1. Announcement – Career Fair Who: Everyone should plan to go… What: Meet / network with companies Meet hiring managers Get information first hand Where:3 rd floor Davies Center When: Thursday, September 24th (10:00 AM – 3:00 PM) Why:At some point you will need a job, and this is the best way to go about getting one. COPYRIGHT TOM SULZER © 2015 Tip: The best jobs are not advertised. They are typically filled before by people that are networked and know about the positions ahead of time.

2. COPYRIGHT TOM SULZER © 2015 Jack Neift Trucking Company  Go through the On-Line interactive case  Read through the case  Review Complexity vs. Uncertainty  Classify the project!

3. COPYRIGHT TOM SULZER © 2015 Where does Jack Neift Trucking’s Project fit? How To Get It Clearly Defined Not Clearly Defined What Is Needed? Clearly Defined TraditionalAdaptive Not Clearly Defined N/AExtreme from Wysocki 2003

4. COPYRIGHT TOM SULZER © 2015 LOWHIGH Uncertainty HIGH Complexity LOW Adaptive Extreme Iterative Traditional (Linear, Incremental) Jack Neift Trucking’s Project Complexity vs. Uncertainty? Software Development Project Approaches

5. COPYRIGHT TOM SULZER © 2015 Where does Jack Neift Project fit?  Evaluate in teams each of these criteria for Jack Neift’s CASE problem:  Risk: High, Medium, Low  Business value: High, Medium, Low  Duration: Short ( 6 months)  Complexity: High, Medium, Low  Technology: Unknown/New, some familiarity, Well known  Proportion of organization affected (All, several depts, one dept.)  Cost: $$$$$, $$$$, $$$, $$, $

6. Jack Neift Trucking on Wysocki’s model COPYRIGHT TOM SULZER © 2015

7. Jack Neift Trucking on Project Complexity vs. Project Environment model COPYRIGHT TOM SULZER © 2015 LOWHIGH Uncertainty HIGH Complexity LOW Adaptive Extreme Iterative Traditional (Linear, Incremental)

8. COPYRIGHT TOM SULZER © 2015 Where does Jack Neift Project fit?  Evaluate in teams each of these criteria for Jack Neift’s CASE problem:  Risk: High, Medium, Low  Business value: High, Medium, Low  Duration: Short ( 6 months)  Complexity: High, Medium, Low  Technology: Unknown/New, some familiarity, Well known  Proportion of organization affected (All, several depts., one dept.)  Cost: $$$$$, $$$$, $$$, $$, $

9. Iterative/Adaptive Project Framework 5 phases

10. Reminder:  Weather Or Not.com Case write up due before 11:59pm tonight! Fissure Simulation Software:  See class web page. See class web page COPYRIGHT TOM SULZER © 2015

11. Iterative PM & Rational Unified Process Trad PM Initial cycle...... Trad PM Final cycle Waterfall process for version 1...... Waterfall process for version n Much use of software library built up over many projects COPYRIGHT TOM SULZER © 2015

12. Overview  Scope is variable – Prioritized list  Iterative – scope changes can occur at the end of every iteration  High level planning is based on the component or function  Client – driven change  Client assessment of business value at the end of each iteration COPYRIGHT TOM SULZER © 2015

13. Five Phases 1) Version Scope 2) Cycle Plan 3) Cycle Build 4) Client Check point 5) Post-Version Review 5 COPYRIGHT TOM SULZER © 2015

14. Characteristics  More client involvement  Client involvement is more critical  Detailed planning converges to Just in Time  Documentation is reduced  Co-location of team is important  Usually uses more senior employees  More emphasis on oral communication  Increasing need for strong sponsorship  Increasing expectation of change COPYRIGHT TOM SULZER © 2015 Why?

15. Iterative/Adaptive PM with SCRUM Scope Plan Launch (Vague) Idea Product owner develops prioritized function list (Product backlog) Sprint Planning Meeting Sprint Backlog Sprint 4-hr: client presents prioritized functionality to be added to backlog 4 hr: high-level sprint plan COPYRIGHT TOM SULZER © 2015

16. Iterative / Adaptive PM with SCRUM Monitor and Control Close Sprint Backlog Sprint Demo Sprint Functionality SCRUM has <= 30 day sprints COPYRIGHT TOM SULZER © 2015

17. Version Scope  Same as Traditional  Outputs:  Conditions Of Satisfaction,  Project Overview Statement  Also  Best guess at prioritized list of functions (requirements) in realization that it will change COPYRIGHT TOM SULZER © 2015

18. Version Scope  Output:  Work Breakdown Structure taken to mid-level  Prioritize scope triangle parameters (time, cost, resources, scope, quality) COPYRIGHT TOM SULZER © 2015

19. Cycle Plan  Inputs (first cycle)  POS  Prioritized scope triangle  Functionality to be built  Mid level WBS  Add for subsequent cycles  Scope Bank (new ideas or thoughts on functionality – discovery) COPYRIGHT TOM SULZER © 2015

20. Cycle Plan  Process 1. Prioritize functionality into cycles for development (cycle length 2-6 weeks) Get functionality to be built this cycle 2. Decompose extracted WBS to task level 3. Note dependencies among tasks 4. Group tasks in meaningful way and assign task groups to teams 5. Team develops own schedule and resource allocation subject to cycle time and budget. COPYRIGHT TOM SULZER © 2015

21. Cycle Build  Finish cycle build schedule and resource allocation  Team members have daily task list, post status of tasks daily  PM does daily review and acts on any variances COPYRIGHT TOM SULZER © 2015

22. Cycle Build  Issue Log  Records all issues that arise and how they are addressed and resolved’  Scope Bank  Records all ideas, learning, “discovery” by teams in process of work COPYRIGHT TOM SULZER © 2015

23. Client Checkpoint  Critical Review  Criteria:  Quality  Business Value  Consider:  Scope bank – what has been learned, how does it affect the functionality in the scope?  Revise priorities on functionality for next cycle COPYRIGHT TOM SULZER © 2015

24. Post-Version Review  Version is complete or incomplete  Allocated Budget/Time spent  Compare to success criteria  Document learning  Initial ideas for next version COPYRIGHT TOM SULZER © 2015

25. Final Questions  Was the business outcome realized?  Was anything learned to improve the version?  What was learned to improve the PM process?  Yes? Great!  No? Kill the project.  We’ll do better next time. COPYRIGHT TOM SULZER © 2015

26. Extreme PM with Flexible Model Scope Plan Launch Monitor and Control Close Visionate Speculate Innovate Reevaluate Disseminate Yes No INSPIREINSPIRE COPYRIGHT TOM SULZER © 2015

27. Mapping Extreme to Traditional Exremei (Agile)  Visionate  Speculate  Innovate  Reevaluate  Disseminate COPYRIGHT TOM SULZER © 2015 Traditional  Scope  Planning project infrastructure  Design, Build, Test  Customer to evaluation progress  Deployment, implementation

28. Second Life Roles…