Group 3:

 Sujeet 1828524
 Saheli 1828534
 Sudhin 1828011
 Agile software development methods were originally
designed for single small teams

 Agile development can improve efficiency and quality and

enable shorter lead times and a stronger focus on customer
needs

 There was a Forecast of strong growth driven by

globalization in the market and lead to the need for a way
to satisfy the growing customers

 Organization is a complex dynamic system of human

beings (any change you do will have side-effects)
 organization in 2000, started using XP (extreme programming)
for long agile was not considered, as scaling the approach for
large organization (for 7 international sites) was not
understood
 After using XP, there was a need to build products into
documents, print and ship them to development sites
 Market Saturation leading to the need for stronger customer
focus
 Time to Market, Quality and Return on Investment (which lead
to initiative to try Scrum)
1. Why did the organization initiate an agile transformation?

2. How did the transformation proceed?

3. How did they ensure the agile transformation stayed on track?

4. What challenges did the organization encounter?

5. How did the organization mitigate the challenges?

1) Agile software development was becoming an important part of organization’s corporate

strategy

2) A dissatisfaction with the current way of working, and

3) A need to enable rapid end-to-end flow of features and continuous deployment.

 Phase 0: Knowledge Transfer And Component-based Teams
 Phase 1: Introducing Agile

 The organization structure evolved into the current agile

team structure through four phases:
 Building a pilot cross-functional agile team
 Full-scale roll-out of cross-component, cross functional
agile teams
 Creating a competence pool providing team members to
cross-component teams
 According to the needs of each feature, Cross-component,
cross-functional teams specializing on specific business
flows.
 Phase 2: Finding Common Ground Through Value Workshops
such as:
 One Organization
 Step-by-step Improvement Way Of Working.
 Customer
 Collaboration
 Passion To Win
 Show Trust, Empowerment And Fun.
 Phase 3: Towards Continuous Integration and Deployment
 First, they had a leadership team on top of the organization
that was fully embracing agility and thus driving agility all
across the organization.
 Second, the important part was a self-organized, independent
group of well-educated agile coaches, who were supporting the
agile transformation within the local organizations, and
 Third, there was frequent retrospectives in the leadership
team, where they were sharing and absorbing what is
emerging across the organization.
 lack of guidance
 reverting to the old way of working and
misunderstanding agile concepts
 change resistance and requirements engineering
challenges.
 was challenging to plan and coordinate work, as features
depended on several components
 development lead-times were long
 way of working was stressful and somewhat chaotic
 time-consuming to learn even a single component.
 Challenge
Change resistance
Lack of a common agile
framework
Lack of agile training
Lack of continuous integration
and test automation
Any team cannot implement
any feature
Mitigation
Building a leadership team with an
Agile mind-set.
Setting up a Coaching Community
of Practice to support similar
coaching across teams and sites.
Coaching as a substitute for
training.
Building CI teams and appropriate
test environments
Teams specialize in business flows
 CHALLENGE MITIGATION

Lack of Coaching and Coaches Having both team and

organization level coaches.

Working as “A Real Team” adding collaboration between the

teams.
Challenges in Defining the Product the PO Cloud was established.
Owner Role
Backlog Challenges Each team had their own backlog
 Experimental Transformation Approach
 Stepwise Transformation
 Limited Team Interchangeability
 Lack of a Common Agile Framework
 Maria Paasivaara,(2008),Large-scale agile
transformation at organization: a case study,
Empir Software Eng (2018) 23:2550–2596.