1 / 47

The Kiev Experiment

The Kiev Experiment. Evolving Agile Partnerships. Who are we?. Simon Sasha Peter. Where did we start?. Existing Monolithic Mainframe Application Quarterly Deliveries 6 Week Testing Cycles Offshore Delivery teams Waterfall process Command and Control. What did we want to do?.

malise
Download Presentation

The Kiev Experiment

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. The Kiev Experiment Evolving Agile Partnerships

  2. Who are we? Simon Sasha Peter

  3. Where did we start? Existing Monolithic Mainframe Application Quarterly Deliveries 6 Week Testing Cycles Offshore Delivery teams Waterfall process Command and Control

  4. What did we want to do? Belief there was a better way to deliver software Incremental development to deliver business value quickly Address the rapidly changing business landscape with flexibility in delivery Build quality into the solutions Deliver the software rapidly, but in a cost effective manner Put the fun back into software delivery

  5. How did we start? Started with a single team in London Initially focused on building the tools, proving the processes and technologies Release 1.0 on Friday 13th October 2006 Very soon we started to look how we could scale

  6. Where are we now? 5 years into the delivery 2M trades per day 100 billions settling per day in all major currencies 40 exchanges across EMEA and APAC 15 scrum teams/120 people Teams in London, Kiev, Hyderabad, Hong Kong and New York 9 application components Production releases every 2 weeks

  7. How did we get here? Inspect & Adapt Lots and lots of experiments Don’t accept the status quo But lets go back to the beginning…….

  8. Evolving the Team

  9. D D D D D D D 2006 small co-located team

  10. D D D D D D D D D D D D D 2006 2007 small co-located team

  11. D D D D D D D D D D D D D 2007 2006 small co-located team component teams

  12. D D D D D D A T D D D D D A T D D D D D A T 2007 2006 2008 2009 small co-located team component teams co-located feature teams dispersed feature teams

  13. D D D D D D A T D D D D D D D A T A T D D D D D A T 2007 2006 2008 2009 2010 small co-located team component teams co-located feature teams dispersed feature teams first distributed feature team

  14. D D D D D D D D D D A T A T D D D D D D D D D A T A T D D D D D D D D A T A T 2007 2006 2008 2009 2010 2011 small co-located team component teams co-located feature teams dispersed feature teams first distributed feature team many distributed feature teams

  15. New York London Kiev Hyderabad Hong Kong

  16. Evolving the Communication

  17. Luxoft teams evolution 30 people4 teams 21 people3 teams 6 people1 team 4 people0 teams

  18. Communication issue Offshore team 1 Analysts End users Offshore team 2 Architects Offshore team 3

  19. Broadening Communication Bandwidth

  20. Polycom experiment PHOTO Communication flow

  21. Skype and projector

  22. Interactive whiteboards + Skype

  23. TelePresence?

  24. Bridging The Communication Gap

  25. Team intermediary Onshore team Intermediary Offshore team

  26. Bilateral rotation

  27. Specification By Example

  28. Dedicated architects group Offshore team 1 Offshore team 2 Architects Offshore team 3

  29. Joint Architectural Workshops

  30. Joint Architectural Workshops

  31. Tackling technical challenges

  32. Release Management Release 1.0 Release 2.0 trunk

  33. But how do you scale? Release 1.0 Release 2.0 trunk Concurrent Projects Multiple Teams

  34. Let’s introduce a process Release 2.1 Release 2.0 ISE CHIX TQ

  35. Manual and high coordinated Waste of delayed integration CI needed on each branch But what if this now becomes the highest priority?

  36. How do you address changing feature priority? How do you allow incremental feature development? How can you have an agile release function?

  37. This is what we want Release X (ISE) Release Y (CHIX) ISE CHIX trunk TQ

  38. Latent Code Patterns Release X (ISE) Release Y (CHIX) ISE CHIX trunk TQ “One of the most powerful techniques I have used over the last three years is latent code patterns.” Chris Matts InfoQ – The Last Responsible Moment in Deployment

  39. Latent Code Patterns Release X (ISE) Release Y (CHIX) ISE CHIX trunk TQ Event Driven Feature Bits or Configuration Modularity or Dependency Injection

  40. Keeping It Green 200 commits per day 1000 artefacts updated per day 1 commit every 5 minutes peak

  41. A Single Bad Commit…..

  42. A Wasted Day 13 hours elapsed time wasted 500 hours of effort wasted

  43. Coaching

  44. Fast Visible Feedback • 24 Build Targets • 37 Test Targets

More Related