Agile Project Management: How to Succeed in the Face of Changing Project Requirements

2017-07-07 02:10:07

Chapter 1: Defining Agile Project Management

Figure 1-1: The relationship between classic and agile PM platforms.
Figure 1-2: Internal uncertainty is higher when doing something for the first time, and it diminishes as you gain experience.
Figure 1-3: Project uncertainty is made up of both internal and external components.
Figure 1-4: Impact of uncertainty on the project as a function of urgency.

Figure 2-1: The operational project environment is more conducive to classic PM.
Figure 2-2: The technology development project environment is more conducive to agile PM.
Figure 2-3: The product development project environment requires a mix of classic PM and agile PM.
Figure 2-4: Agile PM is more applicable when there are fewer organizational stakeholders.
Figure 2-5: Classic PM is more applicable when there are multiple organizational stakeholders.
Figure 2-6: Both agile and classic PM may be applicable when there are multiple organizations within a single company.
Figure 2-7: Applicability of agile PM, based on project type and organizational stakeholders.

Figure 3-1: Typical business consisting of operational and project elements.
Figure 3-2: In agile PM, both the internal and external aspects of business and project decision making are integrated.
Figure 3-3: The primary focus of the project manager in an agile versus classic project environment.
Figure 3-4: The predominately static project boundaries of the classic project give way to more dynamic conditions in the agile project.
Figure 3-5: Agile PM looks to integrate the internal and external project environments.
Figure 3-6: Typical organizational structure for matrix management.
Figure 3-7: The pros and cons of matrix management.
Figure 3-8: A project-based organization integrates the business strategy with the projects.
Figure 3-9: Project-based versus matrix organizations in agile and classic project environments.

Figure 4-1: How team member roles are defined in an agile versus classic environment.
Figure 4-2: Roles and responsibilities in the agile versus classic environment.
Figure 4-3: Decision making in an agile versus classic environment.
Figure 4-4: Meetings in an agile versus classic environment.

Figure 5-1: The project manager's orientation in an agile versus classic environment.
Figure 5-2: Trends and variances monitored by the project manager in an agile versus classic environment.
Figure 5-3: The project manager's focus in an agile versus classic environment.
Figure 5-4: The project manager acts as an intelligent information manifold to distribute key project information to team members and sponsors.

Figure 6-1: The hiring criteria in an agile versus classic project management.

Figure 7-1: Projects that operate on the edge of technology tend to take a zigzag course toward their objectives.
Figure 7-2: The basis of timelines in an agile versus classic environment.
Figure 7-3: The basis of activity durations in an agile versus classic environment.
Figure 7-4: Network diagrams provide a high-level view of a project, especially when there are multiple pathways and decision points, without going into great detail.
Figure 7-5: Gantt chart overlaid on a network diagram.
Figure 7-6: The approach to planning in an agile versus classic environment.
Figure 7-7: Planning effort over time using agile and classic planning methods.
Figure 7-8: The basic planning tools in an agile versus classic environment.

Figure 8-1: Reducing scope to get to market earlier usually extends the overall time and cost needed to get to the original scope.
Figure 8-2: Network diagram with probability weighting assigned to various pathways.
Figure 8-3: Contingency planning in an agile versus classic environment.
Figure 8-4: Project course changes in an agile versus classic environment.

Figure 9-1: Upper management's role in the agile versus classic project.
Figure 9-2: Strategy, business objectives, and tactical projects all exert appropriate influences on each other.
Figure 9-3: Organizational adaptability in an agile versus classic PM environment.
Figure 9-4: A summary of management roles unique to the agile project environment.

Figure 10-1: Project management infrastructures are focused in two broad areas, planning and execution.
Figure 10-2: The operational project management infrastructure.
Figure 10-3: The focus of PM tools in an agile versus classic environment.
Figure 10-4: Architecture of an operational PM infrastructure.

Figure 11-1: A general portfolio management structure showing the alignment of high level strategy, business objectives, programs, and individual projects.
Figure 11-2: In classic portfolio management, external influences start at the top and flow downstream.
Figure 11-3: In agile portfolio management, external influences are felt directly at the top and bottom and subsequently flow both downstream and upstream.
Figure 11-4: The direction of influence in an agile versus classic portfolio.
Figure 11-5: The portfolio review cycle in an agile versus classic portfolio.
Figure 11-6: Portfolio management responsibility in an agile versus classic portfolio.
Figure 11-7: Portfolio mapping hierarchy.
Figure 11-8: Portfolio construction in an agile versus classic environment.
Figure 11-9: Portfolio resource allocation in an agile versus classic environment.
Figure 11-10: Portfolio-level Gantt chart showing roughly estimated project/resource density over time.
Figure 11-11: Portfolio-level Gantt chart showing rough resource usage over time.
Figure 11-12: Top-down, project-level, resource estimation table from Project Data Sheet template.
Figure 11-13: Top-down, portfolio-level, resource estimation table for a specific period.
Figure 11-14: Portfolio-level Gantt chart showing rough resource usage over time.
Figure 11-15: Approach to achieving high-level objectives through tactical projects in an agile versus classic environment.

Figure 12-1: Balancing process and innovation.
Figure 12-2: Integrating project management and portfolio management into the product development process.
Figure 12-3: Portfolio reviews tied to stage-gates.
Figure 12-4: Phase-to-phase detailed project planning.