When I began working at Physicians Interactive, there were many tools. One business entity used Jira for tracking tasks. Another business entity used OnTime. Both business teams used Mercury for tracking test cases and compiled defects on a project through email for tracking. In addition, the development team used manual tracking sheets, such as the ones seen for interdepartmental communication to track who is doing what and when things are required. The project management team used Microsoft Project to update their updates to predict when the project will launch. Some teams across these two business entities were spread geographically requiring duplication of these manual tracking sheets for development purposes!
When I started consulting for the company, I was not very happy. I felt
that most of the time was spent updating manual tracking sheets, duplicating
work through emails, and updating the project plans that was not used by
anyone! When I talked to the infrastructure team that managed all the applications,
I found that they had purchased the SpiraTeam ALM tool which no one used. When
I probed for the reason for not using the ALM tool or their preference to be
using their existing manual processes, the answer was something like “This is
how it is done here!”
I didn’t want to take this answer and wanted to turn this process around.
Using delay as a pseudo resource in the project schedule, I documented the
amount of time spent on project that didn’t generate any value but cost money
to the company (my hourly rate * the number of hours spent waiting!). Simultaneously,
I tested SpiraTeam myself mapping the developmental and operational processes
for the critical teams to the workflow capabilities within Spira. Then, I compiled
the cost of licenses for the various tools. When I compiled all these findings for the senior leadership, the writing was clear! Why would we want to resist
adopting the tool while wasting money paying consultants and the tool vendors,
wasting time (note that time is money) duplicating efforts for remote teams and
other teams that didn’t have the access to the tools due to licenses, while not
generating the value for the company?
The leadership team and the managers of the business units were willing to adapt the ALM tool. We mapped the users, created the queue managers, created the workflow, adapted the phases, etc. Due to the cost of licensing and the overarching artefact support, requirements for business, technical, and compliance requirements, test case authoring and tracking of the test cases and defect management to requirements, defect triage process support, and tracking the definition of done through task management, SpiraTeam emerged as the winner. The continuous 'listening ears' of the Inflectra person for how the release management should work, the traceability to tasks, and potential to include risks sealed the deal on SpiraTeam because none of the other products had anyone willing to spend time.
While we managed the risk register outside this system, the convergence of tools improved the "total cost of ownership" (TCO) and enhanced the "single source of truth" (SST). While the finance and business were happy with the former, the compliance and audit team were happy with the latter. As the head of PMO now, using Spira improved the transparency of work avoiding waiting time and improving value flow. Even the remote teams spread across the countries were able to collocate themselves on the ALM tool tracking their conversations through comments. Manual processes such as tracking sheets, compiling defects in Excel for email communication, and having standup meetings to discuss updates for other remote teams were avoided. As the saying goes, "We stopped starting and started finishing!"
It is not that people are unwilling to change. It is just that nobody cared enough to lead the change lobbying people through the change giving a platform for people to reason with change. Any change like this is not a one-person show! Multiple department heads weighed in on their concerns in the process but were willing to collaborate on a solution. Yes, there were some comfort zones with tools for certain members, but they were willing to see the opportunities ahead and recognize the shortcomings of the current tools. It took a village to see such an electronic tracking of requirements, test cases, tasks, and defects augmented by structured naming conventions to documents and file folders.
After one year of having this entire PMO
running on SpiraTeam with hundreds of project launches, I am happy to see that
we have improved transparency to our workflow to do more with less!
References
SpiraTeam (n.d.). Inflectra. Retrieved from https://www.inflectra.com/Products/SpiraTeam/
No comments:
Post a Comment