1 / 32

PrestigeSoft

PrestigeSoft . PrestigeSoft is $7m US-based company Within the PrestigeSoft’s niche, time-to-market is very critical Entire programming unit in Sofia, Bulgaria Develops low-end, low-cost consumer software packages Most projects are completed on time for market. PrestigeSoft. Success factors

metea
Download Presentation

PrestigeSoft

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. PrestigeSoft • PrestigeSoft is $7m US-based company • Within the PrestigeSoft’s niche, time-to-market is very critical • Entire programming unit in Sofia, Bulgaria • Develops low-end, low-cost consumer software packages • Most projects are completed on time for market

  2. PrestigeSoft • Success factors • Learn how to work with each other • The products themselves are very small • Ability to take advantage of the ten-hour time difference between the US and Bulgaria for rapid iterations

  3. Orchestral Technologies • A major US-based company that specializes in graphical software • Have joint venture in Moscow, Russia • Moscow staff perform the traditional job of offshore programming. • Write codes from spec and develops small components for larger products in California • Expanded to St. Petersburg

  4. Orchestral Technology • Business Developments • The Russian site was tasked to developed a large (one million lines of code) brand new product (release 1.0) • A global team was lunched into this large scale collaborative project with sites • St. Petersburg (Russia), California (headquarters), Denver (US, consultant), Regina (Canada). • Design was shared by California and Moscow • Code was shipped back and forth (across 11 time zone) everyday during the coding phase

  5. Orchestral Technology • Factors • Software configuration team was set up at each site • A policy was instituted whereby code would lock up at 8pm at either California or Russian offices and nothing further could be added to it. • Transfer of the codes after an hour by satellite to the other team • Programmers coordinate code sharing via detailed, formalized notes to each other • Programmers don’t work on exactly same code

  6. Orchestral Technology • Result • Completed on time • At a lower cost • No immediate follow-up bug release • Acquired Software African development site was added to the setup

  7. IBM Global Development • Five-site, Five-country, development project with the round-the-clock aspirations • The project involved developing small components for the IBM VisualAge application development environment • The idea was to develop many small components called – beans, where each bean will be developed rapidly • Fatware vs. component-based beans • The IBM JavaBeans was envisioned to be plugged together and used to develop functional business applications

  8. IBM Global Development • Organization Structure • Multi-sites with four equal size units of 31 professionals • Joint venture of Tsinghua University in Beijin, China • IBM Tata joint venture in Bangalore, India, later wholly owned IBM Global services – India. • IBM joint venture firm with the institute of Computer Science in Minsk, Balarus, and • Privately owned SWH Group in Riga, Latvia. • Why 31 developers at each site?

  9. IBM Global Development • Phalanx • “Close formation of specimen carrying overlapping shields” • A close-knit or compact body of people, especially, one unified by a common goal” • Example, a bone of a finger.

  10. IBM Global Development • IBM Phalanx (Team Structure) • In each site there where five core specialist area of five people each in such areas • The vision was to create a reusable team structure • The central group is in Settle, US with 24-person to: • Initiate, review, allocate, and provide specialized services • The Settle team played the dual role of both architect and users. • Project management and other services were also centralized in the US site including QA and user interface specialists.

  11. JavaBeans project Riga: SWH Group HQ Raleigh, North Carolina, USA Beijing: Spin-off with Tsinghua University Minsk: Joint venture with Inst. of C.S. Bangalore: Joint venture with Tata Source: Erran Carmel

  12. IBM Global Development • Development Method • Follow-the-Sun • Product specification and development was to be iterative, until completion • US command unit would set up a work specification for each JavaBean and assigned it to an offshore site, to be turn into code by the end of the day and ship it back to the US for successive rounds of review and feedback • After reviewing and testing the code the US unit would specify new changes and send those back across the ocean for another iteration • This was to done on daily bases

  13. IBM Global Development • Challenges and Outcome • Daily turn around was too hard to achieve on daily bases for both sides • Changed to two code drops from each remote site per week • About half a dozen beans were assigned to each site • So while Beijing is waiting for the review and feedback on component #1, they worked on beans #2..#6. • At steady state, the project was juggling about two dozen beans between the hub and the remote sites

  14. IBM Global Development • Changes in Team Structure • The original project champion (US-based) left in mid 1997. • The new project manager saw the entire project in a different way. That: • A true global development should not be strongly centralized but more more of a network organization structure • In which global partners coordinate more activities among themselves rather than through a central unit • A large control unit in the US defeats the purpose of a low-cost development project

  15. Changes • The US command unit was moved from Settle to IBM development center in Raleigh, North Carolina • Reduced from 24 people to only 3 (Global manager, budget officer and a chief technical architect) • US site is now a project management unit responsible for oversight and some review function • With the new structure the non-US sites began to initiate the projects

  16. IBM Global Development • Results and Challenges • The US hub’s overall workload was reduced significantly • The Minsk site became responsible for the acceptance testing and integration for all beans (in addition to some of its own development) • Hub delegate tasks to other sites, and follow-the-sun-was de-emphasized and no longer practical. • Occasionally time zone advantages still took place.

  17. IBM Global Development • Result and challenges • Simultaneous development in five nations with inexperienced partners. • Project objective was to build leading –edge technology (i.e. software components) while experimenting with a new management model • JavaBeans are small components that are easier to define and for which the development time is short. • Once finished it is able to communicate with other beans. • If too many beans are been developed at the same time integration and coordination could become a problem

  18. IBM Global Development • Global Development Justifications • Compelling reason was to take advantage of low cost development centers • $8,000-$15,000/programmer/year • 10% of the cost in US • Plus travel costs, etc. • To reduce time to Market using follow-the-sun • Estimated 35% cycle time reduction before the project structure changed • Nevertheless, beans development allows for very rapid development • Is the global development project a fruitful project?

  19. IBM Global Development • Hidden Goal • Cost and time-to-market for this project were not the only strategic drivers of the IBM JavaBeans project • IBM was seeking a strong presences in all of these emerging markets in order to develop a strong base of developers who have experience working with IBM on important projects. • This would allow IBM to continue to expand in these markets • China, in particular, was an important market for IBM. • All five sites were connected via local internet provider to IBM global network. • Tools used include Lotus Notes and other collaborative technologies.

  20. Largest American IT Professional Services Firms:Massive offshore centers • Mexico, India, Argentina, Brazil, Latvia, Hungary, others • Calcutta, Korea • India, Canada, Brazil, Ireland, others • Manila

  21. Are Global Software Teams Successful • Success is measure by four key parameters • Was the product delivered on time? • Was cost reduced? • Was the product Innovative? • Was the product relatively free of bugs and according to specifications?

  22. Are Global Software Teams Successful • Was the product delivered on time • Follow-the-sun development may not reduce the cycle time for some projects • True follow-the-sun requires a great amount of communications and understanding • True follow-the-sun with daily hand offs is very difficult for programming, particularly programs involving any complexity • Works with customer support issues and bug fixing

  23. Are Global Software Teams Successful • Were development costs reduced? • Travel and hotel • Communication set up

  24. Are Global Software Teams Successful • Was the product innovative? • Higher level design • Full ownership of key products • New initiatives from global site that later turn into a product

  25. Are Global Software Teams Successful • Was the product relatively free of bugs and according to specifications • Home country often take responsibility for testing • Development standards are often higher with global teams

  26. Are Global Software Teams Successful • India About $400 million per year; 1800 people in 99 • Mexico • Chennai India700-1000 staff, launched in 2001, handling CAD/CAM, e-mail processing, and application development Largest American Firms: Massive offshore centers GE

  27. Are Global Software Teams Successful • India • Exporting $6 billion in software services and products. • Producing about 50,000 new, well-trained software engineers per year

  28. Are Global Software Teams Successful • Israel • Exporting $15 billion in high-tech. • 2000+ high-tech firms (larger than any nation except for USA). • More off-shore American R&D centers than any other nation. • 40,000 IT professionals

  29. Are Global Software Teams Successful • Russia • Much smaller IT sector than the 3 I’s • ranks 3rd in the world in scientists and engineers • MNCs: Intel, Motorola , Sun, others • Concentrated in, Moscow, St. Petersburg, and Novosibirsk • about 100-160 firms– none are large • Wages 20%> India • Weaknesses: • Lack of experience in managing the complexity of high level quality processes, especially over distance. • Poor English skills • Access to Russia -- The need for visas. • Expensive bandwidth • Lack of quality certification firms • Legal issues: software piracy, export and import, taxation, labor law, company registration, currency control.

  30. Are Global Software Teams Successful • Ireland • Isle of localization and call centers • 25000 software professionals with 3000 now coming out per year Source: McCaffrey 99, Cochran 01

  31. Are Global Software Teams Successful?

  32. What is your predictions for Global Software Teams?

More Related