Fast and easy tech!

As team sizes grow, organizations grow and their needs become more complex, bigger and more complex impediments arise along the road. The role of Scaling Scrum is to provide a framework to continually identify and remove dependencies created by increased complexity.

Scaling Scrum, like implementing Agile Scrum methodology is a matter of choice. Many organizations have reaped tremendous benefit and even more continue to do so. However, the primary integration point of Scaled Scrum is within the culture of an organization. The complexity of an organization’s hierarchy and culture defines the kind of products and applications it produces. In the words of programmer Melvin Conway:

“organizations which design systems … are constrained to produce designs which are copies of the communication structures of these organizations.”

While it is true to a large extent that Agile methods advocate doing away with rigid guidelines, documentation and maintaining artifacts is not a rigid requirement to begin with. Lets keep in mind, agile is first of all a set of values, not a settled and strict, rigid framework. All Agile practitioners should be confident on how to adjust these values to their environment. Remember that every company has its own pace, characteristics and values.

All Agile documentation must follow the same rule – it is not that agile eschews documentation, so much as it eschews up-front documentation.

Over the years as sports have become more competitive, sporting teams have realized that one coach for all aspects of the game is not enough. For example in Cricket, teams employ separate coaches for bowling, batting and fielding. In football, teams employ goalkeeping coaches, striking coaches, defensive coaches and more. Similarly, many large organizations today employ multiple Agile coaches with varying and diverse skill-sets, experience and backgrounds so as to derive maximum benefit and ROI.

Adaption of Agile methods can have more than just tangible benefits. The benefits of Agile are not limited to the organization only. As an organization pursues it’s endeavors on the path of Agile journey, it contributes to its ecosystem and to the field of Agile teachings. By playing an instrumental role in an organization’s Agile journey, an Agile coach can have a lasting impact beyond their expected role.

Customer Centricity, cannot and must not be equated with customer collaboration. Most people make this basic error, partly due to the fact that both terms contain the word customer, and partly due to the belief that involving customers in the development process takes care of all their needs and makes them delighted customers. The truth of the matter is that Customer Centricity is a far wider term which requires placing customers’ requirements at the center of all activities; while collaboration is just a tool available to implement the vision of Customer Centricity.

Whenever there is a talk of infusing technology, automation and intelligence in to tasks or processes, the solutions proposed fall in to two broad buckets. The first is the conventional use of the term Artificial intelligence, machine learning, deep learning and cognitive learning, which typically work outside human intervention and are largely driven by some kind of an algorithm to achieve its goal. The handling of regular transactions as well as any exceptions are defined within the AI program and the machine doing the job in case of touch and feel jobs like manufacturing or the algorithm producing the result in case of purely online work. The second category is where Artificial Intelligence is applied to work in conjunction with the humans and human intervention and interaction is a critical part of the successful completion of the job. This second type is known as Augmented intelligence or Augmented reality.

Agile, Lean and Design Thinking place high focus on close collaboration with users and people closest to the work being done. While Design Thinking focuses on finding the right problem through empathetic approach and listening to the users, Agile places emphasis on collaboration and feedback loop, while Lean advocates placing power in the hands of those doing the work. Just like design thinking, a key tenet of effective agile application, irrespective of the Agile framework chosen, is to seek frequent inputs from end users and incorporate the feedback in iterations to achieve the right outcomes. Doing this during early stages of projects includes establishing project goals, defining business increments, writing user stories and / or features, establishing success criteria through definition of done and creating product backlogs from which iteration backlogs follow. Throughout the development process, the inputs through feedback process manifests form a crucial part of delivering the ‘right’ product .

Perhaps, what makes Agile difficult for lot of managers to grasp is that it’s not just a technology, methodology or process that gets implemented within an enterprise’s current culture and assumptions. The Agile way of running an organization seeks to fundamentally redefine the very concept of an enterprise which has prevailed for the last one hundred years.

Instead of an enterprise being conceived as an efficient, profitable steady-state machine aimed at exploiting its environment and existing business model and the industry its part of, the Agile organization is a growing, learning, adapting living organism that is in constant flux to exploit new opportunities and add new value for customers.

The test process is not a separate process that can be outsourced or left alone, it is merged with the development processes. The true benefits of Agile testing are revealed when it is used as part of Agile development and accorded an equal importance. The sooner testing team and testers get involved, better it is for the project. Ideally, testers should be part of the overall scheme of things from day one, simply because giving testers a seat at the table from the start provides a higher level of insight into requirements and goals, encourages collaboration and helps hammer home the need to conduct frequent, continuous testing.

Today, most organizations view cloud-based services as a better way to deliver the services they need, including data protection and security. The risks and costs associated with maintaining self-managed, in-house IT security teams who manage organization’s IT infrastructure as a strategic answer to address security concerns is prohibitively high. Add to it the need to constantly upgrade skills and knowledge levels to respond to ever changing security landscape, changing and ever deepening nature of attacks, and redundancy of IT equipment at a faster pace than before, make it a luxury that many cannot afford. That’s precisely why most IT teams today understand that self-managed infrastructure — whether in-house or in third-party data centers — is almost always more tedious, less secure and more expensive than more modern, cloud-based alternatives.

When building infrastructure in the cloud, it is important to assess your ability to prevent theft and control access. Determining who can enter data into the cloud, tracking resource modifications to identify abnormal behaviors, securing and hardening orchestration tools, and adding network analysis of both north–south and east–west traffic as a potential signal of compromise are all quickly becoming standard measures in protecting cloud infrastructure deployments at scale.

The thing with new, game-changing technologies, products or ideas, is that to thrive it needs to find an organization that will accept it. Adaption of any new technology has severe implications; it not only changes the organization but often times creates a new industry or segment altogether.

An architectural innovation challenges an old organization because it demands that the organization remake itself. The simple explanation is that a market leader in producing printers is much likely to accept breakthrough innovations in printer ink technology as there is no real organizational stress in pursuing that product line, and highly unlikely to accept the idea for a personal computer as there is little organizational mechanism for paying attention to the innovation and nurturing it along.