Phyllis Marbach (Boeing), coauthors Gundars Osvalds (Praxis Engineering), Larri Rosser (Raytheon), and David Lempiach (Rockwell Collins), with the Agile Systems and SE WG commentary to improve the quality of working paper to be submitted to the July issue of INCOSE Insight
This digest was created in real-time during the meeting, based on the speaker’s presentation(s) and comments from the audience. The content should not be viewed as an official transcript of the meeting, but only as an interpretation by a single individual. Lapses, grammatical errors, and typing mistakes may not have been corrected. Questions about content should be directed to the originator. The digest has been made available for purposes of scholarship, posted by David Ing.
INCOSE International Workshop 2014, Torrance, California
Review articles are at:
More a how-to paper than a concept paper
Agile has gone from software development to DoD projects
Proposing a work cadence, the Agile SE Framework, for the EMD phases of a DoD program with many teams working in parallel
- Engineering and Manufacturing Development
What capabilities do you?
There’s a pre-planning phase
- Might have several implementation teams working in parallel
- May also have multiple architectural team working in parallel as well
Figure has a variety of roles
- System engineers
- Product owners
- Chief engineer
- Systems engineer
- Some also working on the implementation team
- If have an architecture came, need to implement at an appropriate time, so that it doesn’t impact schedule
- e.g. could be building operating system software and application software at the same time
Comment: architecture team could be a bottleneck
Architects are also members of the implementation team
- Working together to maintain architectural integrity
Modular architecture is key to making this work
- If don’t have modular, then agile may not be the way to go
It’s really an IPT issue
Comment: How big is the team? Scale?
Agile practices say team is 7 +- 2
- Some teams can be larger, working as part of project
Comment: What’s the largest thing you’ve built?
Had a team of 50, now working as 30
Dean Leffingwell says 80 to 100
Project was integrating new product with legacy code, so hard to say what the measures: army contract over 2 year period
Comment: Tools, e.g. CATIA on Boeing 777?
- Integration and test tools
- Development tools
- Project management tools
- Protection that only
- Design tools, e.g. Rhapsody
- In sprints, maintain design with implementation
- Agile says value code over documentation, but customers need documentation, so need to do simultaneously
In EMD phase, at milestone 2, should have requirements done, at a high level
- Preplanning, define scope and deliverables, list of priorities
- implementation teams,
- architecture team,
- integration and test team, in large projects, need to integration at next sprint
- planning team
- Should work well in testing and development
- Maintaining system integrity
- Larger systems view
- Articulation and satisfaction of needs
- Verification of capabilities and performance
- Goal is to mature the requirements and architecture as the project proceeds, taking advantage of early iterations
Observation: Description doesn’t match?
- Vertical integration with same person on architecture team and implementation team. If can’t do this, then do documentation.
- Horizontional integration to managing things bubbling up
Comment: More likely to accept agile if includes systems engineering? Invites participation in implementation team.
Wanted them to come, but they were working from paradigm of documenting
- Agile could have a more steady flow, so don’t have it not coming together at integration and testing
Question: Incremental integration, different from agile? Systems with architecture up front.
A matter of understanding the work cadence, so that that people know when iterations come up
- Pull integration and test earlier
Question: How long are sprints?
- Software community says 2 to 6 weeks
- When have multiple teams, and hardware team, they need as much as 3 months, but the software team should be working shorter
- Depends on product and development
- Need to all have the same end date, should be working in a similar cadence, even if in different sprints
Comment: Complementary aspects to scale up agile development
- Agile was traditionally small
- Have capability within model
Comment: Found RACI diagrams interesting, nothing for SE to be responsible for?
Have to look at that
- Put that in to show how division of responsibilities could be place, not how they should be done
- Need to have a bellybutton responsible for architecture, can’t just have one person responsible