Articles

Change management can be a cumbersome, even clumsy, practice that might even be classified as rigid. Add in an Agile mindset and the process seems at odds with each other. Interested in maintaining an Agile environment while navigating change management? Well, then, the following will help us intermingle the two approaches for managing change requests.

Is Agile for Standard or Non-Standard Changes?

Agile tends to be a better fit for non-standard changes given its fluidity. An Agile environment is always in development, always changing according to the needs of the project or the organization. Agile helps to attack work that’s unpredictable and effervescent. Standard changes, of course, are usually moved along in as predictable a manner as possible and can be slow and plodding.

Source de l’article sur DZone (Agile)

Nicole Forsgren’s, Jez Humble’s, and Gene Kim’s latest book, Accelerate: Building and Scaling High Performing Technology Organizations, describes the factors that drive high-performing tech organizations, derived from the data that has been aggregated with the State of DevOps Report since 2014.

Accelerate: Building and Scaling High-Performing Technology Organizations

Accelerateis a must-read book for anyone involved in building Agile organizations and teams. It lays out a path to success based on a statistical analysis of data. It also puts an end to the popular narrative that "becoming Agile" is somehow a fuzzy process. The data shows that there are patterns at all levels that successful Agile organizations share.

Source de l’article sur DZone (Agile)

Recently, I was asked to attend a session at a large corporation. The room was filled with technology-based executives, development managers, and enterprise architects. Also in attendance were a few of my peers from 

Upon leaving this discussion, I found myself wondering just how many other corporations are facing this same dilemma.

Source de l’article sur DZone (Agile)

It all started when software development teams were physically present in the same office and interacting with each other face-to-face. At that time, this was thought to be the best way to get work done. Not many employees worked remotely. But, that era is long gone. By comparison, most of the organizations today have distributed teams. They ease the burden on project infrastructure and improve the employee’s comfort level.

A good infrastructure cannot have the dependency on only one system or person. Infrastructure needs to be distributed to avoid SPOF (Single Point of Failure). Similarly, it makes more sense to have distributed teams. This helps in a DR (Disaster Recovery) situation and also in hiring talented people without the time or location constraints.

Source de l’article sur DZone (Agile)

Whenever I teach Agile approaches, I discuss the possible meetings a team might choose. Some people turn to me in dismay. They start adding up all the meeting time and say, "That’s a lot of meetings."

Could be. Especially if you use iterations. You might have these meetings:

Source de l’article sur DZone

Over the past year, I had the chance to be quite close to a significant project in terms of scope and team size. All in all, over 100 people were involved, with more than 60 working full time on the project.

Out of those 60 people, over 40 were involved in engineering, while the others worked as the Technical & Solution Architects, Business Analysis, User Experience Engineers, and Project Managers. Out of the 40 engineers, over 60% of the team was involved in mobile and frontend implementations while the rest were focused on backend and QA automation.

Source de l’article sur DZone