Program

Monday, 25 May 2015

Room Baltica Nordia Fennia I Nautica
09:00 MO1.1 1st International Workshop on Requirements Engineering in Agile Development (READ) MO1.2 Continuous Delivery with Docker and Jenkins Job Builder Wouter Lagerweij MO1.3 Value Harvesting Fair Minna Hallikainen and Outi Väättänen MO1.4 Collaborative Exploratory and Unit Testing Maaret Pyhäjärvi and Llewellyn Falco
9:00 – 12:30 1st International Workshop on Requirements Engineering in Agile Development (READ)
Organizers: Sabrina Marczak, Maya Daneva, Ville T. Heikkilä, Nils Brede Moe and Knut H. Rolland. READ2015: 1st International Workshop on Requirements Engineering in Agile (Scientific Workshop, 3 hours)
Abstract: Requirements are the abstractions we use to represent what carries value to the customer business. This value needs to be captured and carried into the development cycle. Requirements engineering is the well-established discipline that provides a wide range of approaches, techniques, and tools to elicit, analyze, specify, model, verify, validate, negotiate, prioritize and manage requirements. As software applications became larger and more complex as well as teams gets physically distributed, requirements engineering activities also became more complex and difficult to achieve with high quality. Lack of documentation, requirements creep, late notification of changes, misunderstandings of specifications, and lack of customer involvement are just a few of the issues often faced by software teams concerning requirements. Increase of control and addition of formal process definitions and checkpoints over requirements activities, slowing down the development life cycle, were unintended consequences of attempts to improve the aim of delivering higher- value and higher-quality software products to the customer. The agile movement, with light-weight and effective practices, is one of the most significant changes recently seen in how to develop software. The adaptability to changes and the intense collaboration with the customer are two important characteristics of the agile philosophy translated into practices by agile methods. Despite the almost two decades of adoption of agile in the software industry, we still have little evidence on how requirements engineering is done and fits the agile philosophy. The main goal of this workshop is to promote discussion on the matter and, in a long-term, to develop an understanding of what are the requirements engineering-related challenges faced and the best practices adopted by agile software development organizations. Discussions will be guided by submitted papers but not restricted to them.
9:00-9:30 Opening – introduction to the workshop goal, schedule and work dynamics
9:30-9:45 Irum Inayat (University of Malaya), Lauriane Moraes (PUCRS), Maya Daneava (University of Twente), and Siti Salwah Salim (University of Malaya). A Reflection on Agile Requirements Engineering: Solutions Brought and Challenges Posed (Workshop Research Paper, 15 minutes)
Abstract: The software development industry has accepted agile methods rapidly in the past two decades. Empirical studies suggest that due to their flexible and emergent nature, agile methods brought solutions to several chronic problems of traditional software development method. One among the many is the acceptance of requirements changes at later stages of development. However, knowledge about the solutions that agile brought to the area of requirements engineering (RE) is fragmented. Also, little is known about whether the agile philosophy, while introducing solutions to well-known RE problems from the past, has unintentionally opened new challenges. This paper offers a reflection on this. Based on the results in a recently published systematic review on agile RE, we reflect on the differences of ‘traditional’ RE and agile RE, on the solutions and the challenges of agile RE and on some implications that agile RE might have for research and practice.
9:45-10:00 Knut H. Rolland (SINTEF and Westerdals Oslo ACT). ‘Desperately’ Seeking Research on Agile Requirements in the Context of Large-Scale Agile Projects (Workshop Research Paper, 15 minutes)
Abstract: In this paper, I propose an agenda for undertaking research on requirements engineering in the context of large-scale agile software development projects. In so doing, I draw from my own experience as a practitioner in large-scale agile software development projects, as well as a review of relevant literature. Based on this, the paper reflects on two central questions: what are the main challenges related to requirements in large-scale agile software development? And, what are the relevant themes for researching requirements in large-scale agile projects?
10:00-10:15 Tor Erlend Fægri (SINTEF ICT) and Nils Brede Moe (SINTEF ICT). Re-conceptualizing requirements engineering: Findings from a large-scale, agile project (Workshop Research Paper, 15 minutes)
Abstract: Agile development is a force that reshapes requirements engineering (RE). Agile RE processes are not constrained to pre-development phase like in traditional RE; they’re evenly spread throughout development. High-level RE occurs at the project beginning, and then agile RE continues at each development cycle. Each development cycle starts with customer representatives discussing requirements with the development teams. To seek new understanding of the requirements engineering process in agile projects, we have applied the model of software development as a conversation. In this paper we describe this model and use it to explain a selection of findings from a case study in a large-scale agile project.
10:15-10:30 Elizabeth Bjarnason (Lund University), Michael Unterkalmsteiner (Blekinge Institute of Technology), Emilie Engstrom (Lund University) and Markus Borg (Lund University). An Industrial Case Study on Test Cases as Requirements (Invited Short Talk, 15 minutes)
10:30-11:00 Coffee Break
11:00-12:20 Research agenda and roadmap discussion
Brainstorming of relevant issues and topics of interest among the participants. Group work to further the discussion on the issues and topics listed aiming to define a research agenda and roadmap for future work.
12:20-12:30 Closing
Wrap-up summarizing the morning work and next actions agreed among the participants.

9:00 – 12:30 Industry & Practice
Wouter Lagerweij (Wouter Lagerweij Consultancy). Continuous Delivery with Docker and Jenkins Job Builder (Industry & Practice, 3 hours)
Abstract: “Automate everything”

Mature agile teams use build servers to build, test and, more and more often, also deploy their software. As the industry is moving towards Continuous Delivery, and infrastructure as software, this automation now also includes creating the environments to run on.

New tools make it orders of magnitude easier and faster to create and maintain a Continuous Delivery Pipeline.

In this tutorial workshop, we’ll go through the steps to create a full fresh Jenkins install on the participant’s laptop, to create a ‘production’ environment in there, and to create a fully version controlled pipeline for an example project.

More specifically, participants will:
- Use a prepared Ansible script to create their own Jenkins installation
- Add a new job to Jenkins using Jenkins Job Builder
- Create a Docker container for an example project
- Run the container locally
- Deploy the container to an environment (running locally in CoreOS) from Jenkins
- Use Jenkins Job Builder to set up a full pipeline for the example project

I’ll also discuss various problems I’ve encountered working with these technologies in real project, and how we worked around them.

Participants will need to bring a laptop with Vagrant installed, using the VirtualBox provider. I’ll provide a pre-built vagrant box to get everyone quickly up-to-speed.

9:00 – 12:30 Industry & Practice
Minna Hallikainen (Ericsson Finland) and Outi Väättänen (Ericsson Finland). Value Harvesting Fair (Industry & Practice, 3 hours)
Abstract: Purpose of the workshop is to show a different way to start the Large Scale Lean and Agile journey for a product organization using metaphors and storytelling. The journey aims for moving from cyclic to continuous value delivery.
The goal of this workshop is to describe how a rapidly growing distributed product development organization at Ericsson used value workshop called “Value Harvesting Fair” to align the different sites and teams when adopting Lean and Agile software development. During the Fairs, the teams worked on common values: their interpretation and behavioral implications, using a tree metaphor.
Value Harvesting Fair was used to agree on common values and behaviors that will help the community to practice and root them in everyday life. Throughout the Fair a tree was used as a metaphor. The topics of the Fair were all related to trees e.g. Seeding, Growing, Fertilizing and finally Planting a real cherry tree.
The Fair was very valuable in creating a common organizational identity. After the Fair it is important to continuously reinforce the values. These values are drivers for wanted daily behaviors to be able to continuously deliver value to the customers.
During the workshop all the steps of a Fair will be experienced interactively by all the workshop participants.

9:00 – 17:00 Industry & Practice
Maaret Pyhäjärvi (Granlund Oy) and Llewellyn Falco (Spun Labs). Collaborative Exploratory and Unit Testing – How to Harness the Insights of Bug Discovery to Protect your Code (Industry & Practice, 6 hours)
Abstract: Cross-functional teams have team members with specialized in-depth skills. Collaboration between team members has a significant impact on the team’s ability to deliver value efficiently. In this tutorial, we teach you how to pull together a tester-facing discipline of Exploratory testing and the developer-facing discipline of Unit testing. To do this, we create insights into the product and code through exploring and leverage these insights via unit testing.

The tutorial teaches from the premise of combining forces of machines and humans, leveraging developer and tester skill sets. Machines are particularly well suited for exploring large computational space. Machines enable us to cover variations, in cases where manually we would sample and potentially miss problems. In variations and repeating, computers will easily outperform humans. What they can’t do is have any insight or creative ideas. That’s where humans excel and testers in particular have refined the skill to creatively understand and use software to gain understanding and insight into its quality and weaknesses.

The tutorial allows for a mix of managers, testers and developers to participate. We explore in pairs and implement unit tests in a mob with a style of pairing where the navigator on the keyboard gets to follow the instructions from the group (strong-style pairing). The facilitators help in getting the tasks done balancing the available skills in the group.

This is a hands-on session, where a laptop per pair is required.

10:30 Break
11:00 (previous session continues)
12:30 Lunch
13:30 MO2.1 Agile methods applied to development and certification of safety-critical software (ASCS) MO2.2 DevOps and Continuous Value Delivery with Chocolate and LEGO Dana Pylayeva MO2.3 Fearless Change: Patterns for Introducing New Ideas Linda Rising MO2.4 (previous session continues)
13:30 – 17:00 Agile methods applied to development and certification of safety-critical software (ASCS)
Organizers: Geir K. Hanssen, Thor Myklebust and Tor Stålhane. ASCS – (First international workshop on) Agile methods applied to development and certification of safety-critical software (Scientific Workshop, 3 hours)
Abstract: Development, certification and maintenance of safety-critical software systems is complex and costly. In particular, having a high safety integrity system certified according to mandatory standards such as IEC61508 (process), DO178C (avionics) or EN50128 (railway) is fundamental to keep a competitive advantage but also one of the most severe cost drivers. An estimated 25-50% of total costs may be related to production of proof of compliance to standards and the assessment by external certification bodies. The established practice in the industry is to base development on extensive up-front planning with a consecutive strict focus on plan adherence and late verification and validation of the solution being built. However, this approach gives low flexibility and a risk of discovering critical problems at a late stage where correction costs are high. The industry has recently shown great interest in agile methods and techniques as a mean to improve performance with respect to development efficiency, system quality and safety integrity, as well as resource optimization and effective assessment and certification. This raises a series of research challenges, for example how to adapt agile principles to large and complex HW/SW projects, how to implement changes in a conservative and plan-driven practice, how to involve external certification and notified bodies, and how to enable efficient traceability and documentation management. This event will be the first international workshop addressing industrial and scientific challenges related to the adoption of agile methods and techniques to improve development and certification of safety-critical and high-integrity systems.
J. Axelsson, J. Nyfjord et al. (SICS/KTH). Notes On Agile and Safety-Critical Development
Abstract: Agile approaches have been highly influential to the software engineering practices in many organizations, and are increasingly being applied in larger companies, and for developing systems outside the pure software domain. To understand more about the current state of agile, its applications to safety-critical systems, and the consequences on innovation and large organizations, a seminar was organized in Stockholm in 2014. This paper gives an overview of the topics discussed at that seminar, a summary of the main results and suggestions for future work as input to a research agenda for agile development of safety-critical software.
T. Stålhane (NTNU). Agile safety analysis
Abstract: In this paper, we describe a method for performing safety analysis based on user stories in an agile setting. The chosen analysis method is a generic hazards list, combined with FMEA – both because it is simple and intuitive to use and because it is efficient. In order to handle failure propagation in an efficient and easy-to- understand way, we have chosen to use the input-Focused FMEA from the HiP-HOPS project.
Abstract: In this paper we describe the results of a recent practitioner survey designed to elicit the opinions as to the challenges and opportunities posed by the application of agile development methods in the field of safety critical systems development. In particular, the survey explored the relationship between three key activities in safety engineering and an agile approach – namely, safety requirements development, hazard analysis, and safety case development. The results of this survey are presented together with brief discussion of the implications for integration.
Break at 15:00-15:30
I. Kulbrandstad (Autronica Fire & Security). Learning by doing: lessons from industry
Group discussion: Key challenges and research issues

13:30 – 17:00 Industry & Practice
Dana Pylayeva (Rakuten Marketing). DevOps and Continuous Value Delivery with Chocolate and LEGO (Industry & Practice, 3 hours)
Abstract: This highly engaging and dynamic workshop will use elements of Gamification to demonstrate the advantage of moving away from cyclical to continuous value delivery. Using LEGO and chocolate, session participants will simulate the end-to-end value delivery in a typical product development organization.

We will start by highlighting a problem caused by cyclical approach with its “Potentially shippable product increments”. When not released into production at the end of iteration, the increments can accumulate in front of IT operations. These queues can lead to a future deployment chaos and service disruption. Additionally, this approach can slowdown the feedback loop and negatively impact quality.

Throughout the workshop, attendees will have a chance to experiment with various process optimizations. They will learn to decouple an Iteration/Sprint (as a planning unit) from a Release (as a deployment unit). They will minimize the batch sizes, increase frequency of releases and eventually migrate towards delivering continuous flow of value.

Inspired by ideas from “The Phoenix Project” this workshop will highlight the power of cross-functional teams in amplifying value delivery and delighting the customers. A number of mini-retrospectives throughout the workshop and a fishbowl-style retrospective at the end with help the audience share their learning and exchange ideas.

This gentle and fun introduction to DevOps will arm participants and help them embrace the changes in the culture of their own organizations towards better integration between different roles, deployment automation, continuous delivery of value and continuous customer delight!

13:30 – 17:00 Industry & Practice
Linda Rising. Fearless Change: Patterns for Introducing New Ideas (Industry & Practice, 3 hours)
Abstract: We attend conferences or read books and articles discover new ideas we want to bring into our organizations—but we often struggle when trying to implement those changes. Unfortunately, those introducing change are not always welcomed with open arms. Linda Rising offers proven change management strategies to help you become a more successful agent of change in your organization. Learn how to plant effective seeds of change, and what forces in your organization drive or block change. In addition to using these approaches to change your organization, you can use them to become a more effective person–these strategies or patterns are useful in many different settings. Come and discuss your organizational and personal change challenges. Linda shares lessons from her book, Fearless Change: Patterns for Introducing New Ideas and a forthcoming More Fearless Change. Learn how to overcome adversity to change and to celebrate your improvement successes along with your organization’s new found practices.

15:00 Break
15:30 (previous session continues)
17:00 Spare time
18:00
18:00 – 19:30 Welcome Reception at Helsinki City Hall
Welcome Reception Location
The City of Helsinki is hosting a welcome reception for the XP2015 conference participants. The reception is being held in the festive assembly hall of the Helsinki City Hall, address: Pohjoisesplanadi 11-13, 5 minutes walk from the conference venue.

Tuesday, 26 May 2015

Room Fennia II Press Room Nordia Nautica Fennia I
08:30 (at Fennia II) TU1.1 Conference opening and Keynote: Continuous Retrospectives Linda Rising
8:30 – 10:30 Conference opening and Keynote: Continuous Retrospectives
Conference opening (15 minutes)

View on Vimeo
Linda Rising. Continuous Retrospectives (Keynote, 1 hour)
Abstract: Just like a married couple who has been together for a long time, agile teams can grow a little careless in doing retrospectives. Some of the rationale for the practice might have slipped away or the insights might seem less compelling or, in many cases, a lot of focus on problems causes teams to lose sight of the big picture. Learning might have stalled. In this presentation, Linda Rising will share her thoughts and experience on the changing role of retrospectives, especially for more experienced teams who might even been moving toward continuous delivery. Linda will try to bring in some research from cognitive neuroscience to help busy teams be more productive.

Bio: Linda Rising has a Ph.D. from Arizona State University in the field of object-based design metrics and a background that includes university teaching and industry work in telecommunications, avionics, and strategic weapons systems. An internationally known presenter on topics related to patterns, retrospectives, agile development approaches, the change process, and the connection between the latest neuroscience and software development, Linda is the author of numerous articles and five books—Design Patterns in Communications, The Pattern Almanac 2000, A Patterns Handbook, Fearless Change: Patterns for Introducing New Ideas, and More Fearless Change, the latter two written with Mary Lynn Manns. Find more information about Linda at lindarising.org.

10:30 Break, Poster Session A and Coaches Clinic
10:30 – 11:00 Poster Session A and Coaches Clinic
Juha-Matti Vanhatupa (PacketVideo Finland) and Mikko Heikkinen (PacketVideo Finland). Automatizing Android Unit and User Interface Testing (Poster)
Emil Alegroth (Chalmers), Håkan Burden (University of Gothenburg), Morgan Ericsson (University of Gothenburg), Eric Knauss (University of Gothenburg), Imed Hammouda (University of Gothenburg) and Jan-Philipp Steghöfer (University of Gothenburg). Teaching Scrum – What we did, what we will do and what impedes us (Poster)
Kshama Bhat (Cisco Video Technologies India Pvt Ltd). Splitting user stories gives a splitting headache no more (Poster)
Geir Kjetil Hanssen (SINTEF ICT), Ingar Kulbrandstad (Autronica Fire & Security AS) and Børge Haugset (SINTEF ICT). Introducing SafeScrum (Poster)
Aleksander Fabijan (Malmö University). Data-Driven Decision-Making in Product R&D (Poster)
Philipp Diebold (Fraunhofer IESE). Software Process Improvement using Agile Practices (Poster)
Coaches Clinic
During the session breaks we will provide a Coaches Clinic, where you can meet experienced coaches and get help with solving your issues at work. Get tips and help on Agile methodologies, team dynamics, personal development, organizational change or coaching techniques. Or just bring any problem or question you can think of to the table. Our coaches will do their best to help you out! Make an appointment by our schedule board, or just drop in to see if there are coaches available.

11:00 TU2.1 Why We Need Architects (and Architecture) on Agile Projects Rebecca Wirfs-Brock.
Session Chair: Børge Haugset
TU2.2 Startups and Experimentation.
Session Chair: Juan Grabajosa
TU2.3 DevOps.
Session Chair: Tommi Mikkonen
TU2.4 Agile Culture and Teams.
Session Chair: Jutta Eckstein
11:00 – 12:00 Why We Need Architects (and Architecture) on Agile Projects
Rebecca Wirfs-Brock. Why We Need Architects (and Architecture) on Agile Projects (Invited Talk, 1 hour)
Abstract: Good architecture, no matter what the size of the system, requires ongoing attention and stewardship. Emergent architecture is not about letting stuff happen without paying attention. Quite the opposite.The idea of emergent architecture is to build the simplest sustainable solution that solves the customer’s problem and then evolve it as we learn more about our system as we build it. But it isn’t always prudent to let the software architecture emerge at the speed of the next iteration. Sometimes, especially on complex projects with lots of unknowns, you need to do more. On large, complex projects there often are a lot of technical risk, interdependencies, and conflicting priorities. So how should architecting be done on agile projects? It varies from project to project, depending on risk, complexity, and size. This talk presents some useful architecture practices for both smaller and larger agile projects and explains how an agile architect’s role can and should differ from that of a traditional software architect.

Rebecca is an object design pioneer who invented the set of design practices known as Responsibility-Driven Design (RDD) and by accident started the x-Driven Design meme. Along the way she authored two popular object design books that are still in print. In her work, Rebecca’s helps teams hone their design and architecture skills, manage and reduce technical debt, refactor their code, and address architecture risks. In addition to coaching and personal mentoring, she teaches and conducts workshops on Responsibility-Driven Design, Pragmatic TDD, enterprise application design, agile design skills and thinking, being agile about system qualities, and Agile Architecture. In her spare time she jogs (even in the rain). Rebecca is program director of the Agile Alliance’s Experience Reports Program and co-chair of the XP 2015 Experience Reports and the Agile 2015 Experience Reports tracks. Another interest of hers is software patterns. She serves on the Board of the Hillside Group and recently has written patterns about sustainable architecture, agile QA, and adaptive systems architectures. If you are interested in writing about your experiences or sharing your wisdom in pattern form, contact Rebecca. She can help you turn your itch for writing into the written word.

11:00 – 12:00 Startups and Experimentation
Carmine Giardino (Free University of Bolzano), Sohaib Shahid Bajwa (Free University of Bolzano), Xiaofeng Wang (Free University of Bolzano) and Pekka Abrahamsson (Norwegian University of Science Technology). Key Challenges in Early-stage Software Startups (Full Research Paper, 20 minutes)
Abstract: Software startups are newly created companies designed to grow fast. The uncertainty of new markets and development of cuttingedge technologies pose challenges different from those faced by more mature companies. In this study, we focus on exploring the key challenges that early-stage software startups have to cope with from idea conceptualization to the first time to market. To investigate the key challenges, we used a mixed-method research approach which includes both a largescale survey of 5389 responses and an in-depth multiple-case study. The initial findings reveal that thriving in technology uncertainty and acquiring the first paying customer are among the top challenges, perceived and experienced by early-stage software startups. Our study implies deeper issues that early-stage software startups need to address effectively in validating the problem-solution fit.
Best Paper Candidate: Eveliina Lindgren (University of Helsinki) and Jürgen Munch (University of Helsinki). Software Development as an Experiment System: A Qualitative Survey on the State of the Practice (Full Research Paper, 20 minutes)
Abstract: An experiment-driven approach to software product and service development is gaining increasing attention as a way to channel limited resources to the efficient creation of customer value. In this approach, software functionalities are developed incrementally and validated in continuous experiments with stakeholders such as customers and users. The experiments provide factual feedback for guiding subsequent development. Although case studies on experimentation in industry exist, the understanding of the state of the practice and the encountered obstacles is incomplete. This paper presents an interview-based qualitative survey exploring the experimentation experiences of ten software development companies. The study found that although the principles of continuous experimentation resonated with industry practitioners, the state of the practice is not yet mature. In particular, experimentation is rarely systematic and continuous. Key challenges relate to changing organizational culture, accelerating development cycle speed, and measuring customer value and product success.
Laura Hokkanen (Tampere University of Technology) and Kaisa Väänänen-Vainio-Mattila (Tampere University of Technology). UX Work in Startups: Current Practices and Future Needs (Full Research Paper, 20 minutes)
Abstract: Startups are creating innovative new products and services while seeking fast growth with little resources. The capability to produce software products with good user experience (UX) can help the startup to gain positive attention and revenue. Practices and needs for UX design in startups are not well understood. Research can provide insight on how to design UX with little resources as well as to gaps about what kind of better practices should be developed. In this paper we describe the results of an interview study with eight startups operating in Finland. Current UX practices, challenges and needs for the future were investigated. The results show that personal networks have a significant role in helping startups gain professional UX advice as well as user feedback when designing for UX. When scaling up startups expect usage data and analytics to guide them towards better UX design.

11:00 – 12:00 DevOps
Jens Smeds (Åbo Akademi University), Kristian Nybom (Åbo Akademi University) and Ivan Porres (Åbo Akademi University). DevOps: A Definition and Perceived Adoption Impediments (Full Research Paper, 20 minutes)
Abstract: As the interest in DevOps continues to grow, there is an increasing need for software organizations to understand how to adopt it successfully. This study has as objective to clarify the concept and provide insight into existing challenges of adopting DevOps. First, the existing literature is reviewed. A definition of DevOps is then formed based on the literature by breaking down the concept into its defining characteristics. We interview 13 subjects in a software company adopting DevOps and, finally, we present 11 impediments for the company’s DevOps adoption that were identified based on the interviews.
Lucy Ellen Lwakatare (University of Oulu), Pasi Kuvaja (University of Oulu) and Markku Oivo (University of Oulu). The Dimensions of DevOps (Short Research Paper, 10 minutes)
Abstract: DevOps has been identified as an important aspect in the continuous deployment paradigm in practitioner communities and academic research circles. However, little has been presented to describe and formalize what it constitutes. The absence of such understanding means that the phenomenon will not be effectively communicated and its impact not understood in those two communities. This study investigates the elements that characterize the DevOps phenomenon using a literature survey and interviews with practitioners actively involved in the DevOps movement. Four main dimensions of DevOps are identified: collaboration, automation, measurement and monitoring. An initial conceptual framework is developed to communicate the phenomenon to practitioners and the scientific community as well as to facilitate input for future research.
Pasi Niemi (Nitor Creations Oy) and Mika Majakorpi (Nitor Creations Oy). Willow continous deployment toolset (Technical Demo, 30 minutes)
Abstract: Willow is a set of tools to enable agile deployment, monitoring and scaling for any software project. We believe that when the amount of independent run-time environments grows, it is crucial that extreme transparency, fault tolerance, flexibility and scalability be built into the project from the beginning and that all of the run-time behaviour (including scaling) be testable the same way in all environments.

11:00 – 12:00 Agile Culture and Teams
Johanna Hunt (Eventyr Limited). On a Different Level of Team (Experience Report, 20 minutes)
Abstract: This experience report summarises the decision-making process used at Aptivate, focusing on the decision to create ‘standing teams’ with delegated authority to plan the distribution of their own work across multiple projects. The paper presents the company approach to consensus decision-making, and how this has supported company culture and values as well as enabled this change with full participation. This experience report covers the time period from September 2014 to March 2015.
Abstract: The Guide Board is an artefact that supports continuous improvement of practices and interactions within a team, with the same materials as classical agile artefacts. It represents the conclusions of a team’s retrospectives as “guides” to make them tangible. By specifying how these guides are visualised and handled depending on their actual application, the Guide Board improves the production system efficiency by increasing the critical reuse of previous conclusions. A successful application substantially increases the team’s self-awareness of its culture, and makes its habits more visible to other stakeholders, thus improving communication. Finally, it improves the readability of its social rules to newcomers, thus supporting integration of new hires and therefore growth.
Jari Partanen (Elektrobit Wireless Communications Ltd) and Mari Matinlassi (Neone). Applying Agile and Lean Elements to Accelerate Innovation Culture in a Large Organization – Key Learnings After One Year Journey (Experience Report, 20 minutes)
Abstract: This paper describes how lean elements have been applied in a large company to change existing agilean culture towards innovation culture. Innovation concentrates on radical, new business innovations but covers product and process innovations as well. The main motivation and need to build the innovation culture was an assumption that the company has a lot of competence and innovation potential not utilized. The final goal is to measure if the actions taken really have an impact to the amount and quality of new, radical innovations and business growth of the company. This paper is limited to the intermediary results achieved after the first year being (1) ideas-toinnovations value stream established (2) idea flow and positive pull created among personnel and (3) group of perfection practices has been stabilized for continuous improvement. We plan to describe, measure and analyze concrete examples of radical innovations in the future.

12:00 Lunch
13:30 TU3.1 Testing 1.
Session Chair: Juha Itkonen
TU3.2 Learning and Education.
Session Chair: Peggy Gregory
TU3.3 Agile Transformation 1.
Session Chair: Stefan Wagner
TU3.4 Continuous Delivery 1.
Session Chair: Kari Systä
13:30 – 15:00 Testing 1
Giovanni Asproni (Asprotunity Limited). Design for Testability: What, Why and How (Industry & Practice, 1 hour)
Abstract: “To be tested a system has to be designed to be tested”
Eberhardt Rechtin, “The Art Of System Architecting”

Testing is one of the main activities through which we gather data to assess the quality of our software; this makes testability an important attribute of software–not only for development, but also for maintenance and bug fixing.

Design for testability is a term that has its origin in hardware design, where the concept was introduced in order to make it easier testing circuits while reducing the costs of doing so.

In this talk I’ll show how to translate this concept to the software domain along with the consequences on various aspects of the development activities, both from the technical point of view (e.g., design, code quality, choice of frameworks, etc.), and the product management point of view (e.g., management of team dependencies, delivery time, costs, etc.).

I’ll provide examples based on real world experience, both for the technical and the management aspects.

I’ll show how TDD at various levels helps with designing for testability, but also demonstrate the need of some upfront design along with some techniques to get just the right amount of that (and how to make sure it’s testable).

Last but not least, there will be code!

John Särkelä (Northern Michigan University), Josh Fridstrom (Northern Michigan University), Kurt Kilpelä (Northern Michigan University) and Adam Jacques (Northern Michigan University). Testing Modtalk (Experience Report, 20 minutes)
Abstract: The Modtalk project is an effort to create a production ready tool chain for compiling Smalltalk programs into standalone executables. This development project entailed writing and testing code in a cross development environment, in a target executable environment, and a C based runtime that supports the compiled executable. We discovered that test-driven development supported team communication, focused design efforts, and produced code artifacts that documented the system. In the process, we also discovered that tests were often brittle and would break for a variety of reasons. We identify why some of our tests were brittle and ways in which we responded when tests failed.
Juha-Matti Vanhatupa (PacketVideo Finland) and Mikko Heikkinen (PacketVideo Finland). Automatizing Android Unit and User Interface Testing (Poster Talk, 10 minutes)
Abstract: In this paper we describe our efforts moving towards automatized testing in Android application development. With sophisticated combination of Android development tools and Perl scripts, we have automatized parts of the testing produce. Using the built system, unit tests are built and run automatically each time when a new build is created. In addition, we are automatizing user interface testing using Android uiautomator tool. In this automatization process we encountered several technical issues, for which Android development tools do not offer ready-made solutions, and we had to implement solutions for those.

13:30 – 15:00 Learning and Education
Kirsi Mikkonen (Oy LM Ericsson Ab), Outi Väättänen (Oy LM Ericsson Ab), Hanna-Mari Loisa (Oy LM Ericsson Ab), Markus Päivinen (Oy LM Ericsson Ab) and Kati Ilvonen (Oy LM Ericsson Ab). The Fellowship of the Learning Lifestyle (Industry & Practice, 30 minutes)
Abstract: Organizational learning is basis of Lean and Agile, and Learning Lifestyle is truly agile learning approach from active learners for active learners. We live in a world where faster value delivery requires broader knowledge and faster learning. Learning Lifestyle is Ericsson Finland’s current way to react fast for changing learning requirements.

We at Ericsson Finland redefined what Agile learning means by creating the fellowship of the Learning Lifestyle. It encourages people by themselves define what they want to learn and what they want to share. The goal is to get the people meet, the ones with the specific need and the ones with the specific knowledge. The learning opportunities vary from Tech Talks and class room trainings to hands-on sessions and discussion groups. The learning topics can be anything from technical ones such as Linux, C++ and Virtualization to soft topics like nutrition and mindfulness exercises. All topics are based on interests and needs coming from the people.

Social media, such as Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn and Pinterest, has changed the world. Like those sites Learning Lifestyle makes it easy and motivates people to connect, share information and develop relationships. Learning for the future happens now and we truly want to be part of it in Ericsson Finland. Teaching is a good start but sense of community and involving people is the future of learning – the social learning. As Benjamin Franklin said “Tell me and I forget. Teach me and I remember. Involve me and I learn.”

Sebastian Larsson (Cybercom). The craft of developer learning – What, Where and how? (Industry & Practice, 30 minutes)
Abstract: A trend within software development is the need for a fast time to market. An important part of this is the ability to quickly and safely make changes, which places high demands on the code’s design. This means that you also will need developers with current skills, who are able to keep evolving with the industry. Although there has never been easier to find information for learning purposes, it is also increasingly difficult to find the best alternatives.
In this session Sebastian shares resources, methods and other tips for learning that will make developers better at their work. Being better at work, will ultimately make work more rewarding.
The session is organized in a presentation format with demonstrations of learning methods along the way. It is targeted at both junior and senior developers who wants to:

1. Learn more about
a. Theoretical resources such as books, courses, developer magazines, code casts and pod casts.
b. Practical resources such as programming katas, pet projects, courses, open source and how to maximize on-the-job training.
c. How to use technology to maximize you learning.
d. When different of the above mentioned methods are appropriate.
2. Ensure that value is added on learning investments, and how to avoid common pitfalls.
3. Evolve a culture that combines learning with business goals.

Abstract: This study adapted and applied a traditional randori-style kata to a web programming class, in order to help undergraduate students improve their programming skills. The process in the traditional randori-style kata was modified to match to the nature of XML. The results indicated that the modified randori-style kata is an effective method for the programming course and the students to enhance their programming skills. The activity also helped the students to repetitively review and reapply theories and knowledge to programming problems. The kata can stimulate the learning system, enhance self-confidence, and improve the relationships among the students.
Emil Alegroth (Chalmers), Håkan Burden (University of Gothenburg), Morgan Ericsson (University of Gothenburg), Eric Knauss (University of Gothenburg), Imed Hammouda (University of Gothenburg) and Jan-Philipp Steghöfer (University of Gothenburg). Teaching Scrum – What we did, what we will do and what impedes us (Poster Talk, 10 minutes)
Abstract: The results aggregated in our proposed paper are a response to a crisis: we, a group of teachers and researchers at the University of Gothenburg (GU) and Chalmers Technical University have realized that the way we teach Scrum doesn’t align with the intended learning outcomes of our courses. We feel that the courses become unmaintainable for us and put a lot of cognitive load on our students who learn Scrum in lectures and apply it in projects in parallel. While applying Scrum is key to understand it, the projects’ deliverables and technical aspects tend to shadow teaching goals and reflection on agile principles and practices. By sharing our experiences and our lessons learnt we hope to allow trainers and teachers elsewhere to benefit from our experience and to balance the cognitive load and to start the same alignment process in education and training of agile software development that has now begun for us. The Software Engineering division is a joint venture between GU and Chalmers. Apart from courses in different programmes at both universities, it offers a Bachelor in Software Engineering and Management and a Master in Software Engineering. Both programmes emphasise project-based learning and thus allow students to experience work in group settings with complex case studies and fixed deadlines. A number of these courses either include agile practices in their learning objectives or make use of them for the project work. Our reflection ran over four week-long sprints where each teacher was assigned tasks for reflection on our progress and to plan the next sprint. The proposed paper presents the results of the analysis as well as our lessons learnt and the best practices that we have identified. Two examples: 1. Teaching Scrum needs to have a practical element: it must be applied to know it. However, the more technically advanced the practical element is, the more the students focus on learning tools (such as Git and Android) instead of the process. The tooling becomes an impediment for learning Scrum. 2. Stress is an impediment for learning Scrum since the students focus on delivering before the deadline instead of using a sound process. In a workshop setting the stress creates learning opportunities since the close interaction with the teachers enables immediate and detailed feedback, thus facilitating what previous work defines as reflection-in action during the sprint retrospectives. Our suggestion is to introduce Scrum using workshops with low technical demands, such as LEGO. When students have been introduced to Scrum they can apply the knowledge in a project with a more technical setting. Thereby balancing the cognitive load among the process aspects and technical aspects of the project.

13:30 – 15:00 Agile Transformation 1
Abstract: In this session, I’ll share how we made three very important mental leaps to make the transition to Agile and Lean ”stick” including concrete examples of what we have done.

Leap #1: From Methods & Tools to Principles & Mindset
Tools and methods can work in some contexts and not in others. If you have your own principles and mindset, then you can adapt or create your own methods and tools that fit your context. When realizing this, we made a mental leap from a focus on methods and tools to a focus on principles and mindset.

Leap #2: From Resource Efficiency to Flow Efficiency
With a need reduce both costs and time-to-market we were looking for alternatives to “resource efficiency” focus (keeping people and equipment fully utilized at all times). We realized that our ability to innovate around state-of-the art algorithms for optimizing packet data flow in mobile radio networks is also applicable for our product development processes. We made a mental leap from “resource efficiency” to “flow efficiency”, i e a focus on keeping work items moving through the process without waiting times, delivering value as quickly as possible.

Leap #3: From Scattered Experiences to Continuous Innovation
We were solving problems as they occurred using task forces in fire-fighting mode, lacking corporate memory and a common direction. By creating a shared direction and a common purpose around the need to improve, we made the leap from scattered experiences to a culture of continuous innovation.

Avraham Poupko (Cisco). It has been a long journey, and it is not over yet (Experience Report, 20 minutes)
Abstract: This experience report shares my personal agile journey. The journey begins from the very early days of agile over 15 years ago, and is far from over. I starts with a description of being first exposed to Extreme Programming and trying (with limited success) to get it accepted in the organization I worked for and concludes with a very large organization that is currently in the process of finding its own agile voice. The paper is rich in anecdotes and personal experiences that while personal, are likely to be representative of the journey that others are going through.
Sandeep Hublikar (Cisco Video Technologies India Private Limited) and Shrikanth Hampiholi (Cisco Video Technologies India Private Limited). Value in Agile solar system: Heliocentric or Geocentric? (Short Talk, 10 minutes)
Abstract: Agile Solar system: Customer, Leadership, Team. Who plays role of Sun, Earth and Moon?
What happens when a world leader in a stagnating business with long gestational projects struggling to maintain leadership in a rapid changing landscape?
Each project takes multiple man-months, delaying time to market of new technologies. Driven by business requirements, emerging features and functions get added to the Software stack resulting in scope creep, delayed timelines and compromised quality.
In the quest to find fresh solutions to old problems, the company chooses to commit to agile transformation in the hope that it retain the lost glory.
Once the transformation starts the obstacles and dependencies (Known and Unknown) start surfacing. Multiple stakeholder brainstorming sessions repeatedly point to the fact that all stake holders team members, project leadership team, and Non-Agile stakeholders like Customers, Delivery teams and agile committed executive management team are undergoing the Tuckman’s stages of group development (Forming, Norming, Storming, Performing and Adjourning).
This paper explores the course of transformation with comparison to Geocentric/Heliocentric Model of Solar System and attempts to narrate the transformation as it happened. The closest analogy would be Earth rotation around itself and while revolving around the sun. Further consider that natural satellite moon orbiting around the earth. All the stake holders were undergoing self-transformation and interacting with other stake holders under transformation.
The paper further examines role of Leadership/Management in comparison Moon is that of an ENABLER connecting Sun Customer and Team Earth. The quality of Project Leadership and Management is the single most decisive factor in delivering Value to customer as well as most stakeholders. The imaginary cosmic phenomena of eclipse as a continuum takes place when all the stakeholder align with each other and this marks the pinnacle of agile transformation.
The paper summarizes with observation that any transformation is always work in progress as it creates a learning organization which sustains the core while aiming to reach next level. A matured transforming agile organization (which has developed agility as a differentiator) can evolve to a new model akin to Einstein’s Theory of Relativity that highlighted the limitations of both Heliocentric and Geocentric models. Just as astronomers use both the heliocentric and geocentric models for research depending on which theory makes their calculations easier, agile organization might consciously exploit the both models enhancing value to customer and achieve profitable growth. It definitely seems as if methods are relative after all. Results are absolute with top-line and bottom-line.

13:30 – 15:00 Continuous Delivery 1
Abstract: We are illustrating cloud based Continuous Deployment pipeline, Acceptance Test Driven Development (ATDD) and live demonstration on how development is done in this kind of environment. From the idea to feature into the life production.

The session is in two parts. The first part is a play where we will guide the audience through all concepts and technologies what we are using. No previous knowledge about them is required. The second part will be the hands-on action with the audience.

In the first part We want to demonstrate how a product owner (customer) and a team can together design acceptance test cases and acceptance criteria for future implementation. By doing this, they are using The “Specification By Example” technique aka. Acceptance Test Driven Development (ATDD). As an application under test we will use a real web application, which can be found from the Internet and the audience can observe the whole process themselves during the demonstration. The demonstration will include all phases for a new feature and show how it is designed, implemented, tested and taken into production in a live situation. All phases from design to final commissioning of a finalized batch are visible and shown to the audience. When all the tests are green, we will deliver the batch.

In the second part, we will give the ball to the audience. People can try out tools and concepts that we are using, with the guidance from us. Bring your own laptop, or hook up with other fellows. You can work in pairs, small groups or alone. If you have Git and Robot Framework installed, you have more time to play with our toys. Anyway, we will help you with the installations.

Used technologies are:
Version Control System: Git
Continuous Integration Server: Jenkins
Test Automation Framework and Specification tool: Robot Framework
Cloud Servers: Amazon EC2
System Under Test: Google App Engine (Python + Jinja 2)

Abstract: The technical concerns of implementing continuous delivery of isolated applications can be very straightforward to solve, but the situation is much more complex when you have several dependant applications with different release timeframe needs. This demo shows how to implement continuous delivery in these complex context using several interconnected Jenkins instances, Puppet and Octopush, an open source tool to manage concurrent access to the pipeline stages. Beyond the tools I will also share the key design decisions that support this implementation strategy.

15:00 Break, Poster Session B and Coaches Clinic
15:00 – 15:30 Poster Session B and Coaches Clinic
Peng Liu (Nokia) and Yuedong Zhao (Nokia). Revisit – A Systematic Approach to Continuously Improve Agile Practice in Large-scale and Fast-expanding R&D Center (Poster)
Simon Brooke (Cisco) and Dina Allswang (Cisco). Agility in Dynamic Environments: A Case Study for Agile Development (Poster)
Chitsutha Soomlek (Khon Kaen University). Applying Randori-Style Kata and Agile Practices to an Undergraduate-Level Programming Class (Poster)
Tanja Suomalainen (VTT technical Research Centre of Finland) and Jenni Myllykoski (Oulu Business School). Continuous Strategy Process in the context of Agile and Lean Software Development (Poster)
Marja Känsälä (Finnish Institute of Occupational Health), Tuija Virtanen (Finnish Institute of Occupational Health), Elisa Valtanen (Finnish Institute of Occupational Health), Seppo Tuomivaara (Finnish Institute of Occupational Health), Hilkka Ylisassi (Finnish Institute of Occupational Health), Mari Järvinen (Finnish Institute of Occupational Health), Harri Lindholm (Finnish Institute of Occupational Health), Jussi Konttinen (Finnish Institute of Occupational Health) and Heli Sistonen (Finnish Institute of Occupational Health). Need for Speed (N4S) ways of working and well-being at work (Poster)
Annemarie Harzl (Graz University of Technology). Combining Kanban and FOSS: Can it work? (Poster)
Coaches Clinic
During the session breaks we will provide a Coaches Clinic, where you can meet experienced coaches and get help with solving your issues at work. Get tips and help on Agile methodologies, team dynamics, personal development, organizational change or coaching techniques. Or just bring any problem or question you can think of to the table. Our coaches will do their best to help you out! Make an appointment by our schedule board, or just drop in to see if there are coaches available.

15:30 TU4.1 Management.
Session Chair: Michele Marchesi
TU4.2 Continuous Improvement.
Session Chair: Nils-Brede Moe
TU4.3 Requirements.
Session Chair: Knut Rolland
TU4.4 Panel: Continuous Delivery.
Session Chair: Steven Fraser
15:30 – 16:30 Management
Rafaela M. Fontana (Federal University of Paraná), Victor Meyer Jr. (Pontifical Catholic University of Paraná), Sheila Reinehr (Pontifical Catholic University of Paraná) and Andreia Malucelli (Pontifical Catholic University of Paraná). Management ambidexterity: A clue for maturing in agile software development (Short Research Paper, 10 minutes)
Abstract: Organizational ambidexterity is the ability to be aligned and efficient in combining current resources and demands (exploitation) as well as adaptive and innovative due to changing conditions and demands (exploration). Maturity in software development is defined over exploitation – through processes definition and control. We argue in this study that mature agile software development is also exploratory – adaptive and innovative. Thus, our objective is to verify how ambidexterity occurs in mature agile software development. The research approach is a single case study with analysis of qualitative data. Our findings show how a mature team is managed by ambidextrous strategies.
Denniz Dönmez (ETH Zurich) and Gudela Grote (ETH Zurich). The Two Faces of Uncertainty: Threat vs Opportunity Management in Agile Software Development (Short Research Paper, 10 minutes)
Abstract: Uncertainty is an inevitable fact of software development that can determine success or failure of entire projects. Although often associated with risk or threat, uncertainty bears much overlooked qualities regarding market opportunities. Adopting a conceptualization of uncertainty that includes both threat and opportunity, we investigate different possibilities to manage the uncertainties preceding the creation of novel ideas and innovation. In this qualitative study, we empirically explore the concept of uncertainty beyond the focus on requirement uncertainty that prevails in the literature and explicitly emphasize its multidimensionality. We argue that the failure to distinguish between different dimensions of uncertainty can lead to their inadequate management at high cost. Our results show how teams exploit practices to manage different uncertainties in order to mitigate threats while remaining open to opportunities. We discuss the implications of our findings for product development teams as well as for the design of supportive organizational structures.
Tanja Suomalainen (VTT technical Research Centre of Finland) and Jenni Myllykoski (Oulu Business School). Continuous Strategy Process in the context of Agile and Lean Software Development (Poster Talk, 10 minutes)
Abstract: This extended abstract introduces an ongoing research which elaborates the concept of continuous strategy with an aim to better address the contemporary challenges of strategy process within the field of software development. Theoretically the research draws on the strategy process and practice -literature and on the literature of agile and lean software development when conceptualizing continuous strategy. Empirically the research examines the emerging challenges in software companies’ strategy process when they are pursuing continuous practices in software development. The tentative analysis revealed that the practices that stem from the more traditional, structured strategy process are not compatible with the more “continuous planning”oriented organisational practices. Thus, there seems to be pressure for developing more continuous strategy process and practices. Furthermore, in other organisational processes, especially in team level, the practices relating to continuity are more successfully applied, than in strategic level.
Abstract: A large part of software developers in our community do contracting. Despite a number of interesting startups popping on the scene I do not see this trend ending anytime soon. The fundamental problem of contracting as it is done today is that the contractors are torn between serving their customers and serving their own companies.

What causes this problem and how could it be solved? My argument is that it boils down to the contracting companies using the billing rate of contractors as the main indicator of success.

This leads to a dynamic where spending the customer’s time and money is beneficial to the contractor in short term whilst simultaneously damaging the customer-contractor relationship in the long term.

In my presentation I’ll demonstrate this phenomenon in software contracting with concrete examples. Then we will also explore alternatives based on earlier work in this area in the agile community as well as explore new ideas. I will bring to table the ideas I’ve experimented with to change this dynamic, both successful and failed. Last, I will discuss potential new approaches to transform this conflict of interests into a win-win relationship.

15:30 – 16:30 Continuous Improvement
Eveliina Vuolli (Nokia). Clarity before speed: Plan-Do-Check-Act (PDCA) applied in practice (Industry & Practice, 1 hour)
Abstract: How are you planning your improvement actions? How are they recorded? Are you following their progress? Do you know whether they are giving you the expected results? Are the improvement initiatives taking you to the right direction? In overall, how is your team managing the continuous improvement?
Continuous improvement is one of the cornerstones of the Lean and agile methodologies (e.g. Kaizen & retrospective practices). Even though the basic idea is quite clear, it is often forgotten that it requires real effort to implement this as part of the everyday work. It is also essential to see the relation between the continuous improvement and the bigger picture.
The change to speed up the release cycles and to achieve continuous delivery mode requires deliberate actions. This transformation is neither done with one shot. Thus a systematic way to improve the way of working is needed to make the continuous value delivery successful.
This tutorial discusses how the Deming cycle – Plan-Do-Check-Act – has been applied concretely in an R&D organization to ensure that the operational development is done systematically. The practices have been evolving during couple of years and the talk will also share the lessons learned from this journey.
The talk is targeted to people who are interested to enhance their continuous improvement practices or are interested to hear concrete experiences from a large scale organization. The tutorial format includes interactive parts which give the possibility also for the audience to reflect their current practices related to the PDCA concept.

15:30 – 16:30 Requirements
Best Paper Candidate: Elizabeth Bjarnason (Lund University), Michael Unterkalmsteiner (Blekinge Institute of Technology), Emelie Engstrom (Lund University) and Markus Borg (Lund University). An Industrial Case Study on Test Cases as Requirements (Full Research Paper, 20 minutes)
Abstract: It is a conundrum that agile projects can succeed ‘without requirements’ when weak requirements engineering is a known cause for project failures. While Agile development projects often manage well without extensive requirements documentation, test cases are commonly used as requirements. We have investigated this agile practice at three companies in order to understand how test cases can fill the role of requirements. We performed a case study based on twelve interviews performed in a previous study. The findings include a range of benefits and challenges in using test cases for eliciting, validating, verifying, tracing and managing requirements. In addition, we identified three scenarios for applying the practice, namely as a mature practice, as a de facto practice and as part of an agile transition. The findings provide insights into how the role of requirements may be met in agile development including challenges to consider.
Avraham Poupko (Cisco). Tell me a story – the art of story telling (Short Talk, 10 minutes)
Abstract: “A ‘user story’ is just the Agile way of saying ‘requirements’”. I cannot count the amount of times I have heard this misnomer.

There is a fundamental difference between “requirements” and user stories. And if you think that they are the same, you have missed the point of user stories.

In this talk, I will describe how stories are primarily told, and that capturing them in Rally is really only of secondary importance. In order to make this point, I will bring some insights from the arts and anthropology on the significance of storytelling, and the role storytelling plays in formulating a culture and world view. They audience will then have a better appreciation of what user stories are about.

Geir Kjetil Hanssen (SINTEF ICT), Ingar Kulbrandstad (Autronica Fire & Security AS) and Børge Haugset (SINTEF ICT). Introducing SafeScrum (Poster Talk, 10 minutes)
Abstract: Safety-critical systems such as process control- and signal systems play a fundamental role in many important industries and aspects of society. Such systems, including software, must fulfill extreme demands for correct operation and integrity, meaning that development must follow strict standards (in our case IEC 61508), which has to be documented and evaluated by external certification bodies to receive necessary approval. We present recent industrial experience in applying the SafeScrum approach in a complex software organization.
Timo Lehtinen (Aalto University), Risto Virtanen (Aalto University), Ville Heikkilä (Aalto University) and Juha Itkonen (Aalto University). Why the Development Outcome Does Not Meet the Product Owners’ Expectations? (Full Research Paper, 20 minutes)
Abstract: Many software development projects fail due to problems in requirements, scope, and collaboration. This paper presents a case study of the mismatch between the expectations of Product Owners and the outcome of the development in a large distributed Scrum organization. The data was collected in retrospective meetings involving a team of Product Owners and two software development teams. A focused root cause analysis of the problem “Why the expectations of Product Owners do not meet the outcome of development teams?” was conducted. The analysis aimed at explaining why the problem occurred and how the causes were related to one another. The outcomes were analyzed both quantitatively and qualitatively. Our results illustrate the challenges of implementing the Product Owner role in the context of complex, high-variability requirements and distributed development. We highlight the importance of true collaboration, effective requirements specification activities, and sufficient resources for the Product Owner role.

15:30 – 16:30 Panel: Continuous Delivery
Steven Fraser, Ismo Aro (Omenia Oy), Henri Kivioja, Erik Lundh (Compelcon AB), Ken Power, Linda Rising, Werner Wild and Rebecca Wirfs-Brock. Continuous Delivery: From Concept to Product – Trade-offs in Effectiveness and Efficiency? (Panel, 1 hour)
Abstract: The implementation and release of software products has progressed from a lengthy delivery cycle – the methodical sequential path of “big bang” waterfall product delivery – to the rapid iterative release cycle supported by agile practices. Recently, “continuous delivery” has emerged as a strategy to accelerate product availability. However, only a systematic automation of the build, test and deployment processes in concert with superbly coordinated teams of software practitioners and business partners makes make this possible. However, trade-offs in the optimization of process may act to limit the innovativeness of product output. This panel will discuss approaches, challenges, risks, and strategies for using continuous delivery to competitive advantage.

16:30 Spare time
17:00 Open space opening
17:00 – 18:30 Open space opening
Organizer: Charlie Poole. Open space opening (1 hour 30 minutes)
Abstract: Welcome to Open Space at XP2015! Open Space’s self-directed learning environment will help you integrate and extend the information and experiences you gain during the rest of XP2015. Open Space provides an opportunity to meet in self-organizing groups to share your latest ideas, challenges, questions, hopes, experiences and experiments. The Open Space format gives just enough structure to foster collaboration and the content is determined by those who choose to participate. Make this conference your own. Attend the opening on Tuesday evening, offer your ideas about important topics to explore, and attend sessions Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday.

During this opening session, we’ll have a brief (15 minute) explanation of how Open Space works. Then, everyone will be invited to announce the sessions they are willing to host. Take note of the sessions you want to attend. As you listen, you may be inspired to present a session yourself. There are no deadlines or time limits: simply step up and describe your idea for a session as we create the schedule for a conference-within-the-conference right on the wall!

See How Open Space Works

18:30
18:30 - Open space evening and buffet dinner
Open Space Location
Wouldn’t you love to spend an evening with food, drinks, lots of people willing to learn and share, and interesting conversations going on all around the place? Well, that’s exactly what the Open Space Night is all about, so we surely hope you’ll join us!

See How Open Space Works

Wednesday, 27 May 2015

Room Nordia Fennia I Nautica Fennia II
09:00 (at Fennia II) WE1.1 Keynote: Networked Society: Our Journey in Leadership and Coaching Harri Oikarinen.
Session Chair: Maria Paasivaara
09:00 – 10:30 Keynote

View on Vimeo
Harri Oikarinen (Ericsson Finland). Networked Society: Our Journey in Leadership and Coaching (Keynote, 1 hour)
Abstract: Ericsson Finland R&D started their Lean and Agile journey some 5 years ago. In the beginning we saw it much as a challenge of learning Scrum, building a CI culture and machinery and learning new tools and practices. Quite soon we understood that it above all is a leadership and coaching challenge. This story is about how we took on that challenge.

Bio: Harri Oikarinen is a Head of R&D for Ericsson Finland which focuses on researching, developing, deploying and supporting the Ericsson products for global markets. He has 20 year’s of leadership experience in the global telecommunications industry garnered through a variety of roles. These positions have taken him to several occasions in Asia and Europe e.g. Stockholm, Athlone, Tokyo, Seoul, and Taejon.

He started to launch the agile way of working in Ericsson Ireland organisation in 2008 and have successfully incorporated Lean-Agile practices into large global telecom organization seeking to improve time-to-market and software quality. In 2009 he returned back to Finnish operations. Following a significant reorganisation at Telecom Finland Ericsson R&D in 2011 to strengthen agile and lean transformation, he was appointed as Head of R&D Center in Ericsson Finland. Since that he has been in the heart of the large scale agile transformation.

He is results oriented and a demonstrated high achiever with recorded successes from leading development activities in domestic and global organizations. He has a strong knowledge of global R&D and has worked in a senior management capacity interfacing with different stakeholders within the company. He is recognized for his strong skills on leadership and change management. He also has a long experience on software engineering practices in international telecom organisations.

10:30 Break and Coaches Clinic
10:30 – 11:00 Coaches Clinic
Coaches Clinic
During the session breaks we will provide a Coaches Clinic, where you can meet experienced coaches and get help with solving your issues at work. Get tips and help on Agile methodologies, team dynamics, personal development, organizational change or coaching techniques. Or just bring any problem or question you can think of to the table. Our coaches will do their best to help you out! Make an appointment by our schedule board, or just drop in to see if there are coaches available.

11:00 WE2.1 Continuous Delivery 2.
Session Chair: Pilar Rodríguez
WE2.2 Individual performance assessment and motivation in agile teams Helen Sharp.
Session Chair: Juan Garbajosa
WE2.3 Lightning Talks 1 WE2.4 Executives & Managers track Open Space
11:00 – 12:00 Continuous Delivery 2
Arjan Claassen (Royal Philips) and Laurens Boekhorst (Royal Philips). Shorter Feedback Loops By Means Of Continuous Deployment (Experience Report, 20 minutes)
Abstract: Gathering early feedback on features is critical to many projects. Many Agile methodologies define feedback loops. Often, the feedback loop for completed features only closes after the iteration finishes. In this paper we will introduce a way of closing this feedback loop early, by means of continuous deployment. This also lowers the deployment effort for developers, increasing their happiness.
Olli Rissanen (University of Helsinki) and Jürgen Münch (University of Helsinki). Transitioning Towards Continuous Delivery in the B2B Domain: A Case Study (Full Research Paper, 20 minutes)
Abstract: Delivering value to customers in real-time requires companies to utilize real-time deployment of software to expose features to users faster, and to shorten the feedback loop. This allows for faster reaction and helps to ensure that the development is focused on features providing real value. Continuous delivery is a development practice where the software functionality is deployed continuously to customer environment. Although this practice has been established in some domains such as B2C mobile software, the B2B domain imposes specific challenges. This article presents a case study that is conducted in a medium-sized software company operating in the B2B domain. The objective of this study is to analyze the challenges and benefits of continuous delivery in this domain. The results suggest that technical challenges are only one part of the challenges a company encounters in this transition. The company must also address challenges related to the customer and procedures. The core challenges are caused by having multiple customers with diverse environments and unique properties, whose business depends on the software product. Some customers require to perform manual acceptance testing, while some are reluctant towards new versions. By utilizing continuous delivery, it is possible for the case company to shorten the feedback cycles, increase the reliability of new versions, and reduce the amount of resources required for deploying and testing new releases.
Wouter Lagerweij (Wouter Lagerweij Consultancy). Speed-up your delivery pipeline using Docker (Technical Demo, 20 minutes)
Abstract: Agile has started the movement towards continuous delivery with its focus on automating deployment. New tools are changing that landscape, allowing us to control our infrastructure in code, move more of the infrastructural skills into the dev(ops) team, and go much, much faster.

Lightweight virtualization, currently in the form of Docker, provides some new solutions to problems that an agile team will run into:
- How do I keep a quick pace of development if my infrastructure (versions of OS, programming language, library) moves much more slowly?
- How do I ensure I can test such changes in my infrastructure?
- How do we test with different sets of test-data in different environment without the environment becoming very different from each other?
- How do we deploy to different environments (and locally!) while keeping the environments similar?
- How do we keep our deployment pipeline fast enough (<10 minutes)?

In this session we will see how we can speed-up both creation and performance of a delivery pipeline using Docker.

Using tools like Docker, CoreOS and Jenkins I’ll show:
- How easy it is to create a Docker container for an existing project
- How to deploy a container to different environments using a (Jenkins) build pipeline
- How to create and use Volume Containers to transparently manage (test) data

All tools and technology demoed in this session are Open Source and freely available.

11:00 – 12:00 Individual performance assessment and motivation in agile teams
Helen Sharp (The Open University). Individual performance assessment and motivation in agile teams (Invited Talk, 1 hour)
Abstract: According to theories of motivation, and research into motivation of software practitioners, feedback is key to having a motivated workforce. Regular and rapid feedback is a fundamental principle of agile working, but although individual performance assessment could be seen as one form of feedback, assessing individual performance is regarded as somewhat ‘anti-agile’. There is evidence that an agile working environment is more motivating than a plan-driven environment, so does individual performance assessment have a place in an agile environment or not? In this talk, I will discuss recent research in motivation, feedback, and individual performance assessment in this context.

11:00 – 12:00 Lightning Talks 1
Sami Lilja (Reaktor Innovations). Healthy Agile Diet?
Abstract: Want to lose waste while looking & feeling great? The answer is healthy and balanced Agile diet. Come and hear what to put on your plate!
The session presents one model for a healthy diet and applies the model to Agile transformation. It shows in a funny and semi-serious way what are the ingredients of good Agile and how this kind of good Agile is achieved by daily habits and actions.
Tobias Modig (Citerus). Beware my pitfalls!
Abstract: In difference from all success stories spoken at conferences, this is the true story from a developer’s life. The life where projects goes wrong, where budget runs out, where deadlines are missed and where suppliers get kicked out the door. In the past years I have been in several failing projects and this session will point out the similarities between the projects, sum up what mistakes we did, what we should have done different and not the least how we could fail even though we used scrumboards, planning poker, retrospectives and demos.
Abstract: Have you ever been part of a SCRUM project enjoying the productivity of an established well-functioning team? What if we could rescue the whole team into another project enhancing learning curves; ideally serving the old project during the maintenance phase. I would love to exchange experience. As a software company: Are you offering established teams? As a company searching for a SCRUM team: Would you love a team that already knows how to work hand-in-hand even in the first sprint instead of team members that know how to pass the ball but not where the team mates will run to?
Abstract: This talk will present the findings of a survey that was conducted with responses from 487 respondents from 71 agile software teams in 26 companies (Norway and Asia). The focus of the survey was to investigate how qualities of teamwork within the development teams (communication, coordination, cohesion, effort, etc.) affect 1) team performance (project quality and product quality), and 2) personal satisfaction.
Sandeep Hublikar (Cisco Video Technologies India Private Limited) and Shrikanth Hampiholi (Cisco Video Technologies India Private Limited). Our Struggle to know Value of Value: Narration of our transformation journey at CISCO Video Technologies
Abstract: The objective of sharing this experience report / lightning talk is to showcase how disruptive changes in the market place have driven the execution strategy for transforming a traditional waterfall organization to Agile. It also contains a narration of our transformation journey so far and challenges we faced to understand the Key word “Value” across the business value chain. However for embedded systems & solutions many believe that Agile is not going to work, “our product is so complicated and distributed” (Is this supposed to be a quote?), their nature of business is so unique etc.. and if you ask about scaling then “Forget it”. Hence our session is going to share the practical challenges we encounter and interesting stories of the transformation journey.
Paulo Caroli. A 7-Step Agenda for Effective Retrospectives
Abstract: These seven steps will help you create a solid retrospective structure that keeps you and your team focused and on-track, and continuously improving its activities.
Abstract: At University of Buenos Aires we teach Object-Oriented Programming using a test-first approach. Each programming assignment the students have to solve, is expressed as a set of automated tests. In this short talk, I want to share this experience, our results and some tips to implement it.
Abstract: Working for a backlog tool vendor I see a wide range of different backlogs in product development organisations worldwide. I would like to share a few successful basic patterns I’ve seen in how to manage user stories successfully in pursuit of releasing more valuable, smaller user stories more frequently.

11:00 – 12:00 Executives & Managers track
Welcome from the Moderators
Ground Rules for the afternoon sessions and how the Marketplace will work.
Pieter van de Meché (Sociocratisch Centrum) and Jutta Eckstein (IT communication). Sociocracy: A Key Factor for Making Your Whole Organization Agile
Abstract: Scaling Agile to large projects or the organizational level provides the challenge of establishing and sustaining self-organizing teams.

Sociocracy offers four construction rules and a set of practical methods to make that happen. Like Agile, Sociocracy is based on systems theory but applied to decision making. It lets you design agile decision making structures that boost the quality of decisions, generate real commitment, strengthen cooperation on and between all levels of the organization, make it easier to lead and improve the efficiency of decision making. Sociocracy can be applied in any organization or team as long as people share a common goal and are willing to learn from each other. With a set of simple rules you can establish a more creative, dynamic and open cooperation.

During this session you work with sociocratic decision making which will give you a better understanding of how it can help you establishing self-organizing teams and making your organization more Agile.

Abstract: You might have heard of a new breed of organisational models, responding to the fast growing adaptability, engagement and collaboration needs within modern company structures. Or you might have simply experienced the sound problems of slowness, rigidity, bureaucracy, disengagement along with various kinds of waste and bottlenecks that “traditional” organisational models generate and suffer nowadays.

This is what LiquidO™ is all about: the original “liquid organisation” model for governance, born from direct experience within Cocoon Projects and in use in a growing number of for profit and not-forprofit organisations willing to get liquid.

11:00 – 12:00 Open Space

12:00 Lunch
13:30 WE3.1 Distribution and Coordination.
Session Chair: Maria Paasivaara
WE3.2 Scaling Agile 1.
Session Chair: Nils-Brede Moe
WE3.3 Agile Transformation 2.
Session Chair: Andrey Maglyas
WE3.4 Executives & Managers track Open Space
13:30 – 15:00 Distribution and Coordination
Best Paper Candidate: Mawarny Md. Rejab (Victoria University of Wellington), James Noble (Victoria University of Wellington) and Stuart Marshall (Victoria University of Wellington). Coordinating Expertise Outside Agile Teams (Full Research Paper, 20 minutes)
Abstract: Agile software development projects depend upon roles located outside Agile teams such as User Experience Designers and Software Architects to support teams. As external specialists’ expertise is valuable to Agile teams, further investigation is needed to explore the relationships between Agile teams and external specialists in coordinating external expertise. Through a Grounded Theory study involving 47 Agile practitioners and external specialists, we discovered five factors that Agile teams and external specialists need to consider when coordinating external expertise: Availability, Agile Mindset, Stability, Knowledge Retention and Effective Communication. We present strategies for each factor as a guideline for coordinating external expertise in teams. This study helps Agile teams to manage and utilize external expertise resources effectively.
Markus Hjort (Reaktor). Effective daily, planning session and retro within distributed team (Short Talk, 10 minutes)
Abstract: Tallink online booking system was built by a bunch of developers from Finland, Estonia, Belarus and Russia. We didn’t want split teams by geographical location. Instead we wanted that all our feature teams were equal in skills and was able to implement any story from the backlog. This was an important decision that helped us to build the system successfully. However, it was also a trade off: we had to invent ways to communicate effectively and organize most of the dailies, planning sessions and even retrospectives online. In this lightning talk I will reveal our tricks on how we organized them effectively.
Diana Larsen (FutureWorks Consulting). Create the Conditions for Team Learning and Coordination: Five Simple Rules (Invited Talk, 1 hour)
Abstract: Essential to coordinating shared work, every team needs specific collaboration skills to learn as a group, share knowledge, and develop “co-intelligence.” Based on the leanpub.com book, “QuickStart Guide to Five Rules for Accelerated Learning” by Willem Larsen and Diana Larsen, this session will give you a way to set conditions for effective, fast team learning about customer needs, product qualities, work process, teamwork, and every kind of learning that enables great results the team and the organization can feel proud to deliver.

13:30 – 15:00 Scaling Agile 1
Nirnaya Tripathi (University of Oulu), Pilar Rodríguez (University of Oulu), Markku Oivo (University of Oulu) and Muhammad Ovais Ahmad (University of Oulu). Scaling Kanban for software development in a multisite organization: Challenges and potential solutions (Full Research Paper, 20 minutes)
Abstract: In software development organizations, large-scale distributed projects pose many challenges, such as hierarchical requirements, large team size, and managing workflow. Agile methods, like Scrum, seem to have limitations in addressing those issues. Kanban offers an interesting alternative in this concern by setting work-in-progress (WIP) limits to manage flow and establishing visibility of requirements using a visual signaling system. However, only few empirical studies have investigated scaling Kanban for large organizations. To address this concern, a case study was conducted in a large multisite company to identify the challenges and possible solutions in scaling Kanban. During the study, defining WIP limits, coordinating with distributed teams, and dividing features between teams were found as major challenges. Setting WIP limits by common agreement between teams and visualizing product backlogs and teams on electronic board, with teams pulling features from the board, were found as possible solutions for overcoming the mentioned challenges.
Antonio Martini (Chalmers University of Technology), Lars Pareto (IT University of Göteborg) and Jan Bosch (Chalmers University of Technology). Towards introducing Agile Architecting in Large Companies: the CAFFEA framework (Short Research Paper, 10 minutes)
Abstract: To continuously deliver value both in short-term and long-term, a key goal for large product lines companies is to combine Agile Software Development with the continuous development and management of software architecture. We have conducted interviews involving several roles at 3 sites from 2 large companies employing Agile. We have identified current architect roles and gaps in the practices employed at the organizations. From such investigation, we have developed an organizational framework, CAFFEA, for Agile architecting, including roles, teams and practices.
Ran Nyman (Gosei Oy) and Ari Tikka (Gosei Oy). Scaling Agility Explored (Industry & Practice, 1 hour)
Abstract: Scaling Agile is easily misunderstood. Do you want to handle bigger programs and more teams or do you want to have more value with less hassle? Or do you want to widen the Agile adoption to the whole of the organization: culture, business, and leadership. We will give you valuable thinking tools for choosing the correct approach to your Agile adoption.

In this session, we will study how two scaling approaches, LeSS and SAFe, affect the fundamentals of the organization: leading flow, unity, and learning. A critical choice is the balance between program execution and long term evolution.

We start the analysis by using organizational control theory created by William G. Ouchi where he defines three main control mechanisms; bureaucratic, market and clan control. This explains why teamwork is the only way. Even having the same basis the frameworks differ how control is achieved, and it has an impact on long-term sustainability.

The flow is analyzed looking at batching of work, length of detailed planning horizon and organizational structures. Learning and leadership are tightly intertwined. We will look in more detail to knowledge creation, continuous improvement, and teamwork.

Finally, we will point out what you should look at when selecting LeSS or SAFe. We will give special emphasis to how the frameworks enable moving from Cyclic to Continuous Value Delivery. The presenters have been working with both frameworks at huge organizations.

13:30 – 15:00 Agile Transformation 2
Marcelo Walter (Objective Solutions), Ramon Tramontini (Objective Solutions), Rafaela M. Fontana (Federal University of Paraná), Sheila Reinehr (Pontifical Catholic University of Paraná) and Andreia Malucelli (Pontifical Catholic University of Paraná). From Sprints to Lean Flow: Management Strategies for Agile Improvement (Experience Report, 20 minutes)
Abstract: This paper describes management strategies for continuous improvement in agile software development teams. We have applied these strategies in a Brazilian team, which was born in 2009 and now grew into a headquarter of the company with ninety people. We have currently reached lean flow state with constant throughput, reduced lead time and enhanced quality by cutting bugs rate in half. In a continuous improvement cycle, our management strategies are based on looking at the situation, sensemaking the situation and providing simple responses. We describe how we applied these strategies to learn how to correctly limit work in progress (WIP) and to face challenges with coaching, estimates, team motivation, sprints and pair programming.
CANCELLED! 10 minutes break. Stavros Stavru (Sofia University “St. Kliment Ohridski”) and Sylvia Ilieva (Sofia University “St. Kliment Ohridski”). Agile and the global software leaders: A perfect match? (Short Research Paper, 10 minutes)
Sami Lilja (Reaktor Innovations). Leadership beyond Agile / Sustainable change that matters (Industry & Practice, 1 hour)
Abstract: Agile promises lot of good things but adoption is often slow or painful. Something in the culture makes end-to-end Agile difficult.
For a sustainable and significant change we need more than just “Scrum” or “Kanban”. This talk shows how new thinking makes the work work.

13:30 – 15:00 Executives & Managers track
Marketplace
Participants will have the opportunity to choose one of the following sessions. Rules of marketplace will be briefly outlined, prior to the beginning of the afternoon sessions.
Eric Lynn. Accelerating Team Integration by Aligning Diverse Perspectives
Abstract: Paradoxically, a key characteristic of high impact management and project teams is also one of the most common reasons for entropy: the diversity of members with their range of skills, experience and background and perspectives. What can we do? … Reframe by aligning the team to focus on the common purpose/task.” The first step: create and open space for real meaningful dialogue using the team’s business questions as the vehicle. We embed cultureQs into this process.

cultureQs is a Change Accelerator that that uses powerful questions to inspire participants to reflect on the foundations of their beliefs, attitudes and behaviours. While engaging in deep meaningful conversations, people connect quickly, enabling the invisible borders that hinder collaboration to fall away. Entropy with its wasteful conflict is reduced; people (re-)focus on the personal and professional questions that matter; innovative potential is released and performance is enhanced.

It is built on the pillars of Dialogue (David Bohm), Appreciative Inquiry and Story Telling. All examples are real, collected from over 60 years’ life experience; 40 years professional experience working on about 60 countries, living in 9 countries on 4 continents.

This will be a highly interactive session. The group will work through a mini cultureQs process including the experience, a mini-debrief, transfer, followed by time for questions. I can also briefly present cases where this approach has worked for example, mobilising projects, organisation transformation, conflict resolution to get high-value projects back on track.

Towo Toivola (Ericsson). The Sizeable, Functioning, Agile Development Organization
Abstract: Ever wonder how to design a development organization with hundreds of people across time zones so that it can focus on the essential in a scaled Agile manner? Can it even be done? What would be the role of management in such an organization?

Yes it can be done and it has been done.

Let’s look at how to design and implement a development organization that focuses on the essential: Delivering the right software, on quality, on time, frequently according to business needs.

Let’s also discuss the new role of management in the new world where networks of professionals achieve what action points never could.

Morten Elvang-Goransson (DELTA). Game Changing Beliefs
Abstract: How do you create an organization where succeeding with agile is possible? Are there things you could choose to believe in, that would actually push your luck in a favorable direction?

This interactive talk argues in the favor of this and offers practical examples of what such beliefs could be.

Key takeaways:
– You can and must influence your own work situation
– There are some basic ‘laws’ guiding knowledge work
– You need to figure out what will work for you

Wouter Lagerweij (Wouter Lagerweij Consultancy). How do we get there from here?
Abstract: There are a number of great ideas on how to structure companies so that they can be ‘agile’. These ideas converge on themes such as self-management, multi-functional product teams, a pure customer focus and alignment based on shared vision instead of command and control.

Great. But not quite where most companies are. So how do we get there from here?

I’ve been seeing more and more companies that get the main gist of the Agile ideas under control. At least in their IT departments they work iteratively, have a great focus on quality, and can react swiftly on the wishes of ‘the business’. At that point, they often reach a local optimum, and only keep improving within this classical separation of responsibilities.

Actually getting the leadership connected with what is going on in the IT department is tough. And we should be doing the reverse: getting development in touch with what is going on in the company leadership. We can do that by making connecting the goals of the company directly to the goals of the development teams. Borrowing the concepts of actionable metrics from the Lean Startup movement, and getting the whole company to talk in the same terms allows us to take the first steps to that new organisation. And get stuff done along the way.

I don’t want to hold a broadcast talk on this subject, but I can provide some material to get things started. What I would like to see is a real OpenSpace discussion. My goal for that discussion would be if we can get the/some participants’ ideas for (actionable) metrics, that would help them change the level of discussion in their companies, on the wall,. I’ll share some of mine.

Wouter Lagerweij, http://www.lagerweij.com, is an agile coach that helps companies at every level, from getting to technical excellence, to actually connecting their development teams to business and customer impacts.

Erik Lundh (Compelcon AB). Innovation & Desire – True Metrics of Agile?
Abstract: What is a true metric of Agile?

It sure isn’t which methods package your organization has adopted.

People who are serious about Agile and Lean sometimes get into heated arguments about which and what agile methodology. Being one of them and disliking most of the agile canned cargo cult that is offered by industrialized vendors and to my surprise accepted by most customers, I have thought long and hard about what was the true value of the highly successful agile pilots we did in our industrial process improvement networks (Swedish SPIN) 15 years ago. I realized that it was not just the allergy test of agile. Yes it was an allergy test, like the ones a doctor does by pricking the skin with different allergens. Back then there was no dumbed down certification and you had to do at least a dozen challenging practices to be agile. Many of them revealed sore spots in technology (architecture, technical debt, programmer skills, and general technical knowledge) or organization (teamwork, multi-team projects, interaction between customer/market and development).

But since most of the market has accepted the current agile kakanomics as state of the art, some of us have been thinking on how to be more to the point of what to expect when an organization is truly agile.

We tend to arrive at “innovation” and “timeless desirability” as product properties that we expect from an agile organization. We generally mean innovations that enhance current or new products with properties that make them much more desirable. Think the “Apple-feeling” that Steve Jobs pushed and made Apple’s customers behave in like devoted followers instead of low-bid hunters.

Erik Lundh has evangelized and coached agile methods since 2000. His largest assignment to date was as the global coach of one of Ericsson 3 divisions 2006-2008. Erik only recommends Scrum, Kanban and other canned cargo cult to people and organizations that he does not want to work with.

Christian Engblom (Ericsson Finland) and Marko Setala (Nokia). From waterfall to CD in telecom, how can that be done?
Abstract: Ericsson and Nokia Networks are world leading Telecommunication infrastructure vendors. Both companies have worked for agile transformation since 2000’s. We are jointly proposing a discussion based on experiences from two big global companies around transformation and its impact on leadership and way of working not forgetting the organizational aspect. Planned discussion topics, that we jointly introduce, are linked to:

– why to invest such a big money in lean and agile: the main drivers for change

– typical challenges when traditional companies are taking steps towards a more modern leadership culture and what does it require from each organizational unit

– changes seen during the transformation process.

An interesting topic could also be patterns why big transformations typically fail in large organizations.

We are inviting the community to propose additional aspects where these companies could bring insights to the discussion.

Erik Schön (Ericsson). Why do we Need High-Performing Leadership Teams and How Might We Get Them?
Abstract: “Problems in the organization are a fractal of the problems in the leadership team.” Michael Sahota, Catalyst and Certified Scrum Coach

How come there are so many high-performing development teams and so few high-performing leadership teams? What might we do about this? Let’s start the conversation and see what ideas, experiences and insights emerge!

By the end of this workshop, the co-creators will

  • Know what a high-performing leadership team is.
  • Believe that high-performing leadership teams are essential for high-performing organizations.
  • Have a few ideas of how they can create conditions for high-performing leadership teams to emerge in their organizations as well as what experiments would be relevant and interesting to try.
  • Feel that they want to try one high-performing leadership team experiment tomorrow.

This is highly relevant for all leaders/managers who are members in a management group or leadership team as well as coaches that work with managers, leaders, leadership teams and management groups.

Hacker turned software researcher turned system engineer; manager turned leader turned navigator, @erik_schon has developed people, products and organizations for almost 20 years in complex, global R&D environments. In his current role, Erik is one of the navigators of a large-scale journey towards perfect flow using Lean/Agile principles and practices in a 1500+ people product development unit on 10 sites in Ericsson.

Pieter van de Meché and Jutta Eckstein (IT communication). Sociocracy: A Key Factor for Making Your Whole Organization Agile
A continuation of the morning dialog, for those interested.
Jacopo Romei. LiquidO – No Management from the Trenches
A continuation of the morning dialog, for those interested.

13:30 – 15:00 Open Space

15:00 Break and Coaches Clinic
15:00 – 15:30 Coaches Clinic
Coaches Clinic
During the session breaks we will provide a Coaches Clinic, where you can meet experienced coaches and get help with solving your issues at work. Get tips and help on Agile methodologies, team dynamics, personal development, organizational change or coaching techniques. Or just bring any problem or question you can think of to the table. Our coaches will do their best to help you out! Make an appointment by our schedule board, or just drop in to see if there are coaches available.

15:30 WE4.1 Process and Practices.
Session Chair: Ville Heikkilä
WE4.2 Panel: The Agile Fluency Model.
Session Chair: Steven Fraser
WE4.3 Scaling Agile 2.
Session Chair: Torgeir Dingsøyr
WE4.4 Executives & Managers track Open Space
15:30 – 17:00 Process and Practices
Philipp Diebold (Fraunhofer IESE), Jan-Peter Ostberg (University of Stuttgart), Stefan Wagner (University of Stuttgart) and Ulrich Zendler (University of Stuttgart). What Do Practitioners Vary in Using Scrum? (Full Research Paper, 20 minutes)
Abstract: Background: Agile software development has become a popular way of developing software. Scrum is the most frequently used agile framework, but it is often reported to be adapted in practice. Objective: Thus, we aim to understand how Scrum is adapted in different contexts and what are the reasons for these changes. Method: Using a structured interview guideline, we interviewed ten German companies about their concrete usage of Scrum and analysed the results qualitatively. Results: All companies vary Scrum in some way. The least variations are in the Sprint length, events, team size and requirements engineering. Many users varied the roles, effort estimations and quality assurance. Conclusions: Many variations constitute a substantial deviation from Scrum as initially proposed. For some of these variations, there are good reasons. Sometimes, however, the variations are a result of a previous non-agile, hierarchical organisation.
Hans Brattberg (Crisp). Traffic, Organizations and Lean (Short Talk, 10 minutes)
Abstract: Traffic jam, stress and the crazy behavior it often triggers are easy to understand. But do you know how your organization behaves? When looking at it from a lean perspective, traffic (yes cars, busses, roundabouts etc.) can learn us a lot. This talk covers different traffic situations and how they are applicable to our organizational behavior.

* How a great project leader sometimes causes chaos
* Who is your organizations traffic light and why you need them
* Why 100% resource utilization is a traffic flow standing still
* Priority in traffic vs. deadlock among projects
* How big vehicles can you handle?

Giovanni Asproni (Asprotunity Limited). DIY Methodology Workshop (Industry & Practice, 1 hour)
Abstract: In my experience, custom made methodologies (what Alistair Cockburn calls the “one methodology per project” approach) can give teams a better chance of succeeding than prepackaged methodology frameworks like Scrum, Kanban, XP, etc.–which can be successful in some contexts but not so successful in others. In fact, the successful teams I’ve worked with always used their own custom methodology; however, I’ve also seen the damage sustained by teams that created their own by using an haphazard mix-and-match of practices. In this talk, first of all, I’ll explain the limitations of the prepackaged methodology frameworks. Then, I’ll show how to overcome them by creating a custom methodology by using the language of patterns and pattern languages to describe both technical and non-technical practices (e.g., TDD, self organization, command and control, continuous integration, etc.) and their relationships with each other, with a special focus on the consequences–good and bad ones, including the costs and efforts to make to become proficient with those practices. Teams can then use this information to make more informed decisions in their own contexts avoiding the pitfalls of haphazard mix-and-match.

15:30 – 17:00 Panel: The Agile Fluency Model
Diana Larsen (FutureWorks Consulting). Introduction to the Agile Fluency Model (30 minutes)
Diana Larsen (FutureWorks Consulting), Steve Holyer (Engage Results), Jutta Eckstein (IT communication), Antti Kirjavainen (Flowa) and Olli Sorje (Affecto). Panel: Applying the Agile Fluency Model: Problems and Potential (1 hour)
Abstract: First published in 2011, the Agile Fluency Model (agilefluency.com) describes four stages for achieving agile team proficiency: focus on value, deliver value, optimize value, and optimize the system. Adopting agile in successive stages the model delivers benefits proportional to investments. The model fosters the identification, adaption and adoption of agile practices appropriate to the team’s context and objectives. Does it reflect reality? Is it useful? Does it work when theory meets practice? This panel brings together Agile Fluency practitioners to share their challenges, successes, and future directions for model evolution.

15:30 – 17:00 Scaling Agile 2
Christian Berger (University of Gothenburg) and Ulrik Eklund (Malmö University). Expectations and Challenges from Scaling Agile in Mechatronics-Driven Companies – A Comparative Case Study (Full Research Paper, 20 minutes)
Abstract: Agile software development is increasingly adopted by companies evolving and maintaining software products to support better planning and tracking the realization of user stories and features. While convincing success stories help to further spread the adoption of Agile, mechatronics-driven companies need guidance to implement Agile for non-software teams. In this comparative case study of three companies from the Nordic region, we systematically investigate expectations and challenges from scaling Agile in organizations dealing with mechatronics development by conducting on-site workshops and surveys. Our findings show that all companies have already successfully implemented Agile in their software teams. The expected main benefit of successfully scaling agile development is a faster time-to-market product development; however, the two main challenges are: (a) An inflexible test environment that inhibits fast feedback to changed or added features, and (b) the existing organizational structure including the company’s mind-set that needs to be opened-up for agile principles.
Abstract: We give an overview of our recent initiative in designing a systematic framework to help teams continuously improve Agile practices in large-scale and fast-expanding R&D centre. The framework is expected to be a closed-loop, light-weighted and sustainable one with positive business impact. To address these requirements, after several rounds of pilot, a “Revisit” framework is figured out, which consists of five major phases:1) Goal/Problemdriven planning; 2) Light-weight audit; 3) Audit result analysis and reporting; 4) On-demand Competence Development support leveraging resources across the organization; 5) Progress tracking and effectiveness check. Also, a jointforce including a Revisit team, Revisit agents, and ScrumMaster community is setup to ensure the effective execution. Initial results indicate promising evidence this approach can help teams’ quality and efficiency improvement.
Abstract: The Software Documentation lifecycle for a product is synchronized with the software development model that is implemented for the development of the product. With the change in one software development model to the other, the documentation team too faces increasing level of challenges and demands, which are unfortunately very less known and have not, received much attention on a global level. This paper describes the challenges faced by the software documentation teams working on multiple projects, which are aligned to different software models of development (Waterfall, V, Agile, and Lean). The paper also elaborates how the documentation teams adapted to the Lean model of software development by improvising the documentation life cycle processes to create success stories. The paper further highlights the learning and the persistent challenges of the team.

15:30 – 17:00 Executives & Managers track
Plenary Session
Small groups in a mixture of those who attended different marketplace sessions. Additionally, people may propose topics based on the previous sessions and we do short sessions on several, then convene as a community. Key Topics Discussion in the Plenary: Role of Leadership, Organization Designs for Successful Agile Organizations and Culture as a design element in organizations.

15:30 – 17:00 Open Space

17:00 Spare time
19:00
19:00 - XP Conference Dinner at the Helsinki Stock Exchange
Conference Dinner Location
A Magic Night at the Helsinki Stock Exchange
Welcome to an exciting and fun night at the elegant Restaurant Pörssi – as in Stock Exchange – in the heart of Helsinki city center. This majestic Art Nouveau building built in 1911 will be the worthy setting for our culinary conference dinner spiced with a program tingling your senses of humour and magic.

The Restaurant Pörssi is located in Fabianinkatu 14, within a 10 min walk from the conference venue.

Thursday, 28 May 2015

Room Nordia Fennia II Fennia I Nautica
09:00 (at Fennia II) TH1.1 Keynote: New Directions for Software Development Process Brian Fitzgerald.
Session Chair: Maria Paasivaara
9:00 – 10:30 Keynote
Brian Fitzgerald (Lero). New Directions for Software Development Process (Keynote, 1 hour)
Abstract: The basic principles that underpin the software development processes in use today originated in research and ideas that were formulated in the period 1967-1977 – what may be termed the ‘golden decade’ – object orientation, the structured approach, and even lean and agile principles – these all have strong roots in this period. However, the development environment today is very different from that which prevailed in 1967-1977 where batch processing, job control language, time-sharing, teletypes and punched cards were the order of the day. This talk will present this argument and identify promising new concepts which could underpin modern software development processes in the 21st century. One example is crowdsourcing software development. A case study of crowdsourcing software development will be presented as an exemplar which illustrates the difficulties in crowdsourcing the types of complex interdependent work represented by software development.

Bio: Brian Fitzgerald is Chief Scientist at Lero – the Irish Software Engineering Research Centre. He also holds an endowed professorship, the Krehbiel Chair in Innovation in Business & Technology, at the University of Limerick where he served as Vice President Research from 2008-2011. He holds a PhD from the University of London and has published 14 books and over 150 papers in the leading international journals and conferences in both the Information Systems and Software Engineering fields.

Prior to taking up an academic position, he worked in the software industry for about 12 years, in a variety of sectors (including finance, telecommunications, manufacturing, bespoke software development) in a number of countries (Ireland, Belgium, Germany). He has also been very successful in winning competitive research grants. Overall, these projects have received total funding of almost €100 million, with over €13 million received directly as Principal Investigator (PI). (http://www.brian-fitzgerald.com)

10:30 Break and Coaches Clinic
10:30 – 11:00 Coaches Clinic
Coaches Clinic
During the session breaks we will provide a Coaches Clinic, where you can meet experienced coaches and get help with solving your issues at work. Get tips and help on Agile methodologies, team dynamics, personal development, organizational change or coaching techniques. Or just bring any problem or question you can think of to the table. Our coaches will do their best to help you out! Make an appointment by our schedule board, or just drop in to see if there are coaches available.

11:00 TH2.1 Agile in Practice.
Session Chair: Torgeir Dingsøyr
TH2.2 Agile Project Management Tore Dybå.
Session Chair: Maria Paasivaara
TH2.3 Practices for Developers.
Session Chair: Eero Laukkanen
TH2.4 Lightning Talks 2 Open Space
11:00 – 12:00 Agile in Practice
Best Paper Candidate: Peggy Gregory (University of Central Lancashire), Leonor Barroca (The Open University), Katie Taylor (University of Central Lancashire), Dina Salah (The Open University) and Helen Sharp (The Open University). Agile Challenges in Practice: A Thematic Analysis (Full Research Paper, 20 minutes)
Abstract: As agile is maturing and becoming more widely adopted, it is important that researchers are aware of the challenges faced by practitioners and organisations. We undertook a thematic analysis of 193 agile challenges collected at a series of agile conferences and events during 2013 and 2014. Participants were mainly practitioners and business representatives along with some academics. The challenges were thematically analysed by separate authors, synthesised, and a list of seven themes and 27 sub-themes was agreed. Themes were Organisation, Sustainability, Culture, Teams, Scale, Value and Claims and Limitations. We compare our findings against previous attempts to identify and categorise agile challenges. While most themes have persisted we found a shift of focus towards sustainability, business engagement and transformation, as well as claims and limitations. We identify areas for further research and a need for innovative methods of conveying academic research to industry and industrial problems to academia.
Marco Ortu (DIEE, University of Cagliari), Giuseppe Destefanis (CRIM), Mohamad Kassab (The Pennsylvania State University, Malvern, PA), Steve Counsell (Brunel University, Uxbridge), Michele Marchesi (DIEE, University of Cagliari) and Roberto Tonelli (DIEE, University of Cagliari). Would you mind fixing this issue? An Empirical Analysis of Politeness and Attractiveness in Software Developed Using Agile Boards (Full Research Paper, 20 minutes)
Abstract: A successful software project is the result of a complex process involving, above all, people. Developers are the key factors for the success of a software development process and the Agile philosophy is developer-centred. Developers are not merely executors of tasks, but actually the protagonists and core of the whole development process. This paper aims to investigate social aspects among developers working together and the appeal of a software project developed with the support of Agile tools such as Agile boards. We studied 14 open source software projects developed using the Agile board of the JIRA repository. We analysed all the comments committed by the developers involved in the projects and we studied whether the politeness of the comments affected the number of developers involved over the years and the time required to fix any given issue. Our results show that the level of politeness in the communication process among developers does have an effect on the time required to fix issues and, in the majority of the analysed projects, it has a positive correlation with attractiveness of the project to both active and potential developers. The more polite developers were, the less time it took to fix an issue, and, in the majority of the analysed cases, the more the developers wanted to be part of project, the more they were willing to continue working on the project over time.
Simon Brooke (Cisco) and Dina Allswang (Cisco). Agility in Dynamic Environments: A Case Study for Agile Development (Poster Talk, 10 minutes)
Abstract: Continual changes during software development cycles require solutions, products and platforms to be adaptable, extendible and rapidly created to meet market needs. Agile methodologies were developed as a way to meet these challenges. From our experience, adoption of Agile is more than a one-time decision and simple switch. We saw that in order for Agile to work efficiently, a considered, realistic and adaptive approach is required to ensure team buyin, effective practices and successful, completed sprints. Following Agile approaches in a holistic way throughout the development lifecycle, enabled our team to meet quality requirements, functional requirements, timelines and customer needs, while ensuring adaptability to changes at continuously high quality.

11:00 – 12:00 Agile Project Management
Tore Dybå (SINTEF ICT). Agile Project Management (Invited Talk, 1 hour)
Abstract: Agile software development represents a new approach for planning and managing software projects. It puts less emphasis on up-front plans and strict control and relies more on informal collaboration, coordination, and learning. This talk provides a characterization and definition of agile project management based on extensive studies of large-scale industrial projects. It explains the circumstances behind the change from traditional management with its focus on direct supervision and standardization of work processes, to the newer, agile focus on self- managing teams, including its opportunities and benefits, but also its complexity and challenges. The main focus of the talk is the four principles of agile project management: minimum critical specification, autonomous teams, redundancy, and feedback and learning. The talk is intended for researchers, practitioners and educators in software engineering, especially project managers. Practices and key success factors will be outlined and a successful large-scale case study of agile project management will be presented.

11:00 – 12:00 Practices for Developers
Francesca Arcelli Fontana (University of Milano Bicocca), Marco Zanoni (University of Milano Bicocca) and Francesco Zanoni (University of Milano Bicocca). A Duplicated Code Refactoring Advisor (Full Research Paper, 20 minutes)
Abstract: Refactoring is one of the key practices in Extreme Programming and other agile methods. Duplicated code is one of the most pervasive and pungent smells to remove from source code through refactoring. Duplicated code has been largely studied in the literature, and different types of duplications, or “clones”, have been identified. Some studies analyzed in details the problems caused by clones in the code, others outlined also the difficulties in removing clones, and the cases in which it could be better not removing them. The refactoring cost for removing clones can be very high, also due to the different choices on the possible refactoring steps. In this paper, we describe our approach and tool developed with the aim to suggest the best refactorings to remove clones in Java code. Our approach is based on the classification of the clones in terms of their location in a class hierarchy, and allows to choose among a restricted set of refactorings, which are then evaluated using multiple criteria. We provide a validation of the effectiveness of the approach.
Susanne Siverland (Sigma IT and Management/Blekinge Institute of Technology), Roger C S Wernersson (Ericsson AB) and Charlotte Sennersten (The Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO)). Optimal Refactoring (Short Research Paper, 10 minutes)
Abstract: This paper investigates if Code-Churn, Lines of Code (LoC), Duplicated Code, Complexity and Technical Debt (TD) can inform a coder where to prioritize refactoring. A mature code-base of 1 300 000 LoC in approximately 5000 files for a period of 20 months has been examined. The result is that code-churn is the strongest variable out of the studied variables followed by LoC and TD. Multiplying with code-churn strengthens LoC and TD even more, making them the strongest indicators of refactoring potential.
Avraham Poupko (Cisco). Commonality/Variablity Analysis when working Agile (Short Talk, 10 minutes)
Abstract: Commonality/Variablity Analysis is the heart of software development.
The key to successful software design is identifying when and how things are the same, and when and how they are different. Assuming that things are the same when they are not, will cause software not to work. Assuming that things are different when they are not, will cause the software to be overly complex.

Agile methodologies (inspired by XP), attempt to address these issues by differing the decisons to as late as possible. Making the assumption that the system should only support a commonality or variablity, when we KNOW that there is need for such a construct.
But is that true? Maybe there are some commonalities/variabilities that can be established early in the development process. Identifying those and supporting them, might allow for the development of more robust software.

This thought provoking talk takes a quick look at the various types of commonality and variability, and how these are supported in software. The talk then goes on to suggest that there should be an explicit design stage that has as its core – commonality/variablity analysis. When done right, this will ease the rest of the development. The talk will include a first hand experiance of such an activity.

Best Paper Candidate: Alexander Wilson (Unruly). Mob-Programming: What Works, What Doesn’t (Experience Report, 20 minutes)
Abstract: At Unruly we are constantly trying to turn up the dial on our XP practices, and in the second half of 2014 we started to take the step from Pair Programming on all production code to Mob Programming with the entire team. This report shares experiences that Unruly has gained in pushing the boundaries of Extreme Programming.

11:00 – 12:00 Lightning Talks 2
Abstract: How agile are we? How agile should we be? Can you be too agile? And how do you know?

Can we capture the essence of ‘business agility’? What do you look for to see how agile an organization is?

We take a pulse-check of agility in the organization and suggest a simple way to measure agility in the organizational context.

Abstract: Let me introduce you to two things that help you test better with two short stories. The stories from real projects show value for product quality resulting from serendipity – lucky accidents – and perseverance – not giving up on being creative with ideas. Serendipity and perseverance manifest in skilled testing: to find problems others miss.
Abstract: We are still struggling to put into use the lessons we have learned from lean thinking in software industry. Lately the DevOps movement has been one of the biggest things in the field of software development and it is bringing true agileness and lean in to the practice. DevOps, value stream map and the Theory of Constraints can supercharge your software development machine.
Abstract: Nowadays there are hundreds of tools out there for so-called agile management of stories, tasks and projects. However, very few seem, upon a closer examination to really fit the bill. Apart from usability issues, a key reason is that the underlying concept models of these tools is simply not robust enough to support the just-in-time elaboration of requirements that agile methods demand. Another key problem with most tools’ concept model is that they can’t handle the complex setting of tasks, projects and non-project activities inherent to not-perfectly-agile real-world organizations. During more than a decade of scientific research with software companies large and small, we have been working on a concept model for work item management that would be both easy to grasp and powerful to use. In this lightning talk we present our latest understanding of what is needed and do a walkthrough of it using practical examples.
Rafaela M. Fontana (Federal University of Paraná). Maturity in agile software development
Abstract: To understand what is maturity in agile software development, in my doctoral study I have analyzed how real agile teams evolve their practices. As a result of my research, I have proposed the Progressive Outcomes framework to describe this agile maturing process. In this talk, I will present this framework showing that agile maturity comes from a non-linear and dynamic process of pursuit for progressive outcomes in the practices, on the team, in the way deliveries are performed, in the way requirements are defined, in the quality of the final product, in the customer relationship and in the organizational support.
Abstract: We will explain how the vicious circle of fragmentation, batching and narrow learning will ruin any organisation. Power and wisdom will always be elsewhere. Then we show the opposite, how learning, unity of organisation and flow reverse the vicious circle. But how? Be there and hear the five steps. Learning points: 1. The vicious and virtuous circles are very good thinking and communication tools, for the big picture and for the micro-level, 2. Adoption path based on learning in action, not pre-emptive process planning.
Abstract: Since 2006 the agile community in Latin America has been in constant growing. We organized our first international conference in 2008 and since then, local communities have been developed in each country. Now the conference is in its 8th edition and every year is getting bigger, last year there were more than 600 attendees. In this short talk I want to share some lesson learned from all this years.
Abstract: In this short talk Paulo Caroli demonstrates a recipe for creating lean products. To start an Agile project you need a common understanding of the business objectives and the main users. Within this context, this recipe provides a clarification of main user journeys with its product features that compose the desirable MVPs — the Minimum Viable Products.

11:00 – 12:00 Open Space

12:00 Lunch
13:30 TH3.1 Agile Teams.
Session Chair: Jutta Eckstein
TH3.2 Testing 2.
Session Chair: Kari Systä
TH3.3 Panel: Professionalism.
Session Chair: Steven Fraser
TH3.4 Agile Transformation 3.
Session Chair: Ville Heikkilä
Open Space
13:30 – 15:00 Agile Teams
Tomáš Tureček (RainFellows), Martin Chmelař (RainFellows), Roman Šmiřák (RainFellows) and Jan Krchňák (RainFellows). Building learning organization through peer hands-on support community and gamification (Experience Report, 20 minutes)
Abstract: The story is about how we decided to activate potential of the teams in a product portfolio with 21 products and more than 400 people in 5 countries and started to build a learning organization where product teams share experience and knowledge with each other and improve. And this all driven by their own motivation. How? By organizing a community a bit different way, using peer hands-on support in between community sessions and by gamifying personal growth. This paper describes how we designed the community, piloted it for 3 months and summarizes the results. Teams are now much more connected cross team/product borders and they actively help each other to improve.
Tom Perry (CyberSource). Impediments for Fun and Profit (Short Talk, 10 minutes)
Abstract: Impediments have long been described as obstacles to a team’s progress. They certainly are, but they can be so much more than that! Impediments aren’t just a risk realized, they are also an opportunity! Use them wisely and you can stymie your competitors, confound your enemies, and generally make life much more entertaining for everyone!

Do you have a product owner who is reluctant to engage? Try using an impediment to wake his sorry ass up! Is your team feeling overconfident? Pull the pin and toss them an impediment! Is the work too hard? Well then it must be an impediment!

Learn about all the ways that impediments can be used for both good and evil! Even Darth Vader had impediments, so why don’t you?

Pierluigi Pugliese (Connexxo GmbH). I’m not a servant, I’m a host! (Industry & Practice, 1 hour)
Abstract: In agility we talk a lot about servant leaders, based on the metaphor from Robert Greenleaf, where this is opposed to the attitude of the leader as a hero. Yet, a servant has no power and no rights and has rather a subordinate position that undermines the possibility to influence the peers. The alternative is the leader as a host attitude: a new metaphor for leadership that models much better the role of a leader in an agile organisation.

13:30 – 15:00 Testing 2
Best Paper Candidate: Kristian Bjerke-Gulstuen (Accenture), Emil Wiik Larsen (Accenture), Tor Stålhane (NTNU) and Torgeir Dingsøyr (SINTEF). High level test driven development – Shift Left (Experience Report, 20 minutes)
Abstract: Agile development methods are increasingly used in large projects, with many development teams. Because acceptance testing can require a large chain of features to be completed, testing is often carried out late in such projects. In this experience report, we describe a large project where 11 development teams delivered a system in 12 three week iterations. We also describe how the focus of test activities was shifted towards the earlier phases of development, what we call “shift left”. This involved shifting the focus both within the iterations, and in how the overall testing work was organized. We describe the results of this change, and provide recommendations for how to organize test work in future large-scale development projects.
Maaret Pyhäjärvi (Granlund Oy). Breaking your illusions with Exploratory Testing (Short Talk, 10 minutes)
Abstract: Testers don’t break your code, they break your *illusions* about the code. Testing in agile is not just the technical checks but more relevantly it’s about discovering information about threats to value you’re trying to create. This talk introduces four kinds of illusions exploratory testing often breaks.
Llewellyn Falco (Spun Labs). Getting Existing Code Under Tests (Technical Demo, 30 minutes)
Abstract: While Test Driven Development sounds great, many people have a bunch of code already, which is untested and hard to refactor. This session will demo many common patterns of code, and show how to create unit tests quickly and easily, so you can start on the path to clean code.
Charlie Poole. From Tests to Theories and Back Again (Invited Demo and Talk, 30 minutes)
Abstract: A “Theory” is an extension of the notion of a parameterized test, one that applies a set of pre-conditions to its arguments. Failure of a pre-condition means that the test does not apply to the specific data. As simple as it sounds, this is a powerful technique for specifying cases in which different values and/or relationships of the data items causes entirely different actions to be taken. Examples will be shown in both Java and C#. The demo will use C# with NUnit.

13:30 – 15:00 Panel: Professionalism
Steven Fraser (Innoxec), Janne Järvinen (F-Secure), Erik Lundh (Compelcon AB), Ken Power, Linda Rising, Werner Wild and Rebecca Wirfs-Brock. Learning from Disaster and Experience: Evolving Software Professionalism (Panel, 1 hour 30 minutes)
Abstract: Professionalism evolves as knowledge and skills mature from craft to commercial practice – often as the result of learnings derived from failure and human hazard. Aviation, medicine, engineering, and architecture are examples of disciplines with an established knowledge base and curriculum of learning and mentorship. These disciplines often require regulated practices executed by certified professionals to ensure the safety and economic value of delivered services. This panel will debate whether we are learning effectively from our experiences and what might be done to accelerate increased software professionalism and product value.

13:30 – 15:00 Agile Transformation 3
Roman Smirak (RainFellows) and Martin Chmelar (RainFellows). Why Tech guys need to master psychology and sales skills (Industry & Practice, 30 minutes)
Abstract: In this interactive session we shift the focus from Value delivery (by IT) to Value perception by customer. By Value we mean meeting customer’s need. Actually, IT has been perceived as an opposite – an expensive item with geeks not easy to understand, a synonym for a problem, always delivering late, simply not meeting the needs. “Do the IT guys know what they do at all?” On the other side there are iTech geeks loving to solve technical problems, being a modern incarnation of introverted scientists, who just strike back at business: “Can you just leave us alone so we could do our stuff right?” IT is a service. Perception of its quality and value strongly depends on our attitude towards a customer of the service. We propose an important shift: 1) geeks need to extend their “problem context” from an isolated technology task (and tendency to isolate it) to the whole or systematic thinking about a service including all the stakeholders being a part of the (problem) definition. 2) An interaction between people is well covered by psychology. By introducing basic psychological concepts such as the simple and practical one – personal typology – helps to extend the context in a scientific and logical way acceptable by geeks. In the session we show concrete customer cases and techniques we use to make the shift happen.
Minna Hallikainen (Ericsson Finland), Christian Engblom (Ericsson Finland), Maria Paasivaara (Aalto University) and Casper Lassenius (Aalto University). Good CoP – Bad CoP (Industry & Practice, 1 hour)
Abstract: One of the biggest challenges in making a successful Large-scale Lean and Agile adoption that is able to continuously deliver optimal value is to create a structure which supports learning, collaboration and above all quick decisions based on best available knowledge. At Ericsson one of the key success factors in creating this structure has been the active and innovative use of Communities of Practice (CoPs): a group of people who share a concern, a set of problems, or a passion about a topic, and who deepen their knowledge and expertise in this area by interacting on an ongoing basis. In an iterative manner we learned to understand the characteristics of good CoPs and also how the CoPs best support and optimize the operative flow of value.

During this session we will first learn what a CoP is and how it can be used in the daily work. We will discuss what can be considered as characteristics of successful CoPs. Participants will share their experiences on both good and unsuccessful CoPs: what made them good or bad and what we can learn from those. As a result, participants learn to assess the quality of a CoP and analyze what is working and what is not, as well as identify the needed improvements.

13:30 – 15:00 Open Space

15:00 Break and Coaches Clinic
15:00 – 15:30 Coaches Clinic
Coaches Clinic
During the session breaks we will provide a Coaches Clinic, where you can meet experienced coaches and get help with solving your issues at work. Get tips and help on Agile methodologies, team dynamics, personal development, organizational change or coaching techniques. Or just bring any problem or question you can think of to the table. Our coaches will do their best to help you out! Make an appointment by our schedule board, or just drop in to see if there are coaches available.

15:30 TH4.1 Team Practices.
Session Chair: Daniela Cruzes
TH4.2 Process Frameworks.
Session Chair: Morten Elvang
TH4.3 Metrics.
Session Chair: Jürgen Münch
TH4.4 Agile Transformation 4.
Session Chair: Pilar Rodriguez
Open Space
15:30 – 17:00 Team Practices
Janne Sinivirta (Nitor Creations). All Hands on Deck – Pragmatic Architecture for Agile Teams (Industry & Practice, 30 minutes)
Abstract: What is the role of architecture in a modern software project? Have we forgotten the value of proper planning in our effort to be flexible and agile while stripping away all excess fat? Or are we really better off without the architects in their ivory towers and fine without the big architecture bibles gathering dust on the developers’ tables? This talk will introduce you to lean architecture, a place where architects and agilists can share the same campfire and still leave with their neckbeards intact.

For a project to produce value in a steady stream, one vital aspect is finding the right balance between upfront planning and agility. This is what lean architecture is, a state where the architecture offers enough structure for the code to grow and design to emerge successfully, without being a burden to create and maintain.

In this presentation, you will see the value and the role of both the architect and the architectural documentation in an agile project. We will learn about balance between agility and discipline, importance of domain modeling, tips on essential documentation, ideas on teams vs. organization. All this in a pragmatic way that is easy to adapt into your daily work.

Steve Holyer (Engage Results) and Antti Kirjavainen (Flowa). Liftingoff, a story about Agile chartering and defying gravity (Industry & Practice, 1 hour)
Abstract: Generate the momentum your team needs. Overcome the gravitational forces generated by “lack of common purpose, unclear communication channels, undefined working relationships and other areas of ambiguity”. Start your mission on the right trajectory to deliver the results you and your customers need. (Larsen & Nies 2011).

We’ll introduce you to the practice of Liftoff and Agile chartering, and we’ll show you how that creates necessary alignment between a product or project team and your business. In this discussion oriented session, we’ll introduce you to the three elements of Agile chartering: purpose, alignment and context. And we’ll share and brainstorm ways to create your Agile charter.

We’ll also tell the story of how we formed an internationally diverse round-table of colleagues with a vision and a mission to find better ways of doing Agile chartering. And we’ll tell you how we Lifted what we found.

We will share some valuable resources that will help you with your Liftoffs. Of course this session is inspired by the book “Liftoff: Launching Agile Teams & Projects” bay Diana Larsen and Ainsley Nies.

After this session you will have a better understanding of the way Liftoff helps your teams deliver successful results. And even if you think your project is too far gone, it’s also never too late to accomplish your Liftoff.

Yes, we know that many people are already doing some elements of Liftoff, and we think that after you hear our story you’ll make sure that your Liftoffs include so much more.

15:30 – 17:00 Process Frameworks
Samuli Kiviniemi (Nitor Delta). Introduction to the Scaled Agile Framework (Industry & Practice, 30 minutes)
Abstract: We go through the basics of the Scaled Agile Framework with the help of a set of slides and how to read the Scaled Agile Framework’s Big Picture http://scaledagileframework.com/ explaining what is scaled agile, why it is helping companies to improve their performance and what the key roles are.

After this introduction the participants are familiar with the basic terms and key concepts of Scaled Agile, and can explain what it is and how it helps.

The introduction is suitable especially to researchers, familiar with agile methods such as Scrum but lacking the experience on working in a larger organization. What makes an organization successful? How can Scaled Agile help in creating the success?

We go through the picture using real-life examples and stories. However, the tutorial will not extent to the full level that one can get with a Scaled Agile Academy’s 2-day Leading SAFe training. 2-day Leading SAFe training will cover the topics in much more detail and depth. The session merely tries to build a bridge over the gap between the research and the practice, updating the research community on the topics that practitioners are currently learning.

Unlike the 2-day Leading SAFe training this session will not go through the principles of agile development, Scrum basics and the principles of Lean / Product Development Flow. It will be assumed that the participants are familiar with such basic concepts, and can build their knowledge on top of these principles. Understanding the key concepts and how scaled agile model is supposed to work is an essential pre-condition on researching organizations in various stages of transformation to adopt scaled agility.

Samuli is experienced, easily approachable, very social and honest software professional. He works best as a catalyst between tech-teams and business owners. Samuli has comprehensive experience in software development via different roles (software developer, team manager, coach, technical product owner). He is very familiar with agile software development and lean coaching, facilitation methods and trainings. He’s experienced Scrum Master, mentor and personal coach.

Tom Perry (CyberSource). How to Draw Your Own Process Framework (in 5 easy steps) (Industry & Practice, 1 hour)
Abstract: When it comes to describing processes, there are relatively few options available to us: words, flowcharts, plus a liberal amount of hand waving. This leads to a rather bleak and boring conversation about how we work together. It would be great if there was one great diagram we could use to explain our processes every time. But there is no such picture…not unless you draw it yourself of course.

They say that one picture is worth a thousand words. In this workshop, armed with pens, pencils and more than a few crayons, we will create our own custom pictures of the processes we use (and the way we see them). Through using simple constructs, we can create compelling visualizations that enable us to tell a story about the processes that we use.

It’s easy, it’s fun, and there is no drawing experience or skill required.

15:30 – 17:00 Metrics
Valentina Lenarduzzi (Università degli Studi dell’Insubria), Ilaria Lunesu (Università degli Studi di Cagliari), Martina Matta (Università degli Studi di Cagliari) and Davide Taibi (University of Kaiserslautern). Functional Size Measures and Effort Estimation in Agile Development: a Replicated Study (Full Research Paper, 20 minutes)
Abstract: To help developers during the Scrum planning poker, in our previous work we ran a case study on a Moonlight Scrum process to understand if it is possible to introduce functional size metrics to improve estimation accuracy and to measure the accuracy of expert-based estimation. The results of this original study showed that expert-based estimations are more accurate than those obtained by means of models, calculated with functional size measures. To validate the results and to extend them to plain Scrum processes, we replicated the original study twice, applying an exact replication to two plain Scrum development processes. The results of this replicated study show that the accuracy of the effort estimated by the developers is very accurate and higher than that obtained through functional size measures. In particular, SiFP and IFPUG Function Points, have low predictive power and are thus not help to improve the estimation accuracy in Scrum.
Petri Kettunen (University of Helsinki), Mikko Ämmälä (Elektrobit Wireless Communications Ltd) and Jari Partanen (Elektrobit Wireless Communications Ltd). Towards Predictable B2B Customer Satisfaction and Experience Management with Continuous Improvement Assets and Rich Feedback (Short Research Paper, 10 minutes)
Abstract: Modern high-performing software product development organizations are nowadays more and more often transforming their operations towards continuous higher-level ends. In general, customer satisfaction (CS) is such a goal. This paper presents an approach of gauging and improving customer satisfaction in an industrial B2B product development project organization for continuous customer experience (CX) management. In order to do that, the Customer Satisfaction Index (CSI) used in the company was systematized with an applied impact analysis technique. The resulting artifact (called CSI Impact Mapping Grid) combines a set of satisfier improvement strategies derived from our initial work with the GQM+Strategies method coupled with the company assets (capabilities) and insights. It is furthermore aimed to be integrated with rich online measurement inputs for real-time predictive feedback. Such transparency across the whole organization enables employees to realize and insightfully support − even proactively in real time − the various cause-effect relationships of the CS/CX.
Towo Toivola (Ericsson). A Balanced Metrics Set for Software Business (Industry & Practice, 1 hour)
Abstract: Choosing a balanced metrics set to measure capability of a software development business is untrivial, as many definitions of a ‘good’ metric are contradictory. Choosing the wrong metrics can have drastic consequences.
In this presentation I quickly look at metrics in general and the typical failings in the way they are implemented at organizations. Then I explore different interpretations for “useful” in “useful metrics”.
Last I present the multi-level metrics approach selected at a Finnish global software product company in 2012 to gain awareness of software development performance and its business impact. There the audience can see how a small set of metrics on a well-chosen abstraction level can be holistic enough to discourage local optimization but concrete enough to give guidance on improvement action.

15:30 – 17:00 Agile Transformation 4
Best Paper Candidate: Shlomi Rosenberg (Cisco). Organizational Culture Aspects of an Agile Transformation (Experience Report, 20 minutes)
Abstract: For an organization wishing to be more agile after working waterfall for years, it is not enough to just start learning and implementing new ways of working. There must be a parallel activity, at least equally important, of dealing with the organizational culture changes required to support this transformation. In Cisco I deal with those on a daily basis. An organizational culture is much harder to change than work methods. It involves feelings, perceptions and fears, so it is advisable to be aware of the importance and invest in dealing with it. This experience report details examples of these culture aspects, how we deal with them and some tips that can help make such transformation successful.
Jimmy Janlén (Crisp AB). Passive Coaching (Short Talk, 10 minutes)
Abstract: Priming, sublime perception, behavioural and cultural hacking, and passive coaching are controversial concepts. Probably not fully housebroken tools for an agile coach. But if you disregard those concerns, what could you do? What have been done? Jimmy Janlén, agile enterprise coach from Crisp shares a couple of conducted experiments and ideas for further exploration.
Erik Lundh (Compelcon AB). Find Agile In Their History (Industry & Practice, 1 hour)
Abstract: We look closer at the power of anchoring agile in the history of an organization.

Years ago Steven Fraser built a one page map over the historical roots of various agile practices. Steven was kind enough to allow me to use a version of that page and that helped me a lot when introducing agile in R&D organizations. The next step was to connect with the historical roots of successful “agile” behaviors in each organization.

Nowadays, whenever I am asked to give some kind of motivational presentation on agile I always invest some time looking for success stories with agile properties in the organizations past. Anchoring agile in an organization’s past might be especially helpful if the audience has a lot of experienced people who has seen the passing of a lot of methodology fads.

15:30 – 17:00 Open Space

17:00 Conference closing

Friday, 29 May 2015

Collocated event: Agile Data-driven Company and Data Science training by Reaktor

Room Baltica Fennia I Press Room Nordia Compass
09:00 FR1.1 International Workshop on Refactoring & Testing (RefTest 2015) FR1.2 3rd International Workshop on Large-Scale Agile Development FR1.3 Mob Programming – Learn, Teach, Research Nancy Van Schooenderwoert, Woody Zuill, Matthew Dodkins and Simon Clements-Hawes FR1.4 Fun Retrospectives: Activities and ideas for making agile retrospectives more engaging Paulo Caroli, Taina Caetano FR1.5 Doctoral Symposium
9:00 – 12:30 International Workshop on Refactoring & Testing (RefTest 2015)
Organizers: Steve Counsell, Francesca Arcelli Fontana and Alessandro Murgia. RefTest 2015 – International Workshop on Refactoring & Testing (Scientific Workshop, 3 hours)
Abstract: Refactoring and its testing implications/crossover have emerged over recent years to become important inter-related research topics with high industrial resonance. Many issues and problems still remain unexplored in these two highly-related fields incorporating topics such as the theoretical underpinnings of refactoring, Test Driven Development, empirical studies, refactoring of test artefacts, code smell analysis and patterns (both design and micro) to name just a few. Refactoring also has a growing importance in the monitoring of system’s evolution and the propensity of systems to minimise maintenance effort and fault propensity; the overriding question, still largely unanswered, is whether we can quantify the benefits of refactoring. The purpose and goal of the RefTest Workshop is to bring together industrial practitioners and academics in a setting where current issues in refactoring and test crossover can be presented, relationships with testing discussed, results from current research in refactoring/testing disseminated and future directions distilled.
9:15-9:30 Steve Counsell (Brunel University, Uxbridge). Welcome and Introduction
9:30-10:00 Francesca Arcelli Fontana (University of Milano-Bicocca), Marco Mangiacavalli (University of Milano-Bicocca), Domenico Pochiero (University of Milano-Bicocca) and Marco Zanoni (University of Milano-Bicocca). On Experimenting Refactoring Tools to Remove Code Smells (Workshop Research Paper, 30 minutes)
Abstract: When we develop a software project of a certain complexity, source code maintainability could become a problem, in particular if developers do not use a consolidate development process that simplies the management of the entire project. When source code becomes very complex, it is difcult for developers to share and modify it. We can improve internal software qualities such as reusability, maintainability and readability through refactoring. Refactoring can be applied to remove possible problems in the code, as code smells. Identifying code smells and removing them through refactoring results in better code maintainability, but it can be an overwhelming task. In this paper, we describe our experimentation on using four refactoring tools to remove code smells in four systems, with the aim to outline advantages and disadvantages of the tools with respect to the accomplishment of this task, and to identify the smells easier to be removed among the ones we considered in this paper.
10:00-10:30 Ali Parsai (University of Antwerp), Alessandro Murgia (University of Antwerp), Quinten David Soetens (University of Antwerp) and Serge Demeyer (University of Antwerp). Mutation Testing as a Safety Net for Test Code Refactoring (Workshop Research Paper, 30 minutes)
Abstract: Refactoring is an activity that improves the internal structure of the code without altering its external behavior. When performed on the production code, the tests can be used to verify that the external behavior of the production code is preserved. However, when the refactoring is performed on test code, there is no safety net that assures that the external behavior of the test code is preserved. In this paper, we propose to adopt mutation testing as a means to verify if the behavior of the test code is preserved after refactoring. Moreover, we also show how this approach can be used to identify the part of the test code which is improperly refactored.
10:30-11:00 Coffee Break
11:00-11:30 Bartosz Walter (Poznan University of Technology), Błażej Matuszyk (Poznan University of Technology) and Francesca Arcelli Fontana (University of Milano Bicocca). Including structural factors into metrics-based code smells detection (Workshop Research Paper, 30 minutes)
Abstract: Code smells help to easily discover and describe deeper problems in software design. Most of automated methods of smell detection are based on analysis of a combination of metrics relevant for a given flaw. However, some smells reflect more complex problems and require a holistic perspective that covers a number of different sources of data. In this paper we experimentally verify the usefulness of including structural factors into a metrics-based detection of God Class and Brain Class code smells.
11:30-12:00 Matteo Orrù (Università degli Studi di Cagliari – DRIEI), Simone Porru (Università degli Studi di Cagliari – DRIEI), Michele Marchesi (DIEE, University of Cagliari) and Roberto Tonelli (DIEE, University of Cagliari). The Evolution of Knowledge in the Refactoring Research Field (Workshop Research Paper, 30 minutes)
Abstract: Refactoring is certainly one of the most widespread practices used by developers to improve software quality. During the last two decades, it has been the subject of an increasing number of research studies. But how much do we know about the trends, and the appearance of new topics, in the research field of refactoring? What have researchers found about its application since the time of its first introduction? In this work we provide a preliminary analysis of the state of the art and the evolution of the research on refactoring. We attempt to represent the actual body of knowledge in this field through the analysis of its cognitive structure, leveraging science mapping methodology to focus on the most relevant concepts in this research area. We model the body of knowledge by mining bibliographic databases and by retrieving the co-occurrence of keywords. We have found that some different general themes can be recognized, but not all of them have the same role and equally catalyzed researchers’ interest. In addition, we provide a preliminary analysis on the trends and directions as well as the hot topics we identifed in the refactoring research field.
12:00-12:30 Steve Counsell (Brunel University), Xiaohui Liu (Brunel University), Stephen Swift (Brunel University), Jim Buckley (University of Limerick), Michael English (University of Limerick), Sebastian Herrold (University of Limerick), Sigrid Eldh (Ericsson) and Andreas Ermedahl (Ericsson). An Exploration of the ‘Introduce Explaining Variable’ Refactoring (Workshop Research Paper, 30 minutes)
Abstract: While we know much about refactoring trends and their occurrence in open-source and proprietary systems, we still know little about their association with defects or the nature of classes where refactoring is applied. In this paper, we explore one such refactoring, “Introduce explaining variable” (IEV), a low-level code based refactoring which simplifies a complex expression through the introduction of added variables. We hypothesize that this type of refactoring, requiring manipulation of variables and constructs will have a greater association with defects than other types of refactoring. Classes where they are applied will have lower coupling levels. Five releases from two projects of Eclipse were used to support this analysis and tools to extract both the set of class refactorings and class coupling and size metrics supported the analysis. Results showed that for four out of the five releases studied, classes where the IEV refactoring had been applied were more defect-prone than other classes. Coupling in the same set of classes was higher in all five releases. Size, on the other hand, may be a confounding factor but tentative results suggest that areas of code where this refactoring had been applied is indicative of defect-prone code.

9:00 – 15:30 3rd International Workshop on Large-Scale Agile Development
Organizers: Torgeir Dingsøyr and Nils Moe. Large-Scale Agile Development Workshop (Scientific Workshop, 5 hours)
Abstract: Agile software development methods were made for small, co-located development teams, but are increasingly applied in other settings. Several large projects, with a number of teams that develop complex systems have started to use agile methods. How to apply agile methods to large projects was identified as the “top burning research question” by practitioners at XP2010. Agile software development methods were made for small, co-located development teams, but are increasingly applied in other settings. Several large projects, with a number of teams that develop complex systems have started to use agile methods. This workshop will be the third which seeks to identify the main research challenges in conducting agile software development in large-scale. Such challenges include team coordination, knowledge sharing and facilitating self management. In this workshop, we seek to facilitate knowledge sharing about current practice of large-scale agile development and also deepen the knowledge of principles of such development.
09:00-10:30 Towards Continuous Validation of Customer Value (Minikeynote), position statements
Helena Holmström Olsson (Malmø University). Towards Continuous Validation of Customer Value (Minikeynote)
Position statements: Organizing large-scale development
Maarit Laanti (Nitor Delta). Agile Portfolio Management at Finnish Broadcasting Company Yle
Christian Engblom (Ericsson). Maturity in large scale agile
Elisabeth Krogh (Atkins). Sourcing models and contracts in large scale agile projects – thoughts on how to arrange projects for success

10:30-11:00 Coffee Break
11:00-12:30 Practices in large-scale development (Position statements), Identification of knowledge needs
Henry Edison (Free university of Bolzano). Lean Startup: Why Large Software Companies Should Care
Christian Berger (University of Gothenburg), Ulrik Eklund (Malmö University). The three main challenges in scaling agile development in the mechatronics industry
Marko Setälä (Nokia). Impact of large scale on inter-team coordination
Knut Rolland (SINTEF). Communities of practice in large Scale
Brainstorming on knowledge needs on Large Scale Agile

12:30-13:30 Lunch
13:30-15:30 Feeding the machine (Minikeynote), prioritizing of knowledge needs
Kjetil Røe (Sopra Steria). Feeding the machine: Successful practices for scaling large agile development projects (Minikeynote)
Prioritizing knowledge needs for Large Scale Agile Development
Closing

9:00 – 12:30 Industry & Practice
Nancy Van Schooenderwoert (Lean-Agile Partners, Inc.), Woody Zuill (Industrial Logic), Matthew Dodkins (Bluefruit Software) and Simon Clements-Hawes (Bluefruit Software). Mob Programming – Learn, Teach, Research (Industry & Practice, 3 hours)
Abstract: #MobProgramming is a practice where a whole software team works together, at one computer, one line of code at a time, outperforming their previous work significantly in both quality and volume. Impossible? Maybe – except for the teams actually doing it now. Woody Zuill’s team in California began this practice in 2011, and it’s been spreading since. This session will do three things:
• Show how anyone can help a team get started with Mob Programming
• Give you a front-row seat to see how the first teams to use Mob Programming for embedded systems fared
• Invite you to learn, teach, or research Mob Programming

You’ll learn all about Mob Programming from 4 distinct perspectives:
• Simon – a team member with less than 2 years’ embedded experience, who has now used Mob Programming in two teams at Bluefruit Software
• Matthew – a very experienced team technical leader who works with Simon
• Nancy – a lean-agile coach who got them started in Mob Programming with only a 15 minute description and an hour of “just doing it” the way Woody Zuill teaches it
• Woody – the person who has seen the widest variety of Mob Programming instances in the world, and who has been using it continually with his team since 2011.

9:00 – 12:30 Industry & Practice
Paulo Caroli (Thoughtworks) and Taina Caetano (Thoughtworks). Fun Retrospectives: Activities and ideas for making agile retrospectives more engaging (Industry & Practice, 3 hours)
Abstract: In order to turn a group of people into an effective team, each individual needs to adjust their own actions, habits and work preferences, prioritizing the group’s common goal. That doesn’t happen overnight. It is a journey of reflection and self-discovery. In software projects, retrospectives are a tool to get the team together and provide the space necessary for this reflection, and they can achieve much more.
In this session, we will present a set of activities that can be used for different contexts and groups of people. We will talk briefly about the structure of an effective retrospective, followed by hands-on activities that will cover different scenarios:

• A recently formed group of people needs to understand each other and set ground rules for an effective workplace;
• A team has been running retrospectives regularly for a while, but feels like they need a change in order to keep the participants engaged;
• A project is about to end, and the team wants to understand their successes and mistakes;
• A new project is about to start, and the team needs to foresee problems and uncover risks that might happen;
• And more!

You will take part on performing activities and exercises that have been proven to improve retrospectives’ execution and results. This session’s dynamics have been designed to provide you with hands-on facilitation, group discussion and experience sharing. Each activity will be followed by a group discussion where participants will be invited to share their experience and debate how can they apply their learning in the workplace.

9:00 – 17:00 Doctoral Symposium
Organizers: Peggy Gregory and Helen Sharp. XP 2015 Doctoral Symposium (6 hours)
The Doctoral Symposium aims to bring together doctoral students working in the area of agile or lean methodologies, giving them a unique opportunity to interact with renowned and experienced researchers in the field, and discuss with them about their current and proposed research.

9:00 – 12:30 Individual presentations. Discussants – Brian Fitzgerald, Helen Sharp, Peggy Gregory

9:00 – 9:30 Osama Oss (University of York) and Tim Kelly (University of York). Assurance Case Integration with An Agile Development Method
Abstract: Agile software development has had success in different domains. However there is one area where the implementation of agile methods still needs development – that is in the field of safety critical systems. In this field, the software engineering processes need to be justified against the requirements of software safety assurance standards (such as ISO 26262 in the automotive domain). We describe our ongoing research on assurance case integration with an existing agile development method – SafeScrum.
9:30 – 10:00 Philipp Diebold (Fraunhofer IESE). Improving Processes by Integrating Agile Practices
Abstract: Even though agile development has been known for many years, it is mainly used in information systems and is not common yet in embedded systems. Despite the mandatory regulations, the companies would like to increase the flexibility by the benefits of agile development. Thus, the idea is creating an Agile Capability Analysis with a subsequent Process Simulation, resulting in appropriate process extensions adhere to mandatory requirements. Because often agile methods require context-specific adaptations, we believe that the upfront investigation which agile practices to integrate into processes entails many benefits, especially in regulated domains.
10:00 – 10:30 Annemarie Harzl (Graz University of Technology) and Wolfgang Slany (Graz University of Technology). Combining Kanban and FOSS: Can it work?
Abstract: Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) and Agile Software Development (ASD) research have gained momentum over the past decade. However, to the best of our knowledge, there exists no work about these two phenomena combined. This thesis will show how ASD, specifically the Kanban Method, and FOSS can be consolidated and how they can benefit from each other’s advantages. The agile community and the FOSS community can benefit from this body of work, as we aim at broadening the understanding of both.
10:30 – 11:00 Break
11:00 – 11:30 Aleksander Fabijan (Malmö University), Helena Holmström Olsson (Malmö University) and Jan Bosch (Chalmers University of Technology). Data-Driven Decision-Making in Product R&D
Abstract: Software development companies experience the road mapping and requirements ranking process to be complex as product management (PdM) strives in getting timely and accurate feedback from the customers. Often, companies have insufficient knowledge about how their products are being used, what features the customers appreciate and which ones will generate revenue. To address this problem, this research aims at helping the companies in closing the ‘open’ feedback loop that exists between PdM and customers. Moreover, the research strives at exploring techniques that can be used to involve customers in continuous validation of software functionality in order to provide PdM with the evidence needed for accurate R&D investments.
11:30 – 12:00 Teemu Karvonen (University of Oulu), Markku Oivo (University of Oulu) and Pasi Kuvaja (University of Oulu). Paradigm Shift from Large Releases to Continuous Deployment of Software: Designing a Reference Model for Continuous Deployment
Abstract: Continuous deployment (CD) is an essential method as software development companies move towards real-time business and continuous experiments. Powered by the lean and agile methods, CD aims for continuous deployment of valuable software. This doctoral research investigates what it will take to enable CD. The findings will be collected to generate a CD reference model. The research is initiated by studying existing literature and models for organisational assessment in relation to lean and agile approaches. Next, the focus is sharpened to capabilities that are required for enabling CD in information and communication technologies (ICT) industry. The research will apply literature reviews, case studies and the design science research (DSR) framework.
12:00 – 12:30 Eero Laukkanen (Aalto University) and Casper Lassenius (Aalto University). How to Adopt Continuous Delivery? A Research Proposal
Abstract: Continuous delivery is a software development discipline in which software can be released to production at any time. The proposed dissertation aims to understand the problems that emerge when adopting continuous delivery and find solutions to those problems. The goal is reached by performing a systematic literature review followed by case studies. Root cause analysis is utilized as a data collection method in some of the case studies. The contribution of the dissertation will be a theory on how continuous delivery can be adopted.
12:30 – 13:30 Lunch
13:30 – 15:00 Steve Counsell (Brunel University), Helen Sharp (The Open University) and Peggy Gregory (University of Central Lancashire). Researching in Industrial settings.
Talk and discussion.
15:00 – 15:30 Break
15:30 – 17:00 Helen Sharp (The Open University) and Peggy Gregory (University of Central Lancashire). Research methods and evidence.
Discussion.

10:30 Break
11:00 (previous session continues)
12:30 Lunch
13:30 FR2.1 BDD and test automation tutorial Nicolás Paez FR2.2 (previous session continues) FR2.3 Scaling Agile Principles Jutta Eckstein, David Hussman FR2.4 Soar! It’s never too late to launch your team towards success Steve Holyer, Diana Larsen FR2.5 (previous session continues)
13:30 – 17:00 Industry & Practice
Nicolás Paez (Universidad de Buenos Aires). BDD hands-on tutorial (Industry & Practice, 3 hours)
Abstract: Collaboration between customers, developers and testers is a key factor for a project’s success. Behavior-driven development (BDD) is a practice that supports this collaboration. This tutorial is focused on the technical side of this practice and gives the participants the chance to meet and experiment with BDD tools like Cucumber and FitNesse. Even when a team does not use BDD, knowing these tools can be very useful to have when their customers are involved in the acceptance test definition. This tutorial is hands-on and participants will work with a Virtual Machine Image containing all the tools; some programming background is required.

13:30 – 17:00 Industry & Practice
Jutta Eckstein (IT communication) and David Hussman (Dev Jam). Scaling Agile Principles (Industry & Practice, 3 hours)
Abstract: Agile development isn’t any longer considered to work for small teams only. Also large teams, projects and organizations are asked to focus on delivering value. So the question arises, how to adhere to the agile principles when applying them in the large.
In this workshop we want to use the agile principles as a guideline for scaling. This is basically by understanding agile as a value system, a mindset, a culture – and not as a tool. So be prepared to being asked to think for yourself and to balance forces based on your own needs and requirements instead of finding a recipe that assumes that one size will or can fit all (organizations, projects, products, or teams). Thus, this workshop is not about providing or defining a framework for the enterprise or the organization, scaling scrum or using other existing methodologies at different organizational levels. It is about examining the agile principles according to their effects and application when scaling up. For example, we will discuss what a principle such as “self-organizing teams” means when it is applied to a team of more than 100 developers or to the enterprise level.
The workshop is based on the necessity of large-scale Agile to give and get frequent feedback in order to deliver the highest business value to the customer at all times besides learning and getting better continuously.

13:30 – 17:00 Industry & Practice
Steve Holyer (Engage Results) and Diana Larsen (FutureWorks Consulting). Soar! It’s never too late to launch your team towards success. (Industry & Practice, 3 hours)
Abstract: Too many Agile projects flounder from the very start. Your project won’t soar until you co-create the conditions for success. Even if your project has been floundering, or is lacking momentum, a Liftoff will give you energy to defy gravity and propel your project to deliver great results. Whether you’re just starting your project or restarting, Agile Chartering and Liftoff provide the launch you need reach for the stars.

In this workshop, Diana Larsen and Steve Holyer will introduce the practices of Liftoff and Agile Chartering. As a participant, you will enjoy an immersive experience of chartering a real team, get your questions answered, and prepare for chartering your own team.

Liftoff is a time set aside by a collaborative community (a team, a project) to intentionally explore and set in place the elements needed for success. Product visionaries and team coaches bring this focused practice to start and initiate a development effort. Lifting off generates the momentum your teams need to overcome the gravitational pull generated by lack of common purpose, unclear communication channels, undefined working relationships and other areas of ambiguity.[Larsen & Nies, 2011]

Agile Chartering brings a team together with product visionaries to achieve common understandings about the intention of the work, how stakeholders will work together, and how the team’s work fits with business direction.

While many projects and teams are already doing elements of Liftoff and Agile Chartering, most teams could get so much more out of a Liftoff than they are getting today.

15:00 Break
15:30 (previous session continues)