1 / 8

Agile Software Development with Distributed Teams: A Case Study

Learn how a global software development team successfully implemented Agile techniques to build and maintain complex systems, leveraging iterative development and daily scrum meetings.

normag
Download Presentation

Agile Software Development with Distributed Teams: A Case Study

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. Engineering Executive ForumAgile Software Development witha Distributed Team Paul Demko, Jr.April 17, 2008

  2. Agile Development across a Distributed Team • From Fall 2004 to Spring 2006, my software product development team built and maintained two LiveState product lines, successfully meeting budgets and delivery dates. • LiveState Delivery and LS Patch Manager were relatively complex systems management products that provisioned, installed, and configured Windows and Linux operating systems, applications, and security patches across any network. • The team was global • Waltham, MA – 20 developers • Starnberg, Germany – 20 developers • Bangalore, India – 25 contract developers • The team leveraged some of the best Agile techniques, e.g. • Iterative (2-week iterations) development • Daily scrum meetings

  3. Basic Architecture: LiveState Delivery Proven UI Framework Flexibility to integrate into customers’ business processes World-class Packaging Provisioning Server Services / Web Services Package Manager Used to create content MMC Admin Console Web-based Architecture Web Console • Agent/HTTP/Server Pipes: • Native Installations • OS’s and Applications • Images • Configuration Packages • Integrated H & S Inventory • Controlled reboots • PXE boot • Wake-on-LAN Centralized management across LANs, WANs, & Internet Cross-platform Agent: Windows, Linux, Unix, Macintosh, PPC Double-byte enabled Localized: J FIG Common Criteria Certification: Q2FY07 Trusted Virtual Technician performs unattended software installation and configuration

  4. Background • Team had been distributed for quite some time • ON Technology acquired csd Software in Munich in 1997 • With attrition in Germany and growth in the U.S., by 2001 • 21 engineers (including SQA) in Munich • 20 engineers (including Technical Writing) in Waltham • Two videoconferencing systems were in use 8:00 AM to 1:00 PM daily • Symantec acquired ON Technology in February 2004 • Symantec’s Enterprise Administration Business Unit was created • Symantec’s Ghost (Auckland, NZ) • Symantec’s pcAnywhere (Newport News, VA) • PowerQuest’s Hot Backup (Orem, UT) • ON Technology’s iCommand (MA and Germany)

  5. Background (continued) • SEABU Requirements • Development Methodology that guaranteed dates • Dates do not slip; features and resources may change • Outsourcing to India via MindTree • Waltham/Starberg team was extremely skeptical • “Our technology was too complex for Agile development” • “Indian engineers will take our jobs.” • Orem team had been using “Agile Development” for 18 months • We accepted their offer of training (with extensive documentation) • 6 managers and senior engineers spent a week (50 hours) with us, plus breakfasts, lunches, and dinners • “Vulcan mind melds”

  6. Major Changes • Upfront investment, using schedule estimator and Microsoft Project, to define 2-week iterations for the entire project • 3 – 5 weeks for the whole team; included prototype develpment • Each iteration included assigned staff, dependencies, and deliverables • Daily Scrum Meetings, including all team members • Videoconferencing system and Microsoft Meeting • Telephone and Microsoft Meeting • Bi-weekly Iteration Review Meetings • The teams took each iteration deadline very seriously • Much (not all) “Crunch time” was spread out over the iterations • Tightly-enforced use of Tools • Source code control (Starnberg) • Automated daily build and smoke test system • Automated testing (IBM Rational Robot) • Schedule and Resource Estimator (home grown in Orem) • Documentation Depots – Lotus Notes and Team Rooms • Extensive use of Yahoo Instant Messenger

  7. Why did it work? • “There are none more zealous than the converted!” • Training from Orem saved a lot of time • Camaraderie resulting from dealing with the 2,000-lb. yellow gorilla, Symantec • MindTree’s approach – “Our objective is to make you successful!” • MT had worked with the Orem team and understood the process • MT did not hesitate to point out our errors • MT shifted their work schedulesto work later into the evening • Two MT engineers worked inWaltham and in Starnberg • 60 day rotations • Waltham shifted hours – 7:30 AM

More Related