Kanban and Kaizen are considered by some teams as the natural evolution from Scrum to an Enterprise Level Agile. While there are few Agile frameworks that adapted Kanban and Kaizen to software development as a scaling up approach, it is little known that these Lean Six Sigma practices originated in manufacturing more than 50 years ago. In fact, the 1990s Agile Enterprise used Kanban and Kaizen at scale for large teams and complex products, proving their utility.
159 items found
Agile, for many a silver bullet, worked pretty well for software development teams – this being the first attempt to have a structured approach for many of them. Bringing some order to chaos was beneficial, and the results were in some cases spectacular. Most, if not all, agile frameworks were developed by software engineers and for software engineers. Pretty unstructured in the beginning, software developers found a way to be efficient while improving the quality of their work. Refactoring is not new; although it is an integral part of agility, it was not defined for the first time in an agile framework. In his article that is (wrongly) quoted as "waterfall," W. Royce introduced development patterns that are now at the core of most Agile frameworks, such as feedback loops, prototyping, and continuous Customer involvement. In “pure” programming activities, there were a lot of patterns that can be used in agile adoption and improvement. This webinar contains examples of using programming patterns in agile.
The Agile Enterprise: Using Risk Management Standards - A Look at the Role of PMI and ISO Standards in Agile
Most Agile frameworks developed for small software teams (relative to the size of an organisation) believe that adopting Agile is a Risk Mitigation approach and/or that in Agile risk is reduced compared with the traditional planned approach, wrongly limited to "waterfall" software development. Apart from the fact that there is no empirical or scientific evidence of that, most Agile practitioners can't or won't look at the dual aspect of risk (positive and negative), missing one of the significant benefits of Agile – opportunities management, or in other words, positive risks. Considering Risk Management from the Agile perspective, this webinar is a review of how Risk Management practices and standards can be scaled down and adopted by Agile Teams.
Agile, for many a silver bullet, worked pretty well for software development teams with most of them being the first attempt to have a structured approach. Bringing some order to chaos was beneficial, and the results were in some cases spectacular. Most, if not all Agile frameworks were developed by software engineers and for software engineers. Apart from a couple of frameworks, like Disciplined Agile and SAFe that combine Agile with traditional Lean practices used in manufacturing, most Agile frameworks were developed for small teams (less than 10) and a start-up culture. In real life, Agile does fail, more often than we think and far more often than we learn in the training courses. Agile became the victim of its success with some organizations trying to use Agile as a remedy for core issues like lack of vision, lack of decision or even lack of skills. Contrary to public opinion, Agile and self-organization require more skills and discipline than command and control. To be Agile, an Organization must be Agile at all levels not only at the team level. Agile is based on trust; verbal agreements should be enough. There is no need of sign-offs and approvals for each and every activity. But that's a risk when there are multiple parties involved, especially when commercial agreements are made between entities. This webinar is a collection of real life projects that had to balance Agility with traditional practices. In most cases, the solution was the return to following a plan. For each example there will be an assessment of the causes that lead to failure, what the organization could've done better, and lessons learned that could prevent such issues.
Agile is still a hot topic. Started in the late 70s as an alternative to Lean Six Sigma, Agile become popular in the second decade of the 21st Century when Scrum became the de facto Agile delivery framework. Like most popular Agile frameworks, Scrum started as a software product development approach used by a small software development team to build new products. Scrum remains at the core of most Agile frameworks with the Scrum Master role being the flag bearer of any Agile Team. Nowadays, many projects have a software development component and a software development (sub) team. From the Project Management perspective, the Scrum framework doesn't handle some important project areas like Financial Management, Procurement, and Risk Management; therefore, a Project Manager is still required. The term "Agile Project Management" is widely used these days. Although, most of the time, it refers to small software implementation projects. This webinar is a comparative analysis of various aspects of a project from an Agile Perspective, attempting to define what differentiates an "Agile" Project from a standard project. The webinar will also address skills that the Project Manager needs to acquire or develop and practices that must be avoided when using an adaptive delivery approach.
This presentation discusses real world practitioner experiences in PMO set-up and supporting technology to enable Agile adoption.
A Program Manager spends the vast majority of his or her time communicating. Reporting progress to stakeholders, conducting meetings, and sharing metrics can take much of the day. Certain communication requires careful consideration due to its volatile impact and visibility. Escalating issues requires the insight and deft touch from the Program Manager. This session presents guidelines and tips gathered from both project and program management experience.
This webinar will demonstrate the use of Total Quality Management tools applied to project management and the PMO.
This webinar covers the points that are required PRIOR to a project charter being issued, and the tasks therein can and should fall within the duties of a BA.
Very often, we are asked to fulfill multiple roles within one project. What happens when you have an objective conflict between the different roles you are responsible for?