product owner evolution agile and lean development conference - 2014 walter pruchnic may 2014
TRANSCRIPT
Product Owner Evolution
Agile and Lean Development Conference - 2014
Walter PruchnicMay 2014
Legal Notices
This presentation is for informational purposes only. INTEL MAKES NO WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, IN THIS SUMMARY.
[BunnyPeople, Celeron, Celeron Inside, Centrino, Centrino Inside, Core Inside, i960, Intel, the Intel logo, Intel Atom, Intel Atom Inside, Intel Core, Intel Inside, the Intel Inside logo, Intel NetBurst, Intel NetMerge, Intel NetStructure, Intel SingleDriver, Intel SpeedStep, Intel Sponsors of Tomorrow., the Intel Sponsors of Tomorrow. logo, Intel StrataFlash, Intel Viiv, Intel vPro, Intel XScale, InTru, the InTru logo, InTru soundmark, Itanium, Itanium Inside, MCS, MMX, Pentium, Pentium Inside, skoool, the skoool logo, Sound Mark, The Journey Inside, vPro Inside, VTune, Xeon, and Xeon Inside] are trademarks of Intel Corporation in the U.S. and other countries.
*Other names and brands may be claimed as the property of others.Microsoft, Windows, and the Windows logo are trademarks, or registered trademarks of Microsoft Corporation in the United States and/or other countries.Java and all Java based trademarks and logos are trademarks or registered trademarks of Sun Microsystems, Inc. in the U.S. and other countries.Bluetooth is a trademark owned by its proprietor and used by Intel Corporation under license.Intel Corporation uses the Palm OS® Ready mark under license from Palm, Inc.
Copyright © 2014, Intel Corporation. All rights reserved.
Executive Summary
Our Agile/Scrum journey has resulted in a significant reduction to management processes that historically have had unquantifiable impact on final outcomes.
4
Agenda
• Who are we at Intel?• Early “Project Management”.• Establishing the Product Owner.• Q&A.
What We Do
Our Unique Value, ..
WW8 2013Joan Tafoya | Intel Confidential
5
Own and execute supply strategy to position Intel for financial success
• Enable decisions that align stakeholders across the supply chain.• Balance customer service level requirements with costs.
Supply Planning Operations(SPO)
6
Some History
• Large-scale, robust, well integrated, algorithm-based decision support solutions for Intel’s $40B supply network.
• Nextgen Master Production Scheduling.• Since the early 1990’s, attempted this
over 9 times, spending in the hundreds of millions of dollars with very limited benefit.
7
Next Gen MPS Roadmap
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug SeptQ3 '132H '12 Q2 '13Q1 '131H '11 2H '11 1H' 12
Fab MPS Convergence
AT MPSConvergence
Program Program Explore
ECEP Fab MPS Conv Ph 1
CPU Fab MPS Conv Ph1
Fab MPS Convergence Ph 2 Technical Platform
JOLT Solver
Chipsets Explore
Databank WFDS Migration AT MPS One Common Design
ATM MPS Phase 1
Deployments Contingent upon Explore,,Design& /or Project Launch Date ~50% confidence
Committed Deployments
Explore / Design / Foundational Dev
Deployments Contingent upon Planning Activities
Completed Deployments
Chipsets / PP2 Data Readiness
Integrated Testing, Schedules Validation & Deployment
*Deployments require 2-3 month stabilization
Fab MPS Convergence Ph 2 – Process Transformation, Convergence, CT Reduction
ATM MPS Phase 2B Die Response Solver
Chipset /PP2 Non-Solver MPS Convergence
Chipsets /PP2 AT MPS CR Convergence
ATM MPS Phase 2A Capacity Response Solver
Integration of Ecosystem Tools (Dmd, Foundry, Subcon, DSE, etc.)
Chipset /PP2 WFDS Technical Platform / WFDS Proliferation
Chipsets / PP2 Data Conversion
Chipsets /PP2 AT MPS DR Convergence
Chipsets /PP2 Fab MPS Convergence
Stabilization
Zhihui Integration
NOTE – EXTENDED THRU Q4 FOR CIP
Fab MPS Scrum Team
ATMPS Scrum Team
“Why do you have to do a proof of concept?”
“Tell me when you’re going to be done!”
“What do you mean it’s in production?”
“Well done team!”
ON-SITE CUSTOMER!
PULL!(not Push)
TEST, TEST, TEST!
The Scrum Team rejected.
We rejected.
Servant Leadership!
& a member of the technical team!
Solution: Overview
Project Manager
Product Owner
Idea
!
Value Commit Go Live
Clos
ure
Backlog Formed Releases to P.O.
Released to Users
CONFLICTING DYNAMICS!
Perception
Project Manager
Product Owner
The Project Manager is running the show & there is value.
The Product Owner is my on-site customer rep & servant leader.
A schedule exists.
Scrum Team just keeps making progress.
Management feels in control of making decisions.
Scrum Team just keeps making progress.
Product is delivered quickly.
Scrum Team finishes & The Product Owner says “whew”.
ON-TIME RELEASESBEST-IN-CLASS QUALITY
TRANSPARENCYADAPTIVE TO CHANGE
ELIMINATION OF PLC MILESTONES
Key Result“The PLC process feels like watching a glacier move. It is slow, reactive, and is not set up to respond to the changing business needs. In my experience, the environmental landscape changes dramatically between the time that a ‘value’ decision is made and a ‘go’ decision is made. In between, the team working on the project through PLC is heads down and out of touch with this everything else going on. There is no ‘sensing’ mechanism in the PLC process to check: 1) if indeed the customer is getting what they want and need, 2) evaluate if this project is still the right thing to do given the business climate and resources available, and 3) provide rapid reflection for learning – in the spirit of continuously getting better. The Agile / Scrum process provides all of this. I’m not sure why anyone would want to use PLC. For any business that wants to remain competitive, profitable and relevant, PLC is not the answer –it is too expensive!”
-- Joan Tafoya, Director of Supply Planning Operations, Q1-2014
Conclusions
• If you are practicing Agile/Scrum in a Waterfall culture:– Results are required.
– Be open to accepting realities and find ways to make those realities work.
– Have Patience, Trust, Transparency.
Backup
CPLGCustomer Fulfillment Planning and Logistics GroupIntel Confidential — Do Not Forward 20
Leadership R&R(Agile Architects, Product Owners & Scrum Masters)
Copy-ExactExplore-Design-
Implementation Process(SCRUM)
Copy-ExactEngineering Process & Knowledge
(Agile Engr BKM’s)
CommonSystem
Architecture
Role Models Agile Management & Engineering Practices combined!
Common Leadership
Common Planning Process
Common Engineering Practices
Foundational Framework
Common Tools & Processes Across SPO: 50% Reduction in
Planning TPT. Better Decisions.
CPLGCustomer Fulfillment Planning and Logistics GroupIntel Confidential — Do Not Forward 21
Quality Data(inc. Fab MPS, ATMPS CR, & ATMPS DR)
Less than 5% of solve runsrequire SPDT support.
~40% of all support is related to explaining solveresults; ~8% is a code defect.
Acknowledgements
• Illustration Acknowledgement:–“Scrum” illustration:
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/bharry/archive/2011/06/21/the-importance-of-feedback-in-software-development.aspx–“Choice” picture: www.changingthetide.org–“Boss” illustration: www.pbsmastragix.com–“Communication Cans” illustration:
www.theemailadmin.com–“Servant Leadership” illustration:
www.wisdomresearch.org–“Magic Hands” picture: www.dreamstime.com
• Agile Fluency Model:– James Shore: www.jamesshore.com
