Embrace Agile & DevOps tool suite; cut backlog 4-Agile ↕ SM Cycle SoS, CoP, delivery, metrics; Scrumban, shared resource Kanban, led CI/CD Lacked true EAT to address org impediments Training for management; streamline status reports 3-Sustainable ↗ PO Cycle Roadmap, decomposition, release, metrics, feedback More feedback on usage to drive priorities Vision known but not stated 3-Sustainable ↗ David Hanson | Agile Coach
  • 47. 47 Key Evaluation Score Range Characteristics 1-Impeded: 0% 0-30% rejecting or impeded 2-Transitioning: 40% 30-55% accepting and learning 3-Sustainable: 70% 55-75% practicing and refining 4-Agile: 90% 75-90% skilled and adaptive 5-Advanced: 100% 90-100% innovative and influential Aggregate score Team, date: 82%, 3.7-Agile ↗, 2017 Recommended actions: • Role improvement opportunity: embrace XP practices, hire accordingly • Event improvement opportunity: set goal to release every sprint • Artifact improvement opportunity: leverage story mapping to engage users and team • Scaling improvement opportunity: training on, then not yet version 1, Scrum at Scale David Hanson | Agile Coach
  • 48. More of My Originals 01:12
  • 49. 49 Organizational Assessment Leadership Assessment My Original Organizational and Leadership Assessments Inspired by Eliassen’s organizational maturity matrix and Sally Elatta’s individual role assessment David Hanson | Agile Coach Leadership Attribute Leadership Description Overall Assessment 75% 50% Shared Vision what: compelling, shared, collaborative Sustainable practicing and refining 70% Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Transitioning Implementation Strategy how: compelling, shared, collaborative Sustainable practicing and refining 70% Sustainable practicing and refining 70% Sustainable Business Outcome why: compelling, shared, collaborative Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Impeded Success Metrics measure value and growth Impeded rejecting or impeded 0% Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Impeded Agile Principles embraces Agile values & principles Advanced innovating and influential 100% Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Impeded Team Design cross-functional, fully-dedicated; scaled Agile skilled and adaptive 90% Sustainable practicing and refining 70% Impeded Clear Priorities ordered, balanced, transparent, known Sustainable practicing and refining 70% Sustainable practicing and refining 70% Transitioning Acceptance Criteria specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, timed Agile skilled and adaptive 90% Sustainable practicing and refining 70% Transitioning Enables Focus limit WIP, minimize distractions Agile skilled and adaptive 90% Sustainable practicing and refining 70% Impeded Engagement hoping > telling > selling > participating > delegating Agile skilled and adaptive 90% Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Transitioning Develop People 1-on-1s, feedback, coaching, delegating; scaling Agile skilled and adaptive 90% Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Impeded Build Teams high-performing, self-organized, stable Sustainable practicing and refining 70% Impeded rejecting or impeded 0% Impeded Lean Practioner map value stream, eliminate waste, optimize whole Agile skilled and adaptive 90% Sustainable practicing and refining 70% Impeded Organizational Obstacles identify, remove; courageous, influential Sustainable practicing and refining 70% Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Transitioning Customer Focus knows customer, domain, business value Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Impeded rejecting or impeded 0% Sustainable Model Culture demonstrates desired culture Advanced innovating and influential 100% Sustainable practicing and refining 70% Impeded Change Leader challenges status quo; knows best practices Agile skilled and adaptive 90% Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Impeded Servant Leader serves teams and direct reports; shares power Sustainable practicing and refining 70% Sustainable practicing and refining 70% Transitioning Seeks Feedback eagerly seeks and willingly receives feedback Sustainable practicing and refining 70% Sustainable practicing and refining 70% Sustainable Coach & Mentor coach for team goal; mentor for individual career Agile skilled and adaptive 90% Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Transitioning Character Leader 1 Leader 2 Leader 3 Vision Execution Value Attribute Description Org A Date 1 30% Org A Date 2 60% Org B Date 1 20% Org B Date 2 Culture ownership culture; collaborative; supports measured risks & transparency Sustainable practicing and refining 70% Sustainable practicing and refining 70% Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Transitioning accepting and learning Agile Values organization supports Agile values & principles Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Sustainable practicing and refining 70% Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Impeded rejecting or impeded Lean Principles client focus; continuous improvement; maximize value; eliminate waste Sustainable practicing and refining 70% Agile skilled and adaptive 90% Sustainable practicing and refining 70% Sustainable practicing and refining Vision clear, compelling, shared vision w/ implementation strategy Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Transitioning accepting and learning Goals SMART goals in support of vision; limited in number; assessed quarterly Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Agile skilled and adaptive 90% Impeded rejecting or impeded 0% Impeded rejecting or impeded Structure stable, cross-functional teams supporting product delivery Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Agile skilled and adaptive 90% Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Sustainable practicing and refining Funding funding adjusted quarterly based on metrics; deliver value quarterly Impeded rejecting or impeded 0% Impeded rejecting or impeded 0% Impeded rejecting or impeded 0% Impeded rejecting or impeded Projects limit projects in progress; 1 team no more than 1 project; prioritized queue Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Sustainable practicing and refining 70% Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Impeded rejecting or impeded Metrics metrics track value and growth; funding and rewards based on metrics; visible Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Sustainable practicing and refining 70% Impeded rejecting or impeded 0% Transitioning accepting and learning Rewards compensation based on team performance and project delivery Impeded rejecting or impeded 0% Impeded rejecting or impeded 0% Impeded rejecting or impeded 0% Impeded rejecting or impeded Space physical & virtual space supports team & peer collaboration; video conference rooms Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Sustainable practicing and refining 70% Impeded rejecting or impeded 0% Transitioning accepting and learning Tools integrated continuous integration and Agile collaboration tools widely used Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Sustainable practicing and refining 70% Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Transitioning accepting and learning Infrastructure infrastructure as code supports proper sub environments & developer toolsets Impeded rejecting or impeded 0% Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Impeded rejecting or impeded 0% Transitioning accepting and learning DevOps DevOps team & community to support continuous integration & delivery Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Sustainable practicing and refining 70% Impeded rejecting or impeded 0% Transitioning accepting and learning Learning knowledge sharing activities and training readily available and supported Impeded rejecting or impeded 0% Agile skilled and adaptive 90% Impeded rejecting or impeded 0% Transitioning accepting and learning Adoption genuine adoption widespread; services include launch, scaling, assessment, CI Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Impeded rejecting or impeded 0% Impeded rejecting or impeded Governance Agile governance for Scrum and Kanban defined, followed, audited; just enough Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Sustainable practicing and refining 70% Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Sustainable practicing and refining Scaling Agile scaling approach and support available; actively implemented Impeded rejecting or impeded 0% Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Sustainable practicing and refining Communities various communities of practice where best practices shared Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Agile skilled and adaptive 90% Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Sustainable practicing and refining Impediments organizational obstacles raised and addressed at multiple levels Impeded rejecting or impeded 0% Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Transitioning accepting and learning Business trained in Agile and support activities; sponsor true product owners Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Impeded rejecting or impeded 0% Impeded rejecting or impeded Executive trained in Agile, set Agile goals, allocate budget, recognize improvement Impeded rejecting or impeded 0% Sustainable practicing and refining 70% Impeded rejecting or impeded 0% Impeded rejecting or impeded Management trained in Agile, define Agile objectives, remove obstacles, monitor progress Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Impeded rejecting or impeded 0% Impeded rejecting or impeded Team Managers managers external to Scrum team; actively coach & mentor Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Sustainable practicing and refining 70% Impeded rejecting or impeded 0% Impeded rejecting or impeded Leadership organization supports leadership at all levels; teams trusted to self-organize Impeded rejecting or impeded 0% Sustainable practicing and refining 70% Transitioning accepting and learning 40% Transitioning accepting and learning Cultural Organization Execution Process Management
  • 50. 50 Leverage Excel radar plots to visualize maturity for team of teams or for one team over time Radar Plot Visualization Example above from my original template David Hanson | Agile Coach
  • 52. XPAdoption Stories 52 As an owner, we practice System Metaphor to communicate ideas about code clearly. As a team, we practice Planning Game to schedule the most important work. As an owner, we practice Sustainable Pace to go home tired, but not exhausted. As a team, we practice On-siteCustomer to address user concerns accurately and directly. As a pair, we practice Refactoring to find the code’s optimal design. As a team and a pair, we practice Test First to prove that the code works as it should. As a pair, we practice Pair Programming to spread knowledge, experience, and ideas. As an owner, we practice Continuous Integration to reduce the impact of adding new features. As a team, we practice Small Releases to return the customer’s investment often. As an owner, we practice CollectiveOwnership to share responsibility for code and design. As an owner, we practice Coding Standards to communicate ideas clearly through code. As a team, we practice Simple Design to produce software that’s easy to change. As anAgile team, we adopt XP Practices to deliver higher value, at lower cost, with shorter timelines, while maintaining quality.
  • 53. XPAdoption Planning Game 53 System Metaphor Planning Game Sustainable Pace Should On-siteCustomer 1 Estimate Must Refactoring 2 Estimate Must Test First 5 (split) Guess Pair Programming Continuous Integration Should Small Releases 2 Known Less Certain Effort Risk More Certain Lower Story Value Higher Could CollectiveOwnership 1 Known Coding Standards Could Simple Design 3 Guess Value XP Practice Effort Risk Must/Should/Could XP Practice 1/2/3 Known/Estimate/Guess Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4
  • 54. Kanban Maturity Assessment Team 2023 Evaluator: Agile Coach, Scrum Master, or Scrum Team 01:12
  • 55. 55 Kanban Assessment: Principles* Principles Good Improve Idea Assessment Start Where You Are 4-Agile ↔ Respect Current Process and Roles 3-Sustainable ↕ Agree to Change 2-Transitioning ↘ Distribute Leadership 1-Impeded ↗ David Hanson | Agile Coach *Evaluation on the principles optional
  • 56. 56 Kanban Assessment: Core Practices Practices Good Improve Idea Assessment Visualize Work 4-Agile ↘ Limit WIP 3-Sustainable ↕ Manage Flow 2-Transitioning ↗ David Hanson | Agile Coach Primary Focus
  • 57. 57 Kanban Assessment: Extended Practices Practices Good Improve Idea Assessment Explicit Process 4-Agile ↔ Improve Empirically 3-Sustainable ↕ Establish Cadence 2-Transitioning ↘ Regular Feedback 1-Impeded ↗ David Hanson | Agile Coach Secondary Focus
  • 58. 58 Key Evaluation Score Range Characteristics 0-NA: - - not assessed or not applicable 1-Impeded: 0% 0-30% rejecting or impeded 2-Transitioning: 40% 30-55% accepting and learning 3-Sustainable: 70% 55-75% practicing and refining 4-Agile: 90% 75-90% skilled and adaptive 5-Advanced: 100% 90-100% innovative and influential Trends: ↗ improving; ↔ steady; ↘ worsening; ↕ mixed Team score: 54.5%, 2.6-Transitioning ↕, May 2023 Actions Note: individual assessments will vary; the score is less important than noting what’s going well, where can improve, and what actions can be taken. David Hanson | Agile Coach
  • 59. Scrum Framework Assessment Room Exercise June 2023 Evaluator: 101 Participants
  • 60. 60 Scrum Framework Assessment: Roles Roles Good Improve Idea Assessment Scrum Team: Working Agreement 1 2 3 4 5 ↔ ↕ ↗ ↘ Product Owner 1 2 3 4 5 ↔ ↕ ↗ ↘ Team Members 1 2 3 4 5 ↔ ↕ ↗ ↘ Scrum Master 1 2 3 4 5 ↔ ↕ ↗ ↘ Stakeholders 1 2 3 4 5 ↔ ↕ ↗ ↘ David Hanson | ANE
  • 61. 61 Scrum Framework Assessment: Events Events Good Improve Idea Assessment Sprint 1 2 3 4 5 ↔ ↕ ↗ ↘ Sprint Planning 1 2 3 4 5 ↔ ↕ ↗ ↘ Sprint Tasking 1 2 3 4 5 ↔ ↕ ↗ ↘ Daily Scrum 1 2 3 4 5 ↔ ↕ ↗ ↘ Sprint Review 1 2 3 4 5 ↔ ↕ ↗ ↘ Sprint Retrospective 1 2 3 4 5 ↔ ↕ ↗ ↘ Refinement Activity 1 2 3 4 5 ↔ ↕ ↗ ↘ David Hanson | ANE
  • 62. 62 Scrum Framework Assessment: Artifacts Artifacts: Commitment Good Improve Idea Assessment Product Backlog: Product Goal 1 2 3 4 5 ↔ ↕ ↗ ↘ Sprint Backlog: Sprint Goal 1 2 3 4 5 ↔ ↕ ↗ ↘ Backlog Items: Definition of Ready 1 2 3 4 5 ↔ ↕ ↗ ↘ Sprint Increment: Definition of Done 1 2 3 4 5 ↔ ↕ ↗ ↘ David Hanson | ANE
  • 63. 63 Key Evaluation Score Range Characteristics 1-Impeded: 0% 0-30% rejecting or impeded 2-Transitioning: 40% 30-55% accepting and learning 3-Sustainable: 70% 55-75% practicing and refining 4-Agile: 90% 75-90% skilled and adaptive 5-Advanced: 100% 90-100% innovative and influential Aggregate score* Date: average rating and trend Improvement opportunities • Role: • Event: • Artifact: * Average (mean) individual scores to get overall score; take most common trend as average (mode) David Hanson | ANE

Editor's Notes

  1. The Eliassen ratings also included a variant for organizational agility. My revision in the second approach included a variant for organizational agility and added a leadership agility assessment.
  2. Frustrated and demotivated novice Scrum masters and team members. Confused and misinterpreted novice Scrum masters and team members. More likely content if novice or more likely critical if expert. Often time-consuming and frequently discarded or discontinued.
  3. Compare team over time or across teams. See how my recent teams compare to my past teams. To capture my frustration, perhaps in a constructive way. Hopefully to motivate the team to improve over time. What’s best way to motivate individuals or teams? Give them your ideas or help them find their own ideas?
  4. Eliassen’s matrix author listed as Damon Poole
  5. What else? Scrum Team Backlog Refinement Backlog Item
  6. Characteristic descriptions don’t capture reverting to past anti-patterns, so a team that was sustainable could revert to transitioning (not accepting, not learning), and may end up impeded (rejecting). Some teams stall out at sustainable at least for certain practices. As coach, my goal is usually to get teams to sustainable, before moving on. Reserve advanced for teams that master Agile and then begin experimenting past the current best practices, as well as begin training or sharing with the broader organization or community.
  7. If your organization doesn’t adopt working agreements, consider Scrum Values instead.
  8. Planning and Tasking covers what was formerly called Planning I and Planning II in the 2017 Scrum Guide
  9. TBD
  10. Alternate evaluation for Scrum @ Scale exists based on SM and PO Cycle components.
  11. I use this for assessing the organization or for team’s that claim to be Agile but clearly don’t follow Scrum or Kanban as intended.
  12. First column are principles focused on the business, second column focused on management, third column the developers.
  13. Guessing others might have also tried a 3-5-3 Scrum Framework retrospective. What do you think, might this be better than the alternatives? Guessing 1/3rd think “that’s it”, 1/3rd say “already do something similar”, 1/3rd think “why didn’t I think of that”.
  14. Zombie Scrum recommended actions felt more nuanced. Mountain Goat recommended actions felt a bit more standard category.
  15. Sally Elatta
  16. Three changes to online version: Removed Mega: Prioritization, since repetitive with Backlog Prioritization Replaced Mega: Working Product Every Sprint with missing component Product Increment Split Continuous Improvement and Impediment Removal
  17. More commonly used for each participant’s evaluation with aggregate instead of each team and team of teams aggregate. Prioritization arguably redundant with Backlog Prioritization Replaced Working Product Every Sprint with Product Increment which was missing from original Heat Map material Split Continuous Improvement and Impediment Removal
  18. Space-boxing; only 7 can be in any one column; only 6 can be in any one row; helps enforce prioritization. Online examples are missing Product Increment and skip “Mega” issues such as Organizational Refactoring.
  19. OKROs: OKRs extended to include outcome
  20. Do a self assessment and a coach’s assessment
  21. Planning and Tasking covers what was formerly called Planning I and Planning II in the 2017 Scrum Guide
  22. Assess how scaling supported the single team. Not used to assess the team of teams.
  23. On back of card, outline acceptance criteria for verifying practice adoption.
  24. Coach reviews XP practices with developers including the purpose of each practice and acceptance tests Developers estimate relative effort to adopt each practice: 1, 2, or 3 (perhaps weeks or iterations) Customer (Coach) assesses value of each practice: must, should, or could Developers assess risk (confidence) related to effort as known, estimate, or guess For each column move Musts up and Coulds down * For each row move Guesses left and Knowns right ** Repeat steps 4 and 5 until nothing moves Development sets velocity (suggest 4-8 points per release; suggest setting adoption “release” to one quarter) Coach selects stories from top left to fill first, second, third quarter * Value tiebreaker: for Musts, move less certain risk up; for Shoulds, move lower effort up; for Coulds move more certain risk up ** Risk tiebreaker: move Musts left and Coulds right
  25. Consider using 0-NA for first two principles once team is established. Alternatively reset “starting point” every quarter or year, depending on frequency of assessments.
  26. Planning and Tasking covers what was formerly called Planning I and Planning II in the 2017 Scrum Guide
  27. The Eliassen ratings also included a variant for organizational agility. My revision in the second approach included a variant for organizational agility and added a leadership agility assessment.