Agile Process & The Role of Clarity in the IT Ecosystem

● Governance Tool Ecosystem (Dan) ● Use of Integrations – Approach and Cost (Raghu) ● Common Integrations (Raghu) ● Strategic Integrations – Best Practice ○ Financials (Dan) ○ SharePoint (Dan) ○ Excel (Raghu) ○ Service Management (Raghu) ○ Agile (Doug) Agenda

Governance Process Ecosystem

Governance Sub-Process Ecosystem

Governance Tool Ecosystem

Governance Tool Ecosystem

● Event Based ○ This type of Interface is triggered by event in the system. (Either something got created or updated or deleted) ● Batch ○ This type of interface is scheduled and triggered at a set time (nightly or at certain interval, etc). Since, batch interfaces will handle multiple instances, you want to address transaction managements (what happens when a record fails – one fail, all fail?) ● Manual ○ This type of Interface is manually started by the user when they are ready for data transmittal. Integration Basics – Triggers

● Flat File ○ A.CSV file ftp’ed onto a server can be pulled into Clarity. The file can be read by custom GEL scripts within a process that can be scheduled or started manually. (This is CA’s preferred method of integration for the On-Demand Clients) ● Web Services ○ XML based messaging that makes a call via URLs, or over HTTP to request data from or push data into clarity. This method could leverage GEL scripts, Java classes, or Stored Procedures in the DB ○ This is the most common approach used by any industry for Integrating different systems. Most of the big software vendors like SAP, Oracle, HP, CA have web service API’s developed for bi-directional data exchange with their systems. ● Database Links ○ Establish a link from the Clarity DB to another system database and just pull data from one system to another using a stored procedure or SQL statement. Best practice in this form is to create a “view” in the source system vs. the core tables. (This is not an option for the On Demand Clients) ● Third Party Tools ○ Leverage a third party integration tool like ITROI, etc to build integrations. ○ Leverage an integration service – Pervasive or Task Top Integration Basics – Methods

Comparing Methods Flat FileWeb ServicesDB Link Available in SaaSYes No Rough Effort*40-60 Hours Hours40-60 Hours Examples Send journal entry for capital entry Read data from any legacy system. Create SAP project from new Clarity project Auto create support tickets in Clarity by reading data from ticketing system Pull non-labor financials to Clarity Pull resources into Clarity Push assignment data from Clarity Components Process to read Error object Process for outbound Java for inbound Error Object View to read Process to move from view to object Error object * With an integration, effort is needed on both the sending and receiving application. This means that any Clarity integration will require some effort form the support team of the system you are integrating to. The level of effort depends on the type of interface

● Simpler is Better ○ With integrations, the more complex the interface is the more difficult it will be to build and maintain. One Direction vs. Bi-Direction is simpler. ● Get it Right the First Time ○ We love agile and iterative development, but not when building an interface. Interfaces are best done with solid waterfall requirements and signoffs. ● Integrations are recurring jobs. ○ Integration are not for performing one time data loads. Integrations are for exchanging data between two systems on a regular basis. ● Data Ownership is Key ○ You must determine which system is the “source” vs. the “non-source” of the data. One source must be the owner of the data in case there is a conflict. Do not make the mistake to think Clarity will be the “source” of everything. Leverage other systems to pull summarized data vs. all detail. Keys to Success

● Error Handling / Transaction Management ○ Errors are inevitable when two different systems are being integrated. Therefore plan to developing an error handing mechanism to handle data errors, connectivity errors, and system outages. ○ Equally important is transaction management and performance considerations ● Trial First to Avoid Errors ○ Before you build the complete interface – try a semi-automated load to ensure the “process” you have defined is correct. ○ Have a Testing Environment. It is really important to have test environments that mirror the productions as much as possible and that the data is representative of actual production data. Keys to Success

Common Integrations – Picture 1

Common Integrations – Picture 2

● Overall Strategy ○ Clarity is not the financial system of record, but it is often the source for labor actuals and it needs to be the place for PMs to manage project budgets ● Who Has an Interface? ● Common Uses: ○ Generate Financial Project or Asset element ○ Create Capitalization Journal Entry Data ○ Pull Actuals from financial system How do you reconcile Clarity rates vs. actual labor costs? ● Approach ○ Custom interface for each use Strategic Integrations: Financials

● Overall Strategy ○ Clarity is for Management and SharePoint is for Communication and Interaction with Stakeholders ● Who Has an Interface? ● Common Uses: ○ Documents - Show SharePoint Documents in Clarity – “Frame” ○ Issues / Risks ○ Demand - Pull SharePoint Ideas to Clarity Ideas ○ Reporting - Create SharePoint Portlets ● Approach ○ OOTB Connector ○ Custom Connector ○ Purchase Add-On: ITROI Strategic Integrations: SharePoint

● Overall Strategy ○ Leverage Excel for data manipulation and then import to Clarity – like MSP sync ● Who Has an Interface? ● Common Uses: ○ Financial Plans, Allocations, Bulk Data Load ● Approach ○ Custom interface for each use ○ Purchase Add-On: Integrin, ITROI Strategic Integrations: Excel

● Overall Strategy ○ Clarity is for Project, Resource, and Portfolio Management and Service Mgmt Tool is for Incident/Problem/HelpDesk Ticket Mgmt ● Who Has an Interface? ● Common Uses: ○ Pull Time into Clarity (one way) ○ Pull Tickets into Clarity Incidents (one way) Architecture Decision – what comes over and do you sync back? ○ Pull Tickets to Ideas (one way) Architecture Decision – what comes over and do you sync back? ● Approach ○ OOTB light connector with CA Service Desk ○ Custom Connector Strategic Integrations: ITSM/Demand

● Agile Introduction ○ Manifesto ○ Benefits ○ Statistics on Growth ● Comparison of Agile Tools ○ CA Agile / JIRA / Rally / Version One ● Using Clarity AND and Agile Tool ○ Governance & Process ○ Integration Points Strategic Integrations: Agile

Agile Manifesto

Agile Manifesto Process and tools Individuals and interactions over Following a plan Responding to change over Comprehensive documentation Working software over Contract negotiation Customer collaboration over

Why Companies Want to Move to Agile

Benefits … With a Downside ● Faster Features to the Customers ● Better Business Involvement ● Easier Ability to Correct/Fix BEFORE going live BUT -Little/No Visibility for Management (‘old dog, new trick?’) -Requires Manual Intervention when aggregating for decision support -Co-location is a problem -Resource management is an issue -Financial Cap/ex (aka. A “post it wall wont pass an audit”)

Statistics on Growth ● 35% of all projects use Agile ● 20% or more of the PMs are Agile ● Most have been using it for 3 years or less ● Growth of PMI-ACP: 300%

Gartner Leaders + CA Clarity Agile

Surveys on Tools Used

CA Clarity Agile Key Features: Full built-in integration with Clarity PPM Projects, Tasks, and Timesheets Weaknesses Not widely used – as of right now it’s mostly limited to Clarity customers. Not mentioned in either Gartner or Forrester Research papers on ALM Solutions for 2012

Atlassian JIRA + Agile Key Features: Price: 10x cheaper than other solutions Big community (over 20,000 customers) Many add-on and plugins available that are easy to install and provide much additional functionality Simple, easy to use Weaknesses Out of the box there isn’t a lot of advanced functionality Built-in reporting and dashboarding not very robust

Rally Software Key Features: Broad set of features One of the most widely used agile-specific software Weaknesses English only Expensive

VersionOne Key Features: Broad set of features One of the most widely used agile-specific software Supports Scrum, Kanban, Lean, XP and Hybrid methodologies 50+ pre-packaged agile metrics and reports Weaknesses Limited but growing technology partnerships Support for non-agile processes is limited

IBM Rational Key Features: Largest vendor in the market by installed based and ALM revenue Broad portfolio provides coverage of the widest variety of functionality and platforms Weaknesses Complex, overlapping product line Accommodation of installed base and legacy products slows the pace of change Complex installations and management

CollabNet TeamForge Key Features: Long experience with SaaS support of developers Access robust ALM capabilities in their own environment Mobile access Weaknesses: Overlaps in product offerings due to acquisitions Management outside SCCM is less mature

Vender Overview Vendor and Tool Clarity Integration Methods SaaS Solution Available Key Features On Premise Cost for 100 Users (annually) SaaS Cost for 100 Users (annually) CA Clarity Agile YesScrum, KanbanYes out of the box Clarity integration N/A $54,000 IBM Rational Yes, 3rd party (Tasktop, Pervasive, or custom) Scrum, IBM Agile Scaling Model Yes largest vender in ALM market, large range of products $100K - $150K plus Clarity integration IBM Rational Jazz Atlassian JIRA + Agile Yes, 3rd party (Tasktop, Pervasive, or custom) Scrum, KanbanYes price, large user base, lots of add-ons and plugins $6,000 ONE TIME FEE (plus Clarity integration) $5,400 (plus Clarity integration) Collabnet TeamForge Yes, 3rd party (Tasktop, Pervasive, or custom) Scrum, KanbanYes $50K - $75K plus Clarity integration Web Service APIs and SDK Rally Software Yes, 3rd party (Tasktop, Pervasive, or custom) Scrum, KanbanYes large feature- set, large agile- specific user base $42,000 - $58,800 (plus Clarity integration) VersionOne Yes, 3rd party (Tasktop, Pervasive, or custom) Scrum, Kanban, Lean, XP, Hybrid Yes large feature- set, supports many methodologies, large agile- specific user base $34,800 - $46,800 (plus Clarity integration)

Using Clarity and an Agile Tool ● With Agile, tool not as important as process ● Key decisions ○ How to maintain governance ○ Integration points ● Governance vs Agile ○ Visibility for PMO & senior leadership needs to be maintained ○ Only a portion of your project or team may be agile ○ Water-Scrum-Fall Ex: general Project Charter with a fixed time frame & budget

Agile ● Product or Release ● Sprint/Kanban Board ● User Story/Issue ● Task ● Impediment ● Team Member ● Hours Logged ● Remaining Hours Clarity ● Project ● Phase ● Activity ● Task ● Issue ● Team Member/Assignee ● Timesheet/Trans. Hours ● ETC Integration Points

Integration Points ● Data almost always flows Agile ➞ Clarity ● Exceptions ○ Project ○ Team allocated in Clarity, assignments made in Agile tool ○ User Stories…Depends Will your product owner be in Clarity or the Agile tool?

Questions Contact US Contact Web Site Thank you.