Monday, December 17, 2018
'ASQ Agile v Waterfall Essay\r'
' waterf on the whole vs. wide awake communicate worry\r\nLisa Sieverts, PMP, PMI-ACP\r\nPhil Ailes, PMI-ACP\r\nfalls vs. wide awake advise instruction\r\nAg terminusa\r\nââ¬Â¢\r\nââ¬Â¢\r\nââ¬Â¢\r\nââ¬Â¢\r\nWhat is a learn\r\nOverview\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ tralatitious fox circumspection\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ nimble childbed focussing\r\nThe Differences\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ harvesting Life Cycle\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ The police squads\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ Requirements\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ WBS/ produce Backlog\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ Schedule\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ gamble\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ Quality\r\nQ& group A;A\r\n2\r\néLisa Sieverts & adenylic acid; Phil Ailes\r\n1\r\nfalls vs. restless declare oneself prudence\r\nWhat is a Project?\r\nââ¬Â¢Ã¢â¬Â¯ Temporary\r\nââ¬Â¢Ã¢â¬Â¯ Goal\r\nââ¬Â¢Ã¢â¬Â¯ Constrained\r\n3\r\néLisa Sieverts & adenine; Phil Ailes\r\n waterfall vs. active Project commission\r\nWhat makes final causes supererogatory?\r\nââ¬Â¢Ã¢â¬Â¯ Projects are\r\ncharacterized by \r\nuncertainty\r\n4\r\néLisa Sieverts & angstrom; Phil Ailes\r\n2\r\nfalls vs. lively Project focusing\r\nTraditional falls Projects\r\nââ¬Â¢Ã¢â¬Â¯ Traditional falls Projects\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ Dates from the destruction of WWII\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ Grew out of Defense industry\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ Based on Deming Cycle of plan-Do-Check-Act\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ Emphasizes heavy up-front analysis\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ Lots of financial support\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ PMBOK versions 1-4\r\néLisa Sieverts &type A; Phil Ailes\r\nfalls vs. fast Project focussing\r\nTraditional falls Project\r\nHigh\r\n grow medium\r\nRequirements\r\nLow\r\nOptional\r\nHigh\r\n number\r\n medium\r\nLow\r\nOptional\r\nHigh\r\n receivement strong suit\r\nLow\r\nOptional\r\nHigh\r\n footraceing\r\n mediocre\r\nLow\r\nOptional\r\nHigh\r\nDeploy\r\n strong suit\r\nLow\r\nOptional\r\n6\r\néLisa Sieverts & adenineere; Phil Ailes\r\n3\r\n waterfall vs. lively Project management\r\nWaterfall â⬠Advantages\r\n7\r\nà ©Lisa Sieverts & axerophthol; Phil Ailes\r\nWaterfall vs. quick Project Management\r\nWaterfall â⬠Advantages\r\nââ¬Â¢Ã¢â¬Â¯ Established Processes- Project Management Body of\r\nKnowledge\r\nââ¬Â¢Ã¢â¬Â¯ Management Controls\r\nââ¬Â¢Ã¢â¬Â¯ (Apparent) Predictability\r\nââ¬Â¢Ã¢â¬Â¯ Great for slump uncertainty/high dep eat upency get words\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ Construction\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ up realise of realized mathematical product\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ Maintenance projects\r\n8\r\néLisa Sieverts & antiophthalmic factor; Phil Ailes\r\n4\r\nWaterfall vs. Agile Project Management\r\nWaterfall â⬠Disadvantages\r\n9\r\néLisa Sieverts & Phil Ailes\r\nWaterfall vs. Agile Project Management\r\nWaterfall â⬠Disadvantages\r\nââ¬Â¢Ã¢â¬Â¯ Sometimes is more(prenominal) about the Process than the\r\nProduct\r\nââ¬Â¢Ã¢â¬Â¯ Keeps the customer at bay â⬠by the time they see the end results it may be too late\r\nââ¬Â¢Ã¢â¬Â¯ Project teams often become rigid and resi stant to\r\n variegate: ââ¬Å"Those darn users keep changing their\r\nminds.ââ¬Â\r\nââ¬Â¢Ã¢â¬Â¯ Long product development time\r\n10\r\néLisa Sieverts & Phil Ailes\r\n5\r\nWaterfall vs. Agile Project Management\r\nAgile Project Management\r\nââ¬Â¢Ã¢â¬Â¯ The Agile Way\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ Experiments in the 1990s\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ Values self-organizing teams\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ No formal ââ¬Å"project\r\nmanagementââ¬Â\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ Iterative approach\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ Flexible\r\néLisa Sieverts & Phil Ailes\r\nWaterfall vs. Agile Project Management\r\nmanifesto\r\nââ¬Â¢\r\nThe Agile Manifesto for Software contrivement\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ ââ¬Å"We are uncovering better ways of developing packet by doing it and helping others do it. Through this hit we have come to rank:\r\nââ¬Â¢Ã¢â¬Â¯ Individuals and interactions over processes and tools ââ¬Â¢Ã¢â¬Â¯ spend a pennys software over comprehensive documentation\r\nââ¬Â¢Ã¢â¬Â¯ node collaboration over contract negotiation\r\nââ¬Â¢Ã¢â¬Â¯ Responding to motley over following a plan\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ That is, period there is value in the items on the right, we value the items on the left more.ââ¬Â\r\n12\r\néLisa Sieverts & Phil Ailes\r\n6\r\nWaterfall vs. Agile Project Management\r\nThe Agile Way\r\nSprints â⬠High antecedency Features\r\n shuffle\r\n mental testing\r\nSprints â⬠Low Priority Features\r\nIntegrate\r\n tryout\r\nIntegrate\r\nTest\r\nDesign\r\nTest\r\nTest\r\nDevelop\r\nIntegrate\r\nTest\r\nDemo & Feedback\r\nDevelop\r\nRequirements\r\nTest\r\nTest\r\nDevelop\r\nSprints â⬠Optional Priority Features\r\nDemo & Feedback\r\nRequirements\r\nDesign\r\nTest\r\nDesign\r\nTest\r\nDemo & Feedback\r\nDevelop\r\nRequirements\r\nTest\r\nDemo & Feedback\r\nRequirements\r\nDesign\r\nTest\r\nSprints â⬠average Priority Features\r\n13\r\néLisa Sieverts & Phil Ailes\r\nWaterfall vs. Agile Project Management\r\nAgile â⬠Advantages\r\n14\r\nà ©Lisa Sieverts & Phil Ailes\r\n7\r\nWaterfall vs. Agile Project Management\r\nAgile â⬠Advantages\r\nââ¬Â¢Ã¢â¬Â¯ Shorter development cycles\r\nââ¬Â¢Ã¢â¬Â¯ Customer participates, providing direct feedback\r\nââ¬Â¢Ã¢â¬Â¯ Team-ownership â⬠developers, testers, analysts and\r\ncustomers work together\r\nââ¬Â¢Ã¢â¬Â¯ Process encourages and easily adapts to change\r\nââ¬Â¢Ã¢â¬Â¯ meliorate quality because testing is continuous\r\n15\r\néLisa Sieverts & Phil Ailes\r\nWaterfall vs. Agile Project Management\r\nAgile â⬠Disadvantages\r\n16\r\néLisa Sieverts & Phil Ailes\r\n8\r\nWaterfall vs. Agile Project Management\r\nAgile â⬠Disadvantages\r\nââ¬Â¢Ã¢â¬Â¯ Lack of established processes\r\nââ¬Â¢Ã¢â¬Â¯ Management resistance to change\r\nââ¬Â¢Ã¢â¬Â¯ Reduced (apparent) predictability\r\nââ¬Â¢Ã¢â¬Â¯ Requires culture change\r\nââ¬Â¢Ã¢â¬Â¯ Itââ¬â¢s new â⬠there isnââ¬â¢t a lot to draw upon\r\n17\r\néLisa Sieverts & Phil A iles\r\nWaterfall vs. Agile Project Management\r\nProject Life Cycle\r\nââ¬Â¢Ã¢â¬Â¯ Traditional:\r\nwaterfall\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ get\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯Plan\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯Define\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯Design\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯Build\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯Test\r\nââ¬Â¢Ã¢â¬Â¯ Agile Projects:\r\niterative\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯Envision\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯Speculate\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯seek\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ conform\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯Close\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯Repeat as\r\n undeniable\r\n18\r\néLisa Sieverts & Phil Ailes\r\n9\r\nWaterfall vs. Agile Project Management\r\nThe Team\r\nââ¬Â¢Ã¢â¬Â¯ Waterfall\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯friend\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯Product\r\nManager\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯Project\r\nManager\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯The Team ââ¬\r\ndefined roles\r\nââ¬Â¢Ã¢â¬Â¯ Agile\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯Sponsor\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯Product\r\nproprietor\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯Scrum\r\nMaster\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯The Team ââ¬\r\nvariable\r\nroles\r\n19\r\néLisa Sieverts & Phil Ailes\r\nWaterfall vs. Agile Project Management\r\nThe Requirements\r\nââ¬Â¢Ã¢â¬Â¯ Waterfall\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ Large\r\nDocument\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ Formal, based\r\non analysis\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ Performed by\r\nBusiness\r\nAnalyst\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ spotless\r\nbefore any\r\ndevelopment\r\nbegins\r\nââ¬Â¢Ã¢â¬Â¯ Agile\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ dainty Index\r\nCards\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ substance abuser Stories,\r\nbased on\r\nconversation\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ Performed by\r\nthe Product\r\nOwner\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ absolute\r\nââ¬Å"just in timeââ¬Â\r\n20\r\néLisa Sieverts & Phil Ailes\r\n10\r\nWaterfall vs. Agile Project Management\r\nThe Foundation Documents\r\nââ¬Â¢\r\nWaterfall\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ Work Breakdown\r\n social structure\r\n100 % of Scope\r\n21\r\néLisa Sieverts & Phil Ailes\r\nWaterfall vs. Agile Project Management\r\nThe Foundation Documents\r\nââ¬Â¢\r\nAgile\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ The Product Backlog\r\nRoman Pichler, Agile Product Management\r\n22\r\néLisa Sieverts & Phil Ailes\r\n11\r\nWaterfall vs. Agile Project Management\r\nThe Schedule\r\nââ¬Â¢Ã ¢â¬Â¯ Waterfall\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ Built before work\r\nbegins\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ intercept date is often\r\nââ¬Â¢Ã¢â¬Â¯ Agile\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ Rebuilt every sprint\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ End date evolves\r\nbased on team\r\n f number\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ Focused on nearterm accuracy\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ Emphasizes regular\r\n oral communication of working\r\nfeatures\r\npredetermined\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ Strives to predict the\r\nfuture\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ Emphasizes tar\r\nof the entire product\r\n23\r\néLisa Sieverts & Phil Ailes\r\nWaterfall vs. Agile Project Management\r\n guess\r\nââ¬Â¢Ã¢â¬Â¯ Waterfall\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ Inherently high-risk\r\nbased on ache\r\nproduct cycles\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ Emphasizes the\r\nability to predict the\r\nfuture\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ Risk Register\r\nââ¬Â¢Ã¢â¬Â¯ Agile\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ Inherently low-risk\r\nbased on customer\r\nfeedback\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ Emphasizes\r\nadaptation to\r\nchanging\r\nenvironment\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ Risk Register\r\n24\r\néLisa Sieverts & P hil Ailes\r\n12\r\nWaterfall vs. Agile Project Management\r\nQuality\r\nââ¬Â¢Ã¢â¬Â¯ Waterfall\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ exam is at the end\r\nââ¬Â¢Ã¢â¬Â¯ Agile\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ Testing begins before\r\ndevelopment\r\nof the project\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ Testers work\r\n singly from\r\ndevelopers\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ User sufferance\r\noccurs at the end of\r\nthe project\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ Testers and\r\ndevelopers work\r\ntogether\r\nsimultaneously\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ User Acceptance\r\noccurs at end of\r\nevery sprint\r\n25\r\néLisa Sieverts & Phil Ailes\r\nWaterfall vs. Agile Project Management\r\nWhatââ¬â¢s Different?\r\nââ¬Â¢Ã¢â¬Â¯ Waterfall\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ Plan all in advance\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ Work Breakdown\r\n organise\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ Functional specs\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ Gantt chart\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ Status reports\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ forego at the end\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ Learn at the end\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ Follow the plan\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ Manage tasks\r\nââ¬Â¢Ã¢â¬Â¯ Agile\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ Plan as y ou go\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ Product Backlog\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ User stories\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ Release plan\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ Story boards\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ Deliver as you go\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ Learn every sprint\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ Adapt everything\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ Team ownership\r\n26\r\néLisa Sieverts & Phil Ailes\r\n13\r\nWaterfall vs. Agile Project Management\r\n drumhead\r\nââ¬Â¢Ã¢â¬Â¯ Both Waterfall and Agile\r\nhave the alike(p) goals:\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ Delivering a well-\r\ntested product that\r\nsatisfies the\r\ncustomer indoors an\r\nefficient time frame\r\nthat doesnââ¬â¢t relinquish\r\nthe team worn out\r\n27\r\néLisa Sieverts & Phil Ailes\r\nWaterfall vs. Agile Project Management\r\nQuestions\r\n28\r\néLisa Sieverts & Phil Ailes\r\n14\r\nWaterfall vs. Agile Project Management\r\nThank You\r\n29\r\néLisa Sieverts & Phil Ailes\r\nWaterfall vs. Agile Project Management\r\nContact Us\r\nââ¬Â¢Ã¢â¬Â¯ Lisa Sieverts\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ Facilitated Change\r\nââ¬Ã¢ â¬Â¯ www.lisasieverts.com\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ 603.762.0235\r\nââ¬Â¢Ã¢â¬Â¯ Phil Ailes\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ Ailes Consulting\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ www.ailes-consulting.com\r\nââ¬Ã¢â¬Â¯ 603.903.7051\r\n30\r\néLisa Sieverts & Phil Ailes\r\n15\r\n'
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment