gayane azizyan miganoush magarian mira kajko-mattsson · 2019-12-16 · jira versionone scrumworks...
TRANSCRIPT
!"#$%&'()'*+,-%'.((-'/01+%'123'4%%30
Gayane Azizyan
Miganoush Magarian
Mira Kajko-Mattsson
Agile 2011, Salt Lake City
!"#$%&'(#)%"
An independent survey of Agile tool usage
What?
Lack of independent surveys and adoption
guidelines
Too many tools!
Why?
!"#$%&'(#)%"
How?
A simple web survey created with Google docs,
spread around LinkedIn groups, Yahoo! Groups,
*+,-.'$/,0Part I
Part II
Company
Role
Team type
Agile methods used
Tools used
Most satisfactory aspects of tools in place
Least satisfactory aspects of tools in place
Desired features
Comments
1,2'3#2-)"-4$),5
121 responses from different companies
35 countries
Over 14 different roles
67$#-!8-1%3,2
Distribution of respondents’ roles:
0% 10% 20% 30% 40%0% 10% 20% 30% 40%
Consultant
Owner/Founder
Other
High-Level Management
Mid-Level Management
Developer
Low-Level Management
67$#-!8-*,792
Reported team types:
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
Large Collocated
Distributed
Small Collocated
67$#-!8-:;)3,-9,#+%&
Agile methods and practices used:
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
FDD
DSDM
Crystal
TDD
Kanban
XP
Scrum with XP
Scrum
67$#-!!8-*%%32-<2,&0% 25% 50%0% 25% 50%
Other
Assembla
XPlanner
TFS
JIRA
VersionOne
ScrumWorks
Mingle
Trac
Rally
Custom Tool
MS Project
Spreadsheets
Physical Wall and Paper
67$#-!!8-*%%32-<2,&
26%
23%
8%
43%
Physical wall and paper
Spreadsheets
MS Project
Other (including 31 different APM tools!)
67$#-!!8-6+02)(73-/2=-:6>
Summary of physical vs. APM tool usage:
31%
Agile Project
Management Tools
65%
Physical Walls
and Paper
61%
67$#-!!8-*%%32-?0-*,79-*0@,Usage of different types of tools in collocated
and distributed teams:
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Custom or In-House Tools
Traditional Project Management Tools
Spreadsheets
Physical Walls and Paper
Agile Project Management Tools
Collocated teams
Distributed Teams
67$#-!!8-6%2)#)/,-:2@,(#2
Most satisfactory aspects of the tools in place:
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Integration with Other Systems
Availability of Reports
Price
Customizability
Ease of Use
67$#-!!8-A,;7#)/,-:2@,(#2
Least satisfactory aspects of the tools in place:
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Too Many Customization Options
Price
Usability Issues
Lack of Custom Reports
Lack of Integration Options
67$#-!!8-A,;7#)/,-.'997$0
Summary of mentioned negative aspects:
93%
7%
At least one negative aspects
No negative aspects
67$#-!!8-B%99,"#2Comments grouped by features:
0% 4% 8% 13% 17% 21% 25%0% 4% 8% 13% 17% 21% 25%
Planning Elements
Comprehensive Tool
Requirements Management
Budget Tracking
Flexibility
Ease of Use
Project Status Tracking
Interface Improvements
New Ideas
Virtual Board Features
Integration
Improved Reporting
B%"(3'2)%"2===
....
*+7"C-0%'D
All external images used in this presentation have been taken from http://www.clker.com