Slide 1

7 Management Solutions

Red

Accelerating Innovation
Overview and discussion of NPD
and project management life cycle
models
Robert Grupe
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Introduction
An overview and discussion of integrated
new product development and project life
cycle models for best practice approaches
to successful innovation and accelerated
time to market.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agenda






Clarification of PM Terminology
Strategically Focused PM
NPD vs. Project Management
Models







Waterfall Models
Iterative Models
Agile Approaches

Discussion
Roundup
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Clarification of Terminology
Product Management
 Project Management
 Program Management


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Product Management



Planning and marketing of a product or products at all stages of the
product lifecycle.
Product planning (in-bound marketing)
[Product Manager (PM)]






Defining new products
Gathering market requirements (VoC)
Building product roadmaps
Product Life Cycle considerations
• Stages: introduction, growth, mature, saturation/decline





Competitive differentiation

Product marketing (outbound marketing)
[Product Marketing Manager (PMM)]





Product positioning and outbound messaging
Promotion: press, customers, and partners
Packaging and delivery
Competition messaging monitoring

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Project Management



Project Planning
[Project Manager (PjM)]
Achieve all of the goals of the project charter while
adhering to




Project constraints: scope, time, cost and quality.

Project management life cycle



5 Process Groups: Project Initiation, Project Planning, Project
Execution, Project monitoring and control, and Project closeout.
9 Knowledge Areas: integration management, scope
management, time management, cost management, quality
management, human resource management, communications
management,risk management and procurement management.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology: Program Management
[& Product Portfolio Management]













Layer above project management focusing on selecting the best group of programs [and
products,] defining them in terms of their constituent projects and providing an infrastructure
where projects can be run successfully
Governance: The structure, process, and procedure to control operations and changes to
performance objectives.
Standards: Define the performance architecture.
Alignment: The program must support higher level vision, goals and objectives.
Assurance: Verify and validate the program, ensuring adherence to standards and alignment
with the vision.
Management: Ensure there are regular reviews, there is accountability, and that management of
projects, stakeholders and suppliers is in place.
Integration: Optimize performance across the program value chain, functionally and technically.
Finances: Tracking of finances is an important part of Program management and basic costs
together with wider costs of administering the program are all tracked.
Infrastructure: Allocation of resources influences the cost and success of the program.
Infrastructure might cover offices, version control, and IT. Planning: Develop the plan bringing
together the information on projects, resources, timescales, monitoring and control.[1]
Improvement: Continuously assess performance; research and develop new capabilities; and
systemically apply learning and knowledge to the program.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Why is this important?


Without clearly defined and integrated product,
marketing, and project management, innovation
will be haphazard, chaotic, and un-scaleable
with complexity and growth.


You can’t improve or accelerate what you can’t
understand or control.
• Putting random people on a galley ship won’t ensure you
will get where you want to go or make it go faster.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Research: Most PM’s
not being used effectively


Distracting challenges
Product and
company
strategy
10%

Customers
and market
8%

Internal
process and
organization
28%

Development
process
16%

Prioritization
and Focus
16%

2008-11-11

Time and
resources
22%

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Recommendation:
PM for Strategic Advantage
Focused on inbound tasks
 PM decision-making power






Roadmap, release contents, release
acceptance

Report to CEO/GM

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

New Product Development (NPD)
& Project Life Cycle Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Code & Fix
(AKA Cowboy Coding)

S ys tem
S pe cific atio n
(m a yb e )

2008-11-11

C o de -a nd -F ix

R elea se
(m ay be )

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Traditional NPD Process
Stage-Gate Process
Discovery
QuickTim e™ and a
de co m pres sor
are n eed ed to se e this p ictu re .

Scoping

Business
Case

Stage
1

Stage
2

Development

Test /
Validation

Launch

Stage
3

Stage
4

Stage
5

Gate
1

Gate
2

Gate
3

Gate
4

Gate
5

Idea
Screen

Second
Screen

Go To
Dev

Go To
Test

Go To
Launch

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Review
Qui ckT ime™ and a
deco mpre sso r
are nee ded t o see t his p ict ure.

Traditional Project Management
Waterfall Model
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Risk Reduction
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Subprojects
Pr od u ct
C o n ce pt

R e qu ire m en ts
A n a lysis

D e ta ile d
D e sig n

A rch itec tur a l
D e s ig n

C o din g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S u b sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S ub sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g a nd
D e b u gin g

D e ta ile d
D e s ig n

S ub s yste m
T e sting

C o d in g a nd
D eb u g in g

S yste m
T e sting
S u bs yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Overlapping
Phases (Sashimi)
P rodu ct
C o nc ep t

R equ ire m e nts
A na lysis

A rchite ctura l
D esig n

D etaile d
D e sign

C o din g an d
D e bu ging

S yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Design-to-Schedule
P roduct
C oncept

R equ irem ents
An alysis

Architectural
D esign

H ig h P rio rity: D etailed design , code, d ebug, test

M edium H igh Priority: D etailed desig n, code , debug, te st

R u n ou t of tim e or
m oney h ere

M ed ium P riority: D e tailed design , code, debug , test

M ediu m Low P riority: D etailed design , co de, de bug, test

Low Priority: D etailed design, code , debug , test

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

R elease

Design-to-Tools
F u n ctio n a lity s u p p o rte d b y
th e to o ls

F u n ctio n a lity th a t w ill
n o t b e in th e p ro d u ct

Fu n c tio n a lity th a t w ill b e
b u ilt

Id e a l fu n c tio n a lity

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Iterative Project Management
Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Spiral (Boehm)

R epe at as requ ire d

1. D eter m ine
ob jective s,
alte rnatives,
constraints

2008-11-11

2 . Iden tify and
reso lve risks

3. E va lu ate
a ltern atives

4 . D evelop
ite ration
d elivera ble s a nd
verify co rrect

5 . P la n the ne xt
ite ratio n

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

6.
C om m it to an
a ppro ach for ne xt
ite ratio n

Evolutionary Prototyping
No

In itial
con ce pt

2008-11-11

D esign and
im p lem ent
initia l
proto typ e

R efin e
p ro to typ e

C usto m e r
a ccep tab le ?

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

C om p lete
a nd
relea se

Staged Delivery
(AKA Incremental Implementation)
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

R e q u ire m e nts
A n a ly sis

A rch ite c tu ra l
D e sig n

S ta g e 1 : D e ta ile d d e s ig n , c o d e , d e b u g , te st, d e liv e ry

S ta g e 2 : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e liv e ry

S ta g e n : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e live ry

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Evolutionary Delivery
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

P re lim in a ry
R e q u ire m e n ts
A n a lys is

A rch ite ctu ra l
D e s ig n a n d
S ys te m C o re

D e liv e r F in a l
V e rsio n

D e v e lo p a V e rsio n

In c o rp o ra te
C u s to m e r
F e e d b a ck

D e liv e ry th e
V e rs io n

E licit C u sto m e r
F e e d b a ck

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Project Management
“There is nothing new
under the sun but there
are lots of old things
we don't know.”
Ambrose Bierce

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Principles (2001)













Customer satisfaction by rapid, continuous delivery of useful software
Working software is delivered frequently (weeks rather than months)
Working software is the principal measure of progress
Even late changes in requirements are welcomed
Close, daily cooperation between business people and developers
Face-to-face conversation is the best form of communication (Co-location)
Projects are built around motivated individuals, who should be trusted
Continuous attention to technical excellence and good design
Simplicity
Self-organizing teams
Regular adaptation to changing circumstances

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Characteristics


Time periods in weeks rather than months


time period as a strict timebox.

Work is performed in a highly
collaborative manner.
 If the sponsors of the project are
concerned about completing certain goals
with a defined timeline or budget, agile
may not be appropriate.


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Methodologies (Partial)


Agile Unified Process (AUP)







Simplified IBM Rational Unified Process (RUP)

Extreme programming (XP)
Feature Driven Development (FDD)
Scrum


“Pig” Roles
• Product owner (VOC - Product Manager)
• ScrumMaster (Project Manager)
• Team (Developers)



“Chicken” Roles
• Users
• Stakeholders (customers, vendors)
• Managers

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Adaptive (Agile) vs
Predictive (Plan-driven)
Strengths of each:


Adaptive










Low criticality
Senior developers
Requirements change
very often
Small number of
developers
Culture that thrives on
chaos

2008-11-11

Predictive








High criticality
Junior developers
Requirements don't
change too often
Large number of
developers
Culture that demands
order

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Model Selection Criteria













How well do my customer and we understand the requirements at the beginning of
the project? Is our understanding likely to change significantly as we move through
the project?
How well do we understand the system architecture? Are we likely to need to make
major architectural changes midway through the project?
How much reliable do we need?
How much do we need to plan ahead and design ahead during this project for future
versions?
How much risk does the project entail?
Are we constrained by a predefined schedule?
Do we need to be able to make midcourse corrections?
Do we need to provide customers with visible progress throughout the project?
Do we need to provide management with visible progress throughout the project?
How much sophistication do we need to use this lifecycle model successfully?

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Project Management Models:
Strengths and Weaknesses
M od el C apa city
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
requ ire m en ts
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
arch ite ctu re
Pr od uce s h ig h ly
rel iable sy stem
Pr od uce s sy stem wi th
la rg e g ro wth en v elop
M ana g es ri sk s
Can be c o n strain ed to
p re de te rm in ed
sc h ed u le
Ha s lo w ove rh e ad
A llo w s for m id co ur se
co rre ct ion s
Pr ovid es c u stom ers
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Pr ovid es ma n ag em en t
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Requ ir es little m ana ge r
o r d evelop er
sop h istic atio n

Pure
W ate rfall

C od e-an d F ix

Spi ral

M odi fied
W ate rfall

E vol ut io nar y
Pr o to ty pin g

S tag ed
De liv er y

E vol ut io nar y
De liv er y

De sig n -to sc h ed u le

De sig n to -too ls

C o mme rcial
Of f-th e -sh elf
so ft w are

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

F air

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r to
fai r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

2008-11-11

F air to
exc ellent
F air to
exc ellent

P oo r

N/ A

P oo r to
fai r

N/ A

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air to
exc ellent

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

N/ A

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

N/ A

P oo r

P oo r to
fai r

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Accelerating the NPD Life Cycle
Model
Ideaisation

Go:No-Go

Scoping

Go:No-Go

Planning

Go:No-Go

Development

Go:No-Go

Testing

Go:No-Go

Launch

Go:No-Go

Maintenance
Retirement

Project Lifecycle Framework
 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

EOL

Discussion

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Away
Recommendations
“For which of you,
desiring to build a
tower, doesn't first sit
down and count the
cost, to see if he has
enough to complete it?”
Jesus
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation


Ready-Aim-Fire


Haste makes waste (penny wise, pound foolish)
• Choosing the wrong models will result in unfulfilled
expectations and delays

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Ready


Recognizing the difference between








product management,
marketing, and
project management

Having a well defined NPD process
Not standardizing on only one project model
Having a positive teamwork environment,
inspirational leadership, focused vision, and
necessary skills

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Aim
Ensuring up-front homework done first
 Ensuring the resources(staff) & time to do
it right
 Verifying available resource costs (people
and time)
 Selecting the most appropriate project
model
 Taking the time to do the planning right


Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Fire
Being flexible within parameters
 Regular review of processes and methods
 Regular, frequent review of new ideas
and market information


Fini


Robert Grupe





[email protected]
+1.314.266.7321

Further reading







Forrester “Making Product Management A Strategic
Resource”
Winning at New Products, Robert G Cooper
Rapid Development, Steve McConnell
PDMA Visions magazine, Jun & Sept 2008

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.


Slide 2

7 Management Solutions

Red

Accelerating Innovation
Overview and discussion of NPD
and project management life cycle
models
Robert Grupe
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Introduction
An overview and discussion of integrated
new product development and project life
cycle models for best practice approaches
to successful innovation and accelerated
time to market.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agenda






Clarification of PM Terminology
Strategically Focused PM
NPD vs. Project Management
Models







Waterfall Models
Iterative Models
Agile Approaches

Discussion
Roundup
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Clarification of Terminology
Product Management
 Project Management
 Program Management


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Product Management



Planning and marketing of a product or products at all stages of the
product lifecycle.
Product planning (in-bound marketing)
[Product Manager (PM)]






Defining new products
Gathering market requirements (VoC)
Building product roadmaps
Product Life Cycle considerations
• Stages: introduction, growth, mature, saturation/decline





Competitive differentiation

Product marketing (outbound marketing)
[Product Marketing Manager (PMM)]





Product positioning and outbound messaging
Promotion: press, customers, and partners
Packaging and delivery
Competition messaging monitoring

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Project Management



Project Planning
[Project Manager (PjM)]
Achieve all of the goals of the project charter while
adhering to




Project constraints: scope, time, cost and quality.

Project management life cycle



5 Process Groups: Project Initiation, Project Planning, Project
Execution, Project monitoring and control, and Project closeout.
9 Knowledge Areas: integration management, scope
management, time management, cost management, quality
management, human resource management, communications
management,risk management and procurement management.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology: Program Management
[& Product Portfolio Management]













Layer above project management focusing on selecting the best group of programs [and
products,] defining them in terms of their constituent projects and providing an infrastructure
where projects can be run successfully
Governance: The structure, process, and procedure to control operations and changes to
performance objectives.
Standards: Define the performance architecture.
Alignment: The program must support higher level vision, goals and objectives.
Assurance: Verify and validate the program, ensuring adherence to standards and alignment
with the vision.
Management: Ensure there are regular reviews, there is accountability, and that management of
projects, stakeholders and suppliers is in place.
Integration: Optimize performance across the program value chain, functionally and technically.
Finances: Tracking of finances is an important part of Program management and basic costs
together with wider costs of administering the program are all tracked.
Infrastructure: Allocation of resources influences the cost and success of the program.
Infrastructure might cover offices, version control, and IT. Planning: Develop the plan bringing
together the information on projects, resources, timescales, monitoring and control.[1]
Improvement: Continuously assess performance; research and develop new capabilities; and
systemically apply learning and knowledge to the program.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Why is this important?


Without clearly defined and integrated product,
marketing, and project management, innovation
will be haphazard, chaotic, and un-scaleable
with complexity and growth.


You can’t improve or accelerate what you can’t
understand or control.
• Putting random people on a galley ship won’t ensure you
will get where you want to go or make it go faster.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Research: Most PM’s
not being used effectively


Distracting challenges
Product and
company
strategy
10%

Customers
and market
8%

Internal
process and
organization
28%

Development
process
16%

Prioritization
and Focus
16%

2008-11-11

Time and
resources
22%

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Recommendation:
PM for Strategic Advantage
Focused on inbound tasks
 PM decision-making power






Roadmap, release contents, release
acceptance

Report to CEO/GM

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

New Product Development (NPD)
& Project Life Cycle Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Code & Fix
(AKA Cowboy Coding)

S ys tem
S pe cific atio n
(m a yb e )

2008-11-11

C o de -a nd -F ix

R elea se
(m ay be )

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Traditional NPD Process
Stage-Gate Process
Discovery
QuickTim e™ and a
de co m pres sor
are n eed ed to se e this p ictu re .

Scoping

Business
Case

Stage
1

Stage
2

Development

Test /
Validation

Launch

Stage
3

Stage
4

Stage
5

Gate
1

Gate
2

Gate
3

Gate
4

Gate
5

Idea
Screen

Second
Screen

Go To
Dev

Go To
Test

Go To
Launch

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Review
Qui ckT ime™ and a
deco mpre sso r
are nee ded t o see t his p ict ure.

Traditional Project Management
Waterfall Model
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Risk Reduction
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Subprojects
Pr od u ct
C o n ce pt

R e qu ire m en ts
A n a lysis

D e ta ile d
D e sig n

A rch itec tur a l
D e s ig n

C o din g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S u b sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S ub sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g a nd
D e b u gin g

D e ta ile d
D e s ig n

S ub s yste m
T e sting

C o d in g a nd
D eb u g in g

S yste m
T e sting
S u bs yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Overlapping
Phases (Sashimi)
P rodu ct
C o nc ep t

R equ ire m e nts
A na lysis

A rchite ctura l
D esig n

D etaile d
D e sign

C o din g an d
D e bu ging

S yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Design-to-Schedule
P roduct
C oncept

R equ irem ents
An alysis

Architectural
D esign

H ig h P rio rity: D etailed design , code, d ebug, test

M edium H igh Priority: D etailed desig n, code , debug, te st

R u n ou t of tim e or
m oney h ere

M ed ium P riority: D e tailed design , code, debug , test

M ediu m Low P riority: D etailed design , co de, de bug, test

Low Priority: D etailed design, code , debug , test

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

R elease

Design-to-Tools
F u n ctio n a lity s u p p o rte d b y
th e to o ls

F u n ctio n a lity th a t w ill
n o t b e in th e p ro d u ct

Fu n c tio n a lity th a t w ill b e
b u ilt

Id e a l fu n c tio n a lity

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Iterative Project Management
Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Spiral (Boehm)

R epe at as requ ire d

1. D eter m ine
ob jective s,
alte rnatives,
constraints

2008-11-11

2 . Iden tify and
reso lve risks

3. E va lu ate
a ltern atives

4 . D evelop
ite ration
d elivera ble s a nd
verify co rrect

5 . P la n the ne xt
ite ratio n

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

6.
C om m it to an
a ppro ach for ne xt
ite ratio n

Evolutionary Prototyping
No

In itial
con ce pt

2008-11-11

D esign and
im p lem ent
initia l
proto typ e

R efin e
p ro to typ e

C usto m e r
a ccep tab le ?

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

C om p lete
a nd
relea se

Staged Delivery
(AKA Incremental Implementation)
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

R e q u ire m e nts
A n a ly sis

A rch ite c tu ra l
D e sig n

S ta g e 1 : D e ta ile d d e s ig n , c o d e , d e b u g , te st, d e liv e ry

S ta g e 2 : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e liv e ry

S ta g e n : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e live ry

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Evolutionary Delivery
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

P re lim in a ry
R e q u ire m e n ts
A n a lys is

A rch ite ctu ra l
D e s ig n a n d
S ys te m C o re

D e liv e r F in a l
V e rsio n

D e v e lo p a V e rsio n

In c o rp o ra te
C u s to m e r
F e e d b a ck

D e liv e ry th e
V e rs io n

E licit C u sto m e r
F e e d b a ck

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Project Management
“There is nothing new
under the sun but there
are lots of old things
we don't know.”
Ambrose Bierce

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Principles (2001)













Customer satisfaction by rapid, continuous delivery of useful software
Working software is delivered frequently (weeks rather than months)
Working software is the principal measure of progress
Even late changes in requirements are welcomed
Close, daily cooperation between business people and developers
Face-to-face conversation is the best form of communication (Co-location)
Projects are built around motivated individuals, who should be trusted
Continuous attention to technical excellence and good design
Simplicity
Self-organizing teams
Regular adaptation to changing circumstances

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Characteristics


Time periods in weeks rather than months


time period as a strict timebox.

Work is performed in a highly
collaborative manner.
 If the sponsors of the project are
concerned about completing certain goals
with a defined timeline or budget, agile
may not be appropriate.


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Methodologies (Partial)


Agile Unified Process (AUP)







Simplified IBM Rational Unified Process (RUP)

Extreme programming (XP)
Feature Driven Development (FDD)
Scrum


“Pig” Roles
• Product owner (VOC - Product Manager)
• ScrumMaster (Project Manager)
• Team (Developers)



“Chicken” Roles
• Users
• Stakeholders (customers, vendors)
• Managers

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Adaptive (Agile) vs
Predictive (Plan-driven)
Strengths of each:


Adaptive










Low criticality
Senior developers
Requirements change
very often
Small number of
developers
Culture that thrives on
chaos

2008-11-11

Predictive








High criticality
Junior developers
Requirements don't
change too often
Large number of
developers
Culture that demands
order

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Model Selection Criteria













How well do my customer and we understand the requirements at the beginning of
the project? Is our understanding likely to change significantly as we move through
the project?
How well do we understand the system architecture? Are we likely to need to make
major architectural changes midway through the project?
How much reliable do we need?
How much do we need to plan ahead and design ahead during this project for future
versions?
How much risk does the project entail?
Are we constrained by a predefined schedule?
Do we need to be able to make midcourse corrections?
Do we need to provide customers with visible progress throughout the project?
Do we need to provide management with visible progress throughout the project?
How much sophistication do we need to use this lifecycle model successfully?

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Project Management Models:
Strengths and Weaknesses
M od el C apa city
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
requ ire m en ts
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
arch ite ctu re
Pr od uce s h ig h ly
rel iable sy stem
Pr od uce s sy stem wi th
la rg e g ro wth en v elop
M ana g es ri sk s
Can be c o n strain ed to
p re de te rm in ed
sc h ed u le
Ha s lo w ove rh e ad
A llo w s for m id co ur se
co rre ct ion s
Pr ovid es c u stom ers
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Pr ovid es ma n ag em en t
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Requ ir es little m ana ge r
o r d evelop er
sop h istic atio n

Pure
W ate rfall

C od e-an d F ix

Spi ral

M odi fied
W ate rfall

E vol ut io nar y
Pr o to ty pin g

S tag ed
De liv er y

E vol ut io nar y
De liv er y

De sig n -to sc h ed u le

De sig n to -too ls

C o mme rcial
Of f-th e -sh elf
so ft w are

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

F air

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r to
fai r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

2008-11-11

F air to
exc ellent
F air to
exc ellent

P oo r

N/ A

P oo r to
fai r

N/ A

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air to
exc ellent

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

N/ A

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

N/ A

P oo r

P oo r to
fai r

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Accelerating the NPD Life Cycle
Model
Ideaisation

Go:No-Go

Scoping

Go:No-Go

Planning

Go:No-Go

Development

Go:No-Go

Testing

Go:No-Go

Launch

Go:No-Go

Maintenance
Retirement

Project Lifecycle Framework
 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

EOL

Discussion

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Away
Recommendations
“For which of you,
desiring to build a
tower, doesn't first sit
down and count the
cost, to see if he has
enough to complete it?”
Jesus
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation


Ready-Aim-Fire


Haste makes waste (penny wise, pound foolish)
• Choosing the wrong models will result in unfulfilled
expectations and delays

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Ready


Recognizing the difference between








product management,
marketing, and
project management

Having a well defined NPD process
Not standardizing on only one project model
Having a positive teamwork environment,
inspirational leadership, focused vision, and
necessary skills

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Aim
Ensuring up-front homework done first
 Ensuring the resources(staff) & time to do
it right
 Verifying available resource costs (people
and time)
 Selecting the most appropriate project
model
 Taking the time to do the planning right


Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Fire
Being flexible within parameters
 Regular review of processes and methods
 Regular, frequent review of new ideas
and market information


Fini


Robert Grupe





[email protected]
+1.314.266.7321

Further reading







Forrester “Making Product Management A Strategic
Resource”
Winning at New Products, Robert G Cooper
Rapid Development, Steve McConnell
PDMA Visions magazine, Jun & Sept 2008

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.


Slide 3

7 Management Solutions

Red

Accelerating Innovation
Overview and discussion of NPD
and project management life cycle
models
Robert Grupe
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Introduction
An overview and discussion of integrated
new product development and project life
cycle models for best practice approaches
to successful innovation and accelerated
time to market.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agenda






Clarification of PM Terminology
Strategically Focused PM
NPD vs. Project Management
Models







Waterfall Models
Iterative Models
Agile Approaches

Discussion
Roundup
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Clarification of Terminology
Product Management
 Project Management
 Program Management


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Product Management



Planning and marketing of a product or products at all stages of the
product lifecycle.
Product planning (in-bound marketing)
[Product Manager (PM)]






Defining new products
Gathering market requirements (VoC)
Building product roadmaps
Product Life Cycle considerations
• Stages: introduction, growth, mature, saturation/decline





Competitive differentiation

Product marketing (outbound marketing)
[Product Marketing Manager (PMM)]





Product positioning and outbound messaging
Promotion: press, customers, and partners
Packaging and delivery
Competition messaging monitoring

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Project Management



Project Planning
[Project Manager (PjM)]
Achieve all of the goals of the project charter while
adhering to




Project constraints: scope, time, cost and quality.

Project management life cycle



5 Process Groups: Project Initiation, Project Planning, Project
Execution, Project monitoring and control, and Project closeout.
9 Knowledge Areas: integration management, scope
management, time management, cost management, quality
management, human resource management, communications
management,risk management and procurement management.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology: Program Management
[& Product Portfolio Management]













Layer above project management focusing on selecting the best group of programs [and
products,] defining them in terms of their constituent projects and providing an infrastructure
where projects can be run successfully
Governance: The structure, process, and procedure to control operations and changes to
performance objectives.
Standards: Define the performance architecture.
Alignment: The program must support higher level vision, goals and objectives.
Assurance: Verify and validate the program, ensuring adherence to standards and alignment
with the vision.
Management: Ensure there are regular reviews, there is accountability, and that management of
projects, stakeholders and suppliers is in place.
Integration: Optimize performance across the program value chain, functionally and technically.
Finances: Tracking of finances is an important part of Program management and basic costs
together with wider costs of administering the program are all tracked.
Infrastructure: Allocation of resources influences the cost and success of the program.
Infrastructure might cover offices, version control, and IT. Planning: Develop the plan bringing
together the information on projects, resources, timescales, monitoring and control.[1]
Improvement: Continuously assess performance; research and develop new capabilities; and
systemically apply learning and knowledge to the program.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Why is this important?


Without clearly defined and integrated product,
marketing, and project management, innovation
will be haphazard, chaotic, and un-scaleable
with complexity and growth.


You can’t improve or accelerate what you can’t
understand or control.
• Putting random people on a galley ship won’t ensure you
will get where you want to go or make it go faster.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Research: Most PM’s
not being used effectively


Distracting challenges
Product and
company
strategy
10%

Customers
and market
8%

Internal
process and
organization
28%

Development
process
16%

Prioritization
and Focus
16%

2008-11-11

Time and
resources
22%

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Recommendation:
PM for Strategic Advantage
Focused on inbound tasks
 PM decision-making power






Roadmap, release contents, release
acceptance

Report to CEO/GM

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

New Product Development (NPD)
& Project Life Cycle Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Code & Fix
(AKA Cowboy Coding)

S ys tem
S pe cific atio n
(m a yb e )

2008-11-11

C o de -a nd -F ix

R elea se
(m ay be )

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Traditional NPD Process
Stage-Gate Process
Discovery
QuickTim e™ and a
de co m pres sor
are n eed ed to se e this p ictu re .

Scoping

Business
Case

Stage
1

Stage
2

Development

Test /
Validation

Launch

Stage
3

Stage
4

Stage
5

Gate
1

Gate
2

Gate
3

Gate
4

Gate
5

Idea
Screen

Second
Screen

Go To
Dev

Go To
Test

Go To
Launch

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Review
Qui ckT ime™ and a
deco mpre sso r
are nee ded t o see t his p ict ure.

Traditional Project Management
Waterfall Model
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Risk Reduction
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Subprojects
Pr od u ct
C o n ce pt

R e qu ire m en ts
A n a lysis

D e ta ile d
D e sig n

A rch itec tur a l
D e s ig n

C o din g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S u b sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S ub sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g a nd
D e b u gin g

D e ta ile d
D e s ig n

S ub s yste m
T e sting

C o d in g a nd
D eb u g in g

S yste m
T e sting
S u bs yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Overlapping
Phases (Sashimi)
P rodu ct
C o nc ep t

R equ ire m e nts
A na lysis

A rchite ctura l
D esig n

D etaile d
D e sign

C o din g an d
D e bu ging

S yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Design-to-Schedule
P roduct
C oncept

R equ irem ents
An alysis

Architectural
D esign

H ig h P rio rity: D etailed design , code, d ebug, test

M edium H igh Priority: D etailed desig n, code , debug, te st

R u n ou t of tim e or
m oney h ere

M ed ium P riority: D e tailed design , code, debug , test

M ediu m Low P riority: D etailed design , co de, de bug, test

Low Priority: D etailed design, code , debug , test

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

R elease

Design-to-Tools
F u n ctio n a lity s u p p o rte d b y
th e to o ls

F u n ctio n a lity th a t w ill
n o t b e in th e p ro d u ct

Fu n c tio n a lity th a t w ill b e
b u ilt

Id e a l fu n c tio n a lity

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Iterative Project Management
Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Spiral (Boehm)

R epe at as requ ire d

1. D eter m ine
ob jective s,
alte rnatives,
constraints

2008-11-11

2 . Iden tify and
reso lve risks

3. E va lu ate
a ltern atives

4 . D evelop
ite ration
d elivera ble s a nd
verify co rrect

5 . P la n the ne xt
ite ratio n

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

6.
C om m it to an
a ppro ach for ne xt
ite ratio n

Evolutionary Prototyping
No

In itial
con ce pt

2008-11-11

D esign and
im p lem ent
initia l
proto typ e

R efin e
p ro to typ e

C usto m e r
a ccep tab le ?

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

C om p lete
a nd
relea se

Staged Delivery
(AKA Incremental Implementation)
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

R e q u ire m e nts
A n a ly sis

A rch ite c tu ra l
D e sig n

S ta g e 1 : D e ta ile d d e s ig n , c o d e , d e b u g , te st, d e liv e ry

S ta g e 2 : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e liv e ry

S ta g e n : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e live ry

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Evolutionary Delivery
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

P re lim in a ry
R e q u ire m e n ts
A n a lys is

A rch ite ctu ra l
D e s ig n a n d
S ys te m C o re

D e liv e r F in a l
V e rsio n

D e v e lo p a V e rsio n

In c o rp o ra te
C u s to m e r
F e e d b a ck

D e liv e ry th e
V e rs io n

E licit C u sto m e r
F e e d b a ck

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Project Management
“There is nothing new
under the sun but there
are lots of old things
we don't know.”
Ambrose Bierce

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Principles (2001)













Customer satisfaction by rapid, continuous delivery of useful software
Working software is delivered frequently (weeks rather than months)
Working software is the principal measure of progress
Even late changes in requirements are welcomed
Close, daily cooperation between business people and developers
Face-to-face conversation is the best form of communication (Co-location)
Projects are built around motivated individuals, who should be trusted
Continuous attention to technical excellence and good design
Simplicity
Self-organizing teams
Regular adaptation to changing circumstances

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Characteristics


Time periods in weeks rather than months


time period as a strict timebox.

Work is performed in a highly
collaborative manner.
 If the sponsors of the project are
concerned about completing certain goals
with a defined timeline or budget, agile
may not be appropriate.


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Methodologies (Partial)


Agile Unified Process (AUP)







Simplified IBM Rational Unified Process (RUP)

Extreme programming (XP)
Feature Driven Development (FDD)
Scrum


“Pig” Roles
• Product owner (VOC - Product Manager)
• ScrumMaster (Project Manager)
• Team (Developers)



“Chicken” Roles
• Users
• Stakeholders (customers, vendors)
• Managers

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Adaptive (Agile) vs
Predictive (Plan-driven)
Strengths of each:


Adaptive










Low criticality
Senior developers
Requirements change
very often
Small number of
developers
Culture that thrives on
chaos

2008-11-11

Predictive








High criticality
Junior developers
Requirements don't
change too often
Large number of
developers
Culture that demands
order

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Model Selection Criteria













How well do my customer and we understand the requirements at the beginning of
the project? Is our understanding likely to change significantly as we move through
the project?
How well do we understand the system architecture? Are we likely to need to make
major architectural changes midway through the project?
How much reliable do we need?
How much do we need to plan ahead and design ahead during this project for future
versions?
How much risk does the project entail?
Are we constrained by a predefined schedule?
Do we need to be able to make midcourse corrections?
Do we need to provide customers with visible progress throughout the project?
Do we need to provide management with visible progress throughout the project?
How much sophistication do we need to use this lifecycle model successfully?

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Project Management Models:
Strengths and Weaknesses
M od el C apa city
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
requ ire m en ts
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
arch ite ctu re
Pr od uce s h ig h ly
rel iable sy stem
Pr od uce s sy stem wi th
la rg e g ro wth en v elop
M ana g es ri sk s
Can be c o n strain ed to
p re de te rm in ed
sc h ed u le
Ha s lo w ove rh e ad
A llo w s for m id co ur se
co rre ct ion s
Pr ovid es c u stom ers
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Pr ovid es ma n ag em en t
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Requ ir es little m ana ge r
o r d evelop er
sop h istic atio n

Pure
W ate rfall

C od e-an d F ix

Spi ral

M odi fied
W ate rfall

E vol ut io nar y
Pr o to ty pin g

S tag ed
De liv er y

E vol ut io nar y
De liv er y

De sig n -to sc h ed u le

De sig n to -too ls

C o mme rcial
Of f-th e -sh elf
so ft w are

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

F air

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r to
fai r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

2008-11-11

F air to
exc ellent
F air to
exc ellent

P oo r

N/ A

P oo r to
fai r

N/ A

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air to
exc ellent

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

N/ A

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

N/ A

P oo r

P oo r to
fai r

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Accelerating the NPD Life Cycle
Model
Ideaisation

Go:No-Go

Scoping

Go:No-Go

Planning

Go:No-Go

Development

Go:No-Go

Testing

Go:No-Go

Launch

Go:No-Go

Maintenance
Retirement

Project Lifecycle Framework
 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

EOL

Discussion

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Away
Recommendations
“For which of you,
desiring to build a
tower, doesn't first sit
down and count the
cost, to see if he has
enough to complete it?”
Jesus
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation


Ready-Aim-Fire


Haste makes waste (penny wise, pound foolish)
• Choosing the wrong models will result in unfulfilled
expectations and delays

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Ready


Recognizing the difference between








product management,
marketing, and
project management

Having a well defined NPD process
Not standardizing on only one project model
Having a positive teamwork environment,
inspirational leadership, focused vision, and
necessary skills

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Aim
Ensuring up-front homework done first
 Ensuring the resources(staff) & time to do
it right
 Verifying available resource costs (people
and time)
 Selecting the most appropriate project
model
 Taking the time to do the planning right


Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Fire
Being flexible within parameters
 Regular review of processes and methods
 Regular, frequent review of new ideas
and market information


Fini


Robert Grupe





[email protected]
+1.314.266.7321

Further reading







Forrester “Making Product Management A Strategic
Resource”
Winning at New Products, Robert G Cooper
Rapid Development, Steve McConnell
PDMA Visions magazine, Jun & Sept 2008

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.


Slide 4

7 Management Solutions

Red

Accelerating Innovation
Overview and discussion of NPD
and project management life cycle
models
Robert Grupe
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Introduction
An overview and discussion of integrated
new product development and project life
cycle models for best practice approaches
to successful innovation and accelerated
time to market.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agenda






Clarification of PM Terminology
Strategically Focused PM
NPD vs. Project Management
Models







Waterfall Models
Iterative Models
Agile Approaches

Discussion
Roundup
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Clarification of Terminology
Product Management
 Project Management
 Program Management


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Product Management



Planning and marketing of a product or products at all stages of the
product lifecycle.
Product planning (in-bound marketing)
[Product Manager (PM)]






Defining new products
Gathering market requirements (VoC)
Building product roadmaps
Product Life Cycle considerations
• Stages: introduction, growth, mature, saturation/decline





Competitive differentiation

Product marketing (outbound marketing)
[Product Marketing Manager (PMM)]





Product positioning and outbound messaging
Promotion: press, customers, and partners
Packaging and delivery
Competition messaging monitoring

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Project Management



Project Planning
[Project Manager (PjM)]
Achieve all of the goals of the project charter while
adhering to




Project constraints: scope, time, cost and quality.

Project management life cycle



5 Process Groups: Project Initiation, Project Planning, Project
Execution, Project monitoring and control, and Project closeout.
9 Knowledge Areas: integration management, scope
management, time management, cost management, quality
management, human resource management, communications
management,risk management and procurement management.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology: Program Management
[& Product Portfolio Management]













Layer above project management focusing on selecting the best group of programs [and
products,] defining them in terms of their constituent projects and providing an infrastructure
where projects can be run successfully
Governance: The structure, process, and procedure to control operations and changes to
performance objectives.
Standards: Define the performance architecture.
Alignment: The program must support higher level vision, goals and objectives.
Assurance: Verify and validate the program, ensuring adherence to standards and alignment
with the vision.
Management: Ensure there are regular reviews, there is accountability, and that management of
projects, stakeholders and suppliers is in place.
Integration: Optimize performance across the program value chain, functionally and technically.
Finances: Tracking of finances is an important part of Program management and basic costs
together with wider costs of administering the program are all tracked.
Infrastructure: Allocation of resources influences the cost and success of the program.
Infrastructure might cover offices, version control, and IT. Planning: Develop the plan bringing
together the information on projects, resources, timescales, monitoring and control.[1]
Improvement: Continuously assess performance; research and develop new capabilities; and
systemically apply learning and knowledge to the program.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Why is this important?


Without clearly defined and integrated product,
marketing, and project management, innovation
will be haphazard, chaotic, and un-scaleable
with complexity and growth.


You can’t improve or accelerate what you can’t
understand or control.
• Putting random people on a galley ship won’t ensure you
will get where you want to go or make it go faster.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Research: Most PM’s
not being used effectively


Distracting challenges
Product and
company
strategy
10%

Customers
and market
8%

Internal
process and
organization
28%

Development
process
16%

Prioritization
and Focus
16%

2008-11-11

Time and
resources
22%

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Recommendation:
PM for Strategic Advantage
Focused on inbound tasks
 PM decision-making power






Roadmap, release contents, release
acceptance

Report to CEO/GM

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

New Product Development (NPD)
& Project Life Cycle Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Code & Fix
(AKA Cowboy Coding)

S ys tem
S pe cific atio n
(m a yb e )

2008-11-11

C o de -a nd -F ix

R elea se
(m ay be )

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Traditional NPD Process
Stage-Gate Process
Discovery
QuickTim e™ and a
de co m pres sor
are n eed ed to se e this p ictu re .

Scoping

Business
Case

Stage
1

Stage
2

Development

Test /
Validation

Launch

Stage
3

Stage
4

Stage
5

Gate
1

Gate
2

Gate
3

Gate
4

Gate
5

Idea
Screen

Second
Screen

Go To
Dev

Go To
Test

Go To
Launch

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Review
Qui ckT ime™ and a
deco mpre sso r
are nee ded t o see t his p ict ure.

Traditional Project Management
Waterfall Model
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Risk Reduction
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Subprojects
Pr od u ct
C o n ce pt

R e qu ire m en ts
A n a lysis

D e ta ile d
D e sig n

A rch itec tur a l
D e s ig n

C o din g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S u b sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S ub sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g a nd
D e b u gin g

D e ta ile d
D e s ig n

S ub s yste m
T e sting

C o d in g a nd
D eb u g in g

S yste m
T e sting
S u bs yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Overlapping
Phases (Sashimi)
P rodu ct
C o nc ep t

R equ ire m e nts
A na lysis

A rchite ctura l
D esig n

D etaile d
D e sign

C o din g an d
D e bu ging

S yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Design-to-Schedule
P roduct
C oncept

R equ irem ents
An alysis

Architectural
D esign

H ig h P rio rity: D etailed design , code, d ebug, test

M edium H igh Priority: D etailed desig n, code , debug, te st

R u n ou t of tim e or
m oney h ere

M ed ium P riority: D e tailed design , code, debug , test

M ediu m Low P riority: D etailed design , co de, de bug, test

Low Priority: D etailed design, code , debug , test

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

R elease

Design-to-Tools
F u n ctio n a lity s u p p o rte d b y
th e to o ls

F u n ctio n a lity th a t w ill
n o t b e in th e p ro d u ct

Fu n c tio n a lity th a t w ill b e
b u ilt

Id e a l fu n c tio n a lity

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Iterative Project Management
Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Spiral (Boehm)

R epe at as requ ire d

1. D eter m ine
ob jective s,
alte rnatives,
constraints

2008-11-11

2 . Iden tify and
reso lve risks

3. E va lu ate
a ltern atives

4 . D evelop
ite ration
d elivera ble s a nd
verify co rrect

5 . P la n the ne xt
ite ratio n

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

6.
C om m it to an
a ppro ach for ne xt
ite ratio n

Evolutionary Prototyping
No

In itial
con ce pt

2008-11-11

D esign and
im p lem ent
initia l
proto typ e

R efin e
p ro to typ e

C usto m e r
a ccep tab le ?

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

C om p lete
a nd
relea se

Staged Delivery
(AKA Incremental Implementation)
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

R e q u ire m e nts
A n a ly sis

A rch ite c tu ra l
D e sig n

S ta g e 1 : D e ta ile d d e s ig n , c o d e , d e b u g , te st, d e liv e ry

S ta g e 2 : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e liv e ry

S ta g e n : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e live ry

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Evolutionary Delivery
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

P re lim in a ry
R e q u ire m e n ts
A n a lys is

A rch ite ctu ra l
D e s ig n a n d
S ys te m C o re

D e liv e r F in a l
V e rsio n

D e v e lo p a V e rsio n

In c o rp o ra te
C u s to m e r
F e e d b a ck

D e liv e ry th e
V e rs io n

E licit C u sto m e r
F e e d b a ck

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Project Management
“There is nothing new
under the sun but there
are lots of old things
we don't know.”
Ambrose Bierce

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Principles (2001)













Customer satisfaction by rapid, continuous delivery of useful software
Working software is delivered frequently (weeks rather than months)
Working software is the principal measure of progress
Even late changes in requirements are welcomed
Close, daily cooperation between business people and developers
Face-to-face conversation is the best form of communication (Co-location)
Projects are built around motivated individuals, who should be trusted
Continuous attention to technical excellence and good design
Simplicity
Self-organizing teams
Regular adaptation to changing circumstances

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Characteristics


Time periods in weeks rather than months


time period as a strict timebox.

Work is performed in a highly
collaborative manner.
 If the sponsors of the project are
concerned about completing certain goals
with a defined timeline or budget, agile
may not be appropriate.


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Methodologies (Partial)


Agile Unified Process (AUP)







Simplified IBM Rational Unified Process (RUP)

Extreme programming (XP)
Feature Driven Development (FDD)
Scrum


“Pig” Roles
• Product owner (VOC - Product Manager)
• ScrumMaster (Project Manager)
• Team (Developers)



“Chicken” Roles
• Users
• Stakeholders (customers, vendors)
• Managers

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Adaptive (Agile) vs
Predictive (Plan-driven)
Strengths of each:


Adaptive










Low criticality
Senior developers
Requirements change
very often
Small number of
developers
Culture that thrives on
chaos

2008-11-11

Predictive








High criticality
Junior developers
Requirements don't
change too often
Large number of
developers
Culture that demands
order

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Model Selection Criteria













How well do my customer and we understand the requirements at the beginning of
the project? Is our understanding likely to change significantly as we move through
the project?
How well do we understand the system architecture? Are we likely to need to make
major architectural changes midway through the project?
How much reliable do we need?
How much do we need to plan ahead and design ahead during this project for future
versions?
How much risk does the project entail?
Are we constrained by a predefined schedule?
Do we need to be able to make midcourse corrections?
Do we need to provide customers with visible progress throughout the project?
Do we need to provide management with visible progress throughout the project?
How much sophistication do we need to use this lifecycle model successfully?

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Project Management Models:
Strengths and Weaknesses
M od el C apa city
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
requ ire m en ts
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
arch ite ctu re
Pr od uce s h ig h ly
rel iable sy stem
Pr od uce s sy stem wi th
la rg e g ro wth en v elop
M ana g es ri sk s
Can be c o n strain ed to
p re de te rm in ed
sc h ed u le
Ha s lo w ove rh e ad
A llo w s for m id co ur se
co rre ct ion s
Pr ovid es c u stom ers
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Pr ovid es ma n ag em en t
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Requ ir es little m ana ge r
o r d evelop er
sop h istic atio n

Pure
W ate rfall

C od e-an d F ix

Spi ral

M odi fied
W ate rfall

E vol ut io nar y
Pr o to ty pin g

S tag ed
De liv er y

E vol ut io nar y
De liv er y

De sig n -to sc h ed u le

De sig n to -too ls

C o mme rcial
Of f-th e -sh elf
so ft w are

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

F air

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r to
fai r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

2008-11-11

F air to
exc ellent
F air to
exc ellent

P oo r

N/ A

P oo r to
fai r

N/ A

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air to
exc ellent

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

N/ A

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

N/ A

P oo r

P oo r to
fai r

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Accelerating the NPD Life Cycle
Model
Ideaisation

Go:No-Go

Scoping

Go:No-Go

Planning

Go:No-Go

Development

Go:No-Go

Testing

Go:No-Go

Launch

Go:No-Go

Maintenance
Retirement

Project Lifecycle Framework
 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

EOL

Discussion

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Away
Recommendations
“For which of you,
desiring to build a
tower, doesn't first sit
down and count the
cost, to see if he has
enough to complete it?”
Jesus
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation


Ready-Aim-Fire


Haste makes waste (penny wise, pound foolish)
• Choosing the wrong models will result in unfulfilled
expectations and delays

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Ready


Recognizing the difference between








product management,
marketing, and
project management

Having a well defined NPD process
Not standardizing on only one project model
Having a positive teamwork environment,
inspirational leadership, focused vision, and
necessary skills

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Aim
Ensuring up-front homework done first
 Ensuring the resources(staff) & time to do
it right
 Verifying available resource costs (people
and time)
 Selecting the most appropriate project
model
 Taking the time to do the planning right


Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Fire
Being flexible within parameters
 Regular review of processes and methods
 Regular, frequent review of new ideas
and market information


Fini


Robert Grupe





[email protected]
+1.314.266.7321

Further reading







Forrester “Making Product Management A Strategic
Resource”
Winning at New Products, Robert G Cooper
Rapid Development, Steve McConnell
PDMA Visions magazine, Jun & Sept 2008

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.


Slide 5

7 Management Solutions

Red

Accelerating Innovation
Overview and discussion of NPD
and project management life cycle
models
Robert Grupe
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Introduction
An overview and discussion of integrated
new product development and project life
cycle models for best practice approaches
to successful innovation and accelerated
time to market.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agenda






Clarification of PM Terminology
Strategically Focused PM
NPD vs. Project Management
Models







Waterfall Models
Iterative Models
Agile Approaches

Discussion
Roundup
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Clarification of Terminology
Product Management
 Project Management
 Program Management


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Product Management



Planning and marketing of a product or products at all stages of the
product lifecycle.
Product planning (in-bound marketing)
[Product Manager (PM)]






Defining new products
Gathering market requirements (VoC)
Building product roadmaps
Product Life Cycle considerations
• Stages: introduction, growth, mature, saturation/decline





Competitive differentiation

Product marketing (outbound marketing)
[Product Marketing Manager (PMM)]





Product positioning and outbound messaging
Promotion: press, customers, and partners
Packaging and delivery
Competition messaging monitoring

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Project Management



Project Planning
[Project Manager (PjM)]
Achieve all of the goals of the project charter while
adhering to




Project constraints: scope, time, cost and quality.

Project management life cycle



5 Process Groups: Project Initiation, Project Planning, Project
Execution, Project monitoring and control, and Project closeout.
9 Knowledge Areas: integration management, scope
management, time management, cost management, quality
management, human resource management, communications
management,risk management and procurement management.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology: Program Management
[& Product Portfolio Management]













Layer above project management focusing on selecting the best group of programs [and
products,] defining them in terms of their constituent projects and providing an infrastructure
where projects can be run successfully
Governance: The structure, process, and procedure to control operations and changes to
performance objectives.
Standards: Define the performance architecture.
Alignment: The program must support higher level vision, goals and objectives.
Assurance: Verify and validate the program, ensuring adherence to standards and alignment
with the vision.
Management: Ensure there are regular reviews, there is accountability, and that management of
projects, stakeholders and suppliers is in place.
Integration: Optimize performance across the program value chain, functionally and technically.
Finances: Tracking of finances is an important part of Program management and basic costs
together with wider costs of administering the program are all tracked.
Infrastructure: Allocation of resources influences the cost and success of the program.
Infrastructure might cover offices, version control, and IT. Planning: Develop the plan bringing
together the information on projects, resources, timescales, monitoring and control.[1]
Improvement: Continuously assess performance; research and develop new capabilities; and
systemically apply learning and knowledge to the program.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Why is this important?


Without clearly defined and integrated product,
marketing, and project management, innovation
will be haphazard, chaotic, and un-scaleable
with complexity and growth.


You can’t improve or accelerate what you can’t
understand or control.
• Putting random people on a galley ship won’t ensure you
will get where you want to go or make it go faster.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Research: Most PM’s
not being used effectively


Distracting challenges
Product and
company
strategy
10%

Customers
and market
8%

Internal
process and
organization
28%

Development
process
16%

Prioritization
and Focus
16%

2008-11-11

Time and
resources
22%

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Recommendation:
PM for Strategic Advantage
Focused on inbound tasks
 PM decision-making power






Roadmap, release contents, release
acceptance

Report to CEO/GM

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

New Product Development (NPD)
& Project Life Cycle Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Code & Fix
(AKA Cowboy Coding)

S ys tem
S pe cific atio n
(m a yb e )

2008-11-11

C o de -a nd -F ix

R elea se
(m ay be )

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Traditional NPD Process
Stage-Gate Process
Discovery
QuickTim e™ and a
de co m pres sor
are n eed ed to se e this p ictu re .

Scoping

Business
Case

Stage
1

Stage
2

Development

Test /
Validation

Launch

Stage
3

Stage
4

Stage
5

Gate
1

Gate
2

Gate
3

Gate
4

Gate
5

Idea
Screen

Second
Screen

Go To
Dev

Go To
Test

Go To
Launch

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Review
Qui ckT ime™ and a
deco mpre sso r
are nee ded t o see t his p ict ure.

Traditional Project Management
Waterfall Model
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Risk Reduction
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Subprojects
Pr od u ct
C o n ce pt

R e qu ire m en ts
A n a lysis

D e ta ile d
D e sig n

A rch itec tur a l
D e s ig n

C o din g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S u b sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S ub sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g a nd
D e b u gin g

D e ta ile d
D e s ig n

S ub s yste m
T e sting

C o d in g a nd
D eb u g in g

S yste m
T e sting
S u bs yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Overlapping
Phases (Sashimi)
P rodu ct
C o nc ep t

R equ ire m e nts
A na lysis

A rchite ctura l
D esig n

D etaile d
D e sign

C o din g an d
D e bu ging

S yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Design-to-Schedule
P roduct
C oncept

R equ irem ents
An alysis

Architectural
D esign

H ig h P rio rity: D etailed design , code, d ebug, test

M edium H igh Priority: D etailed desig n, code , debug, te st

R u n ou t of tim e or
m oney h ere

M ed ium P riority: D e tailed design , code, debug , test

M ediu m Low P riority: D etailed design , co de, de bug, test

Low Priority: D etailed design, code , debug , test

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

R elease

Design-to-Tools
F u n ctio n a lity s u p p o rte d b y
th e to o ls

F u n ctio n a lity th a t w ill
n o t b e in th e p ro d u ct

Fu n c tio n a lity th a t w ill b e
b u ilt

Id e a l fu n c tio n a lity

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Iterative Project Management
Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Spiral (Boehm)

R epe at as requ ire d

1. D eter m ine
ob jective s,
alte rnatives,
constraints

2008-11-11

2 . Iden tify and
reso lve risks

3. E va lu ate
a ltern atives

4 . D evelop
ite ration
d elivera ble s a nd
verify co rrect

5 . P la n the ne xt
ite ratio n

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

6.
C om m it to an
a ppro ach for ne xt
ite ratio n

Evolutionary Prototyping
No

In itial
con ce pt

2008-11-11

D esign and
im p lem ent
initia l
proto typ e

R efin e
p ro to typ e

C usto m e r
a ccep tab le ?

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

C om p lete
a nd
relea se

Staged Delivery
(AKA Incremental Implementation)
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

R e q u ire m e nts
A n a ly sis

A rch ite c tu ra l
D e sig n

S ta g e 1 : D e ta ile d d e s ig n , c o d e , d e b u g , te st, d e liv e ry

S ta g e 2 : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e liv e ry

S ta g e n : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e live ry

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Evolutionary Delivery
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

P re lim in a ry
R e q u ire m e n ts
A n a lys is

A rch ite ctu ra l
D e s ig n a n d
S ys te m C o re

D e liv e r F in a l
V e rsio n

D e v e lo p a V e rsio n

In c o rp o ra te
C u s to m e r
F e e d b a ck

D e liv e ry th e
V e rs io n

E licit C u sto m e r
F e e d b a ck

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Project Management
“There is nothing new
under the sun but there
are lots of old things
we don't know.”
Ambrose Bierce

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Principles (2001)













Customer satisfaction by rapid, continuous delivery of useful software
Working software is delivered frequently (weeks rather than months)
Working software is the principal measure of progress
Even late changes in requirements are welcomed
Close, daily cooperation between business people and developers
Face-to-face conversation is the best form of communication (Co-location)
Projects are built around motivated individuals, who should be trusted
Continuous attention to technical excellence and good design
Simplicity
Self-organizing teams
Regular adaptation to changing circumstances

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Characteristics


Time periods in weeks rather than months


time period as a strict timebox.

Work is performed in a highly
collaborative manner.
 If the sponsors of the project are
concerned about completing certain goals
with a defined timeline or budget, agile
may not be appropriate.


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Methodologies (Partial)


Agile Unified Process (AUP)







Simplified IBM Rational Unified Process (RUP)

Extreme programming (XP)
Feature Driven Development (FDD)
Scrum


“Pig” Roles
• Product owner (VOC - Product Manager)
• ScrumMaster (Project Manager)
• Team (Developers)



“Chicken” Roles
• Users
• Stakeholders (customers, vendors)
• Managers

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Adaptive (Agile) vs
Predictive (Plan-driven)
Strengths of each:


Adaptive










Low criticality
Senior developers
Requirements change
very often
Small number of
developers
Culture that thrives on
chaos

2008-11-11

Predictive








High criticality
Junior developers
Requirements don't
change too often
Large number of
developers
Culture that demands
order

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Model Selection Criteria













How well do my customer and we understand the requirements at the beginning of
the project? Is our understanding likely to change significantly as we move through
the project?
How well do we understand the system architecture? Are we likely to need to make
major architectural changes midway through the project?
How much reliable do we need?
How much do we need to plan ahead and design ahead during this project for future
versions?
How much risk does the project entail?
Are we constrained by a predefined schedule?
Do we need to be able to make midcourse corrections?
Do we need to provide customers with visible progress throughout the project?
Do we need to provide management with visible progress throughout the project?
How much sophistication do we need to use this lifecycle model successfully?

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Project Management Models:
Strengths and Weaknesses
M od el C apa city
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
requ ire m en ts
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
arch ite ctu re
Pr od uce s h ig h ly
rel iable sy stem
Pr od uce s sy stem wi th
la rg e g ro wth en v elop
M ana g es ri sk s
Can be c o n strain ed to
p re de te rm in ed
sc h ed u le
Ha s lo w ove rh e ad
A llo w s for m id co ur se
co rre ct ion s
Pr ovid es c u stom ers
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Pr ovid es ma n ag em en t
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Requ ir es little m ana ge r
o r d evelop er
sop h istic atio n

Pure
W ate rfall

C od e-an d F ix

Spi ral

M odi fied
W ate rfall

E vol ut io nar y
Pr o to ty pin g

S tag ed
De liv er y

E vol ut io nar y
De liv er y

De sig n -to sc h ed u le

De sig n to -too ls

C o mme rcial
Of f-th e -sh elf
so ft w are

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

F air

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r to
fai r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

2008-11-11

F air to
exc ellent
F air to
exc ellent

P oo r

N/ A

P oo r to
fai r

N/ A

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air to
exc ellent

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

N/ A

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

N/ A

P oo r

P oo r to
fai r

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Accelerating the NPD Life Cycle
Model
Ideaisation

Go:No-Go

Scoping

Go:No-Go

Planning

Go:No-Go

Development

Go:No-Go

Testing

Go:No-Go

Launch

Go:No-Go

Maintenance
Retirement

Project Lifecycle Framework
 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

EOL

Discussion

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Away
Recommendations
“For which of you,
desiring to build a
tower, doesn't first sit
down and count the
cost, to see if he has
enough to complete it?”
Jesus
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation


Ready-Aim-Fire


Haste makes waste (penny wise, pound foolish)
• Choosing the wrong models will result in unfulfilled
expectations and delays

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Ready


Recognizing the difference between








product management,
marketing, and
project management

Having a well defined NPD process
Not standardizing on only one project model
Having a positive teamwork environment,
inspirational leadership, focused vision, and
necessary skills

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Aim
Ensuring up-front homework done first
 Ensuring the resources(staff) & time to do
it right
 Verifying available resource costs (people
and time)
 Selecting the most appropriate project
model
 Taking the time to do the planning right


Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Fire
Being flexible within parameters
 Regular review of processes and methods
 Regular, frequent review of new ideas
and market information


Fini


Robert Grupe





[email protected]
+1.314.266.7321

Further reading







Forrester “Making Product Management A Strategic
Resource”
Winning at New Products, Robert G Cooper
Rapid Development, Steve McConnell
PDMA Visions magazine, Jun & Sept 2008

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.


Slide 6

7 Management Solutions

Red

Accelerating Innovation
Overview and discussion of NPD
and project management life cycle
models
Robert Grupe
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Introduction
An overview and discussion of integrated
new product development and project life
cycle models for best practice approaches
to successful innovation and accelerated
time to market.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agenda






Clarification of PM Terminology
Strategically Focused PM
NPD vs. Project Management
Models







Waterfall Models
Iterative Models
Agile Approaches

Discussion
Roundup
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Clarification of Terminology
Product Management
 Project Management
 Program Management


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Product Management



Planning and marketing of a product or products at all stages of the
product lifecycle.
Product planning (in-bound marketing)
[Product Manager (PM)]






Defining new products
Gathering market requirements (VoC)
Building product roadmaps
Product Life Cycle considerations
• Stages: introduction, growth, mature, saturation/decline





Competitive differentiation

Product marketing (outbound marketing)
[Product Marketing Manager (PMM)]





Product positioning and outbound messaging
Promotion: press, customers, and partners
Packaging and delivery
Competition messaging monitoring

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Project Management



Project Planning
[Project Manager (PjM)]
Achieve all of the goals of the project charter while
adhering to




Project constraints: scope, time, cost and quality.

Project management life cycle



5 Process Groups: Project Initiation, Project Planning, Project
Execution, Project monitoring and control, and Project closeout.
9 Knowledge Areas: integration management, scope
management, time management, cost management, quality
management, human resource management, communications
management,risk management and procurement management.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology: Program Management
[& Product Portfolio Management]













Layer above project management focusing on selecting the best group of programs [and
products,] defining them in terms of their constituent projects and providing an infrastructure
where projects can be run successfully
Governance: The structure, process, and procedure to control operations and changes to
performance objectives.
Standards: Define the performance architecture.
Alignment: The program must support higher level vision, goals and objectives.
Assurance: Verify and validate the program, ensuring adherence to standards and alignment
with the vision.
Management: Ensure there are regular reviews, there is accountability, and that management of
projects, stakeholders and suppliers is in place.
Integration: Optimize performance across the program value chain, functionally and technically.
Finances: Tracking of finances is an important part of Program management and basic costs
together with wider costs of administering the program are all tracked.
Infrastructure: Allocation of resources influences the cost and success of the program.
Infrastructure might cover offices, version control, and IT. Planning: Develop the plan bringing
together the information on projects, resources, timescales, monitoring and control.[1]
Improvement: Continuously assess performance; research and develop new capabilities; and
systemically apply learning and knowledge to the program.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Why is this important?


Without clearly defined and integrated product,
marketing, and project management, innovation
will be haphazard, chaotic, and un-scaleable
with complexity and growth.


You can’t improve or accelerate what you can’t
understand or control.
• Putting random people on a galley ship won’t ensure you
will get where you want to go or make it go faster.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Research: Most PM’s
not being used effectively


Distracting challenges
Product and
company
strategy
10%

Customers
and market
8%

Internal
process and
organization
28%

Development
process
16%

Prioritization
and Focus
16%

2008-11-11

Time and
resources
22%

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Recommendation:
PM for Strategic Advantage
Focused on inbound tasks
 PM decision-making power






Roadmap, release contents, release
acceptance

Report to CEO/GM

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

New Product Development (NPD)
& Project Life Cycle Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Code & Fix
(AKA Cowboy Coding)

S ys tem
S pe cific atio n
(m a yb e )

2008-11-11

C o de -a nd -F ix

R elea se
(m ay be )

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Traditional NPD Process
Stage-Gate Process
Discovery
QuickTim e™ and a
de co m pres sor
are n eed ed to se e this p ictu re .

Scoping

Business
Case

Stage
1

Stage
2

Development

Test /
Validation

Launch

Stage
3

Stage
4

Stage
5

Gate
1

Gate
2

Gate
3

Gate
4

Gate
5

Idea
Screen

Second
Screen

Go To
Dev

Go To
Test

Go To
Launch

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Review
Qui ckT ime™ and a
deco mpre sso r
are nee ded t o see t his p ict ure.

Traditional Project Management
Waterfall Model
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Risk Reduction
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Subprojects
Pr od u ct
C o n ce pt

R e qu ire m en ts
A n a lysis

D e ta ile d
D e sig n

A rch itec tur a l
D e s ig n

C o din g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S u b sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S ub sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g a nd
D e b u gin g

D e ta ile d
D e s ig n

S ub s yste m
T e sting

C o d in g a nd
D eb u g in g

S yste m
T e sting
S u bs yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Overlapping
Phases (Sashimi)
P rodu ct
C o nc ep t

R equ ire m e nts
A na lysis

A rchite ctura l
D esig n

D etaile d
D e sign

C o din g an d
D e bu ging

S yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Design-to-Schedule
P roduct
C oncept

R equ irem ents
An alysis

Architectural
D esign

H ig h P rio rity: D etailed design , code, d ebug, test

M edium H igh Priority: D etailed desig n, code , debug, te st

R u n ou t of tim e or
m oney h ere

M ed ium P riority: D e tailed design , code, debug , test

M ediu m Low P riority: D etailed design , co de, de bug, test

Low Priority: D etailed design, code , debug , test

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

R elease

Design-to-Tools
F u n ctio n a lity s u p p o rte d b y
th e to o ls

F u n ctio n a lity th a t w ill
n o t b e in th e p ro d u ct

Fu n c tio n a lity th a t w ill b e
b u ilt

Id e a l fu n c tio n a lity

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Iterative Project Management
Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Spiral (Boehm)

R epe at as requ ire d

1. D eter m ine
ob jective s,
alte rnatives,
constraints

2008-11-11

2 . Iden tify and
reso lve risks

3. E va lu ate
a ltern atives

4 . D evelop
ite ration
d elivera ble s a nd
verify co rrect

5 . P la n the ne xt
ite ratio n

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

6.
C om m it to an
a ppro ach for ne xt
ite ratio n

Evolutionary Prototyping
No

In itial
con ce pt

2008-11-11

D esign and
im p lem ent
initia l
proto typ e

R efin e
p ro to typ e

C usto m e r
a ccep tab le ?

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

C om p lete
a nd
relea se

Staged Delivery
(AKA Incremental Implementation)
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

R e q u ire m e nts
A n a ly sis

A rch ite c tu ra l
D e sig n

S ta g e 1 : D e ta ile d d e s ig n , c o d e , d e b u g , te st, d e liv e ry

S ta g e 2 : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e liv e ry

S ta g e n : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e live ry

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Evolutionary Delivery
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

P re lim in a ry
R e q u ire m e n ts
A n a lys is

A rch ite ctu ra l
D e s ig n a n d
S ys te m C o re

D e liv e r F in a l
V e rsio n

D e v e lo p a V e rsio n

In c o rp o ra te
C u s to m e r
F e e d b a ck

D e liv e ry th e
V e rs io n

E licit C u sto m e r
F e e d b a ck

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Project Management
“There is nothing new
under the sun but there
are lots of old things
we don't know.”
Ambrose Bierce

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Principles (2001)













Customer satisfaction by rapid, continuous delivery of useful software
Working software is delivered frequently (weeks rather than months)
Working software is the principal measure of progress
Even late changes in requirements are welcomed
Close, daily cooperation between business people and developers
Face-to-face conversation is the best form of communication (Co-location)
Projects are built around motivated individuals, who should be trusted
Continuous attention to technical excellence and good design
Simplicity
Self-organizing teams
Regular adaptation to changing circumstances

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Characteristics


Time periods in weeks rather than months


time period as a strict timebox.

Work is performed in a highly
collaborative manner.
 If the sponsors of the project are
concerned about completing certain goals
with a defined timeline or budget, agile
may not be appropriate.


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Methodologies (Partial)


Agile Unified Process (AUP)







Simplified IBM Rational Unified Process (RUP)

Extreme programming (XP)
Feature Driven Development (FDD)
Scrum


“Pig” Roles
• Product owner (VOC - Product Manager)
• ScrumMaster (Project Manager)
• Team (Developers)



“Chicken” Roles
• Users
• Stakeholders (customers, vendors)
• Managers

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Adaptive (Agile) vs
Predictive (Plan-driven)
Strengths of each:


Adaptive










Low criticality
Senior developers
Requirements change
very often
Small number of
developers
Culture that thrives on
chaos

2008-11-11

Predictive








High criticality
Junior developers
Requirements don't
change too often
Large number of
developers
Culture that demands
order

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Model Selection Criteria













How well do my customer and we understand the requirements at the beginning of
the project? Is our understanding likely to change significantly as we move through
the project?
How well do we understand the system architecture? Are we likely to need to make
major architectural changes midway through the project?
How much reliable do we need?
How much do we need to plan ahead and design ahead during this project for future
versions?
How much risk does the project entail?
Are we constrained by a predefined schedule?
Do we need to be able to make midcourse corrections?
Do we need to provide customers with visible progress throughout the project?
Do we need to provide management with visible progress throughout the project?
How much sophistication do we need to use this lifecycle model successfully?

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Project Management Models:
Strengths and Weaknesses
M od el C apa city
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
requ ire m en ts
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
arch ite ctu re
Pr od uce s h ig h ly
rel iable sy stem
Pr od uce s sy stem wi th
la rg e g ro wth en v elop
M ana g es ri sk s
Can be c o n strain ed to
p re de te rm in ed
sc h ed u le
Ha s lo w ove rh e ad
A llo w s for m id co ur se
co rre ct ion s
Pr ovid es c u stom ers
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Pr ovid es ma n ag em en t
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Requ ir es little m ana ge r
o r d evelop er
sop h istic atio n

Pure
W ate rfall

C od e-an d F ix

Spi ral

M odi fied
W ate rfall

E vol ut io nar y
Pr o to ty pin g

S tag ed
De liv er y

E vol ut io nar y
De liv er y

De sig n -to sc h ed u le

De sig n to -too ls

C o mme rcial
Of f-th e -sh elf
so ft w are

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

F air

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r to
fai r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

2008-11-11

F air to
exc ellent
F air to
exc ellent

P oo r

N/ A

P oo r to
fai r

N/ A

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air to
exc ellent

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

N/ A

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

N/ A

P oo r

P oo r to
fai r

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Accelerating the NPD Life Cycle
Model
Ideaisation

Go:No-Go

Scoping

Go:No-Go

Planning

Go:No-Go

Development

Go:No-Go

Testing

Go:No-Go

Launch

Go:No-Go

Maintenance
Retirement

Project Lifecycle Framework
 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

EOL

Discussion

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Away
Recommendations
“For which of you,
desiring to build a
tower, doesn't first sit
down and count the
cost, to see if he has
enough to complete it?”
Jesus
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation


Ready-Aim-Fire


Haste makes waste (penny wise, pound foolish)
• Choosing the wrong models will result in unfulfilled
expectations and delays

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Ready


Recognizing the difference between








product management,
marketing, and
project management

Having a well defined NPD process
Not standardizing on only one project model
Having a positive teamwork environment,
inspirational leadership, focused vision, and
necessary skills

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Aim
Ensuring up-front homework done first
 Ensuring the resources(staff) & time to do
it right
 Verifying available resource costs (people
and time)
 Selecting the most appropriate project
model
 Taking the time to do the planning right


Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Fire
Being flexible within parameters
 Regular review of processes and methods
 Regular, frequent review of new ideas
and market information


Fini


Robert Grupe





[email protected]
+1.314.266.7321

Further reading







Forrester “Making Product Management A Strategic
Resource”
Winning at New Products, Robert G Cooper
Rapid Development, Steve McConnell
PDMA Visions magazine, Jun & Sept 2008

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.


Slide 7

7 Management Solutions

Red

Accelerating Innovation
Overview and discussion of NPD
and project management life cycle
models
Robert Grupe
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Introduction
An overview and discussion of integrated
new product development and project life
cycle models for best practice approaches
to successful innovation and accelerated
time to market.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agenda






Clarification of PM Terminology
Strategically Focused PM
NPD vs. Project Management
Models







Waterfall Models
Iterative Models
Agile Approaches

Discussion
Roundup
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Clarification of Terminology
Product Management
 Project Management
 Program Management


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Product Management



Planning and marketing of a product or products at all stages of the
product lifecycle.
Product planning (in-bound marketing)
[Product Manager (PM)]






Defining new products
Gathering market requirements (VoC)
Building product roadmaps
Product Life Cycle considerations
• Stages: introduction, growth, mature, saturation/decline





Competitive differentiation

Product marketing (outbound marketing)
[Product Marketing Manager (PMM)]





Product positioning and outbound messaging
Promotion: press, customers, and partners
Packaging and delivery
Competition messaging monitoring

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Project Management



Project Planning
[Project Manager (PjM)]
Achieve all of the goals of the project charter while
adhering to




Project constraints: scope, time, cost and quality.

Project management life cycle



5 Process Groups: Project Initiation, Project Planning, Project
Execution, Project monitoring and control, and Project closeout.
9 Knowledge Areas: integration management, scope
management, time management, cost management, quality
management, human resource management, communications
management,risk management and procurement management.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology: Program Management
[& Product Portfolio Management]













Layer above project management focusing on selecting the best group of programs [and
products,] defining them in terms of their constituent projects and providing an infrastructure
where projects can be run successfully
Governance: The structure, process, and procedure to control operations and changes to
performance objectives.
Standards: Define the performance architecture.
Alignment: The program must support higher level vision, goals and objectives.
Assurance: Verify and validate the program, ensuring adherence to standards and alignment
with the vision.
Management: Ensure there are regular reviews, there is accountability, and that management of
projects, stakeholders and suppliers is in place.
Integration: Optimize performance across the program value chain, functionally and technically.
Finances: Tracking of finances is an important part of Program management and basic costs
together with wider costs of administering the program are all tracked.
Infrastructure: Allocation of resources influences the cost and success of the program.
Infrastructure might cover offices, version control, and IT. Planning: Develop the plan bringing
together the information on projects, resources, timescales, monitoring and control.[1]
Improvement: Continuously assess performance; research and develop new capabilities; and
systemically apply learning and knowledge to the program.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Why is this important?


Without clearly defined and integrated product,
marketing, and project management, innovation
will be haphazard, chaotic, and un-scaleable
with complexity and growth.


You can’t improve or accelerate what you can’t
understand or control.
• Putting random people on a galley ship won’t ensure you
will get where you want to go or make it go faster.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Research: Most PM’s
not being used effectively


Distracting challenges
Product and
company
strategy
10%

Customers
and market
8%

Internal
process and
organization
28%

Development
process
16%

Prioritization
and Focus
16%

2008-11-11

Time and
resources
22%

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Recommendation:
PM for Strategic Advantage
Focused on inbound tasks
 PM decision-making power






Roadmap, release contents, release
acceptance

Report to CEO/GM

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

New Product Development (NPD)
& Project Life Cycle Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Code & Fix
(AKA Cowboy Coding)

S ys tem
S pe cific atio n
(m a yb e )

2008-11-11

C o de -a nd -F ix

R elea se
(m ay be )

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Traditional NPD Process
Stage-Gate Process
Discovery
QuickTim e™ and a
de co m pres sor
are n eed ed to se e this p ictu re .

Scoping

Business
Case

Stage
1

Stage
2

Development

Test /
Validation

Launch

Stage
3

Stage
4

Stage
5

Gate
1

Gate
2

Gate
3

Gate
4

Gate
5

Idea
Screen

Second
Screen

Go To
Dev

Go To
Test

Go To
Launch

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Review
Qui ckT ime™ and a
deco mpre sso r
are nee ded t o see t his p ict ure.

Traditional Project Management
Waterfall Model
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Risk Reduction
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Subprojects
Pr od u ct
C o n ce pt

R e qu ire m en ts
A n a lysis

D e ta ile d
D e sig n

A rch itec tur a l
D e s ig n

C o din g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S u b sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S ub sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g a nd
D e b u gin g

D e ta ile d
D e s ig n

S ub s yste m
T e sting

C o d in g a nd
D eb u g in g

S yste m
T e sting
S u bs yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Overlapping
Phases (Sashimi)
P rodu ct
C o nc ep t

R equ ire m e nts
A na lysis

A rchite ctura l
D esig n

D etaile d
D e sign

C o din g an d
D e bu ging

S yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Design-to-Schedule
P roduct
C oncept

R equ irem ents
An alysis

Architectural
D esign

H ig h P rio rity: D etailed design , code, d ebug, test

M edium H igh Priority: D etailed desig n, code , debug, te st

R u n ou t of tim e or
m oney h ere

M ed ium P riority: D e tailed design , code, debug , test

M ediu m Low P riority: D etailed design , co de, de bug, test

Low Priority: D etailed design, code , debug , test

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

R elease

Design-to-Tools
F u n ctio n a lity s u p p o rte d b y
th e to o ls

F u n ctio n a lity th a t w ill
n o t b e in th e p ro d u ct

Fu n c tio n a lity th a t w ill b e
b u ilt

Id e a l fu n c tio n a lity

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Iterative Project Management
Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Spiral (Boehm)

R epe at as requ ire d

1. D eter m ine
ob jective s,
alte rnatives,
constraints

2008-11-11

2 . Iden tify and
reso lve risks

3. E va lu ate
a ltern atives

4 . D evelop
ite ration
d elivera ble s a nd
verify co rrect

5 . P la n the ne xt
ite ratio n

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

6.
C om m it to an
a ppro ach for ne xt
ite ratio n

Evolutionary Prototyping
No

In itial
con ce pt

2008-11-11

D esign and
im p lem ent
initia l
proto typ e

R efin e
p ro to typ e

C usto m e r
a ccep tab le ?

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

C om p lete
a nd
relea se

Staged Delivery
(AKA Incremental Implementation)
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

R e q u ire m e nts
A n a ly sis

A rch ite c tu ra l
D e sig n

S ta g e 1 : D e ta ile d d e s ig n , c o d e , d e b u g , te st, d e liv e ry

S ta g e 2 : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e liv e ry

S ta g e n : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e live ry

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Evolutionary Delivery
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

P re lim in a ry
R e q u ire m e n ts
A n a lys is

A rch ite ctu ra l
D e s ig n a n d
S ys te m C o re

D e liv e r F in a l
V e rsio n

D e v e lo p a V e rsio n

In c o rp o ra te
C u s to m e r
F e e d b a ck

D e liv e ry th e
V e rs io n

E licit C u sto m e r
F e e d b a ck

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Project Management
“There is nothing new
under the sun but there
are lots of old things
we don't know.”
Ambrose Bierce

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Principles (2001)













Customer satisfaction by rapid, continuous delivery of useful software
Working software is delivered frequently (weeks rather than months)
Working software is the principal measure of progress
Even late changes in requirements are welcomed
Close, daily cooperation between business people and developers
Face-to-face conversation is the best form of communication (Co-location)
Projects are built around motivated individuals, who should be trusted
Continuous attention to technical excellence and good design
Simplicity
Self-organizing teams
Regular adaptation to changing circumstances

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Characteristics


Time periods in weeks rather than months


time period as a strict timebox.

Work is performed in a highly
collaborative manner.
 If the sponsors of the project are
concerned about completing certain goals
with a defined timeline or budget, agile
may not be appropriate.


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Methodologies (Partial)


Agile Unified Process (AUP)







Simplified IBM Rational Unified Process (RUP)

Extreme programming (XP)
Feature Driven Development (FDD)
Scrum


“Pig” Roles
• Product owner (VOC - Product Manager)
• ScrumMaster (Project Manager)
• Team (Developers)



“Chicken” Roles
• Users
• Stakeholders (customers, vendors)
• Managers

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Adaptive (Agile) vs
Predictive (Plan-driven)
Strengths of each:


Adaptive










Low criticality
Senior developers
Requirements change
very often
Small number of
developers
Culture that thrives on
chaos

2008-11-11

Predictive








High criticality
Junior developers
Requirements don't
change too often
Large number of
developers
Culture that demands
order

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Model Selection Criteria













How well do my customer and we understand the requirements at the beginning of
the project? Is our understanding likely to change significantly as we move through
the project?
How well do we understand the system architecture? Are we likely to need to make
major architectural changes midway through the project?
How much reliable do we need?
How much do we need to plan ahead and design ahead during this project for future
versions?
How much risk does the project entail?
Are we constrained by a predefined schedule?
Do we need to be able to make midcourse corrections?
Do we need to provide customers with visible progress throughout the project?
Do we need to provide management with visible progress throughout the project?
How much sophistication do we need to use this lifecycle model successfully?

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Project Management Models:
Strengths and Weaknesses
M od el C apa city
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
requ ire m en ts
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
arch ite ctu re
Pr od uce s h ig h ly
rel iable sy stem
Pr od uce s sy stem wi th
la rg e g ro wth en v elop
M ana g es ri sk s
Can be c o n strain ed to
p re de te rm in ed
sc h ed u le
Ha s lo w ove rh e ad
A llo w s for m id co ur se
co rre ct ion s
Pr ovid es c u stom ers
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Pr ovid es ma n ag em en t
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Requ ir es little m ana ge r
o r d evelop er
sop h istic atio n

Pure
W ate rfall

C od e-an d F ix

Spi ral

M odi fied
W ate rfall

E vol ut io nar y
Pr o to ty pin g

S tag ed
De liv er y

E vol ut io nar y
De liv er y

De sig n -to sc h ed u le

De sig n to -too ls

C o mme rcial
Of f-th e -sh elf
so ft w are

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

F air

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r to
fai r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

2008-11-11

F air to
exc ellent
F air to
exc ellent

P oo r

N/ A

P oo r to
fai r

N/ A

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air to
exc ellent

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

N/ A

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

N/ A

P oo r

P oo r to
fai r

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Accelerating the NPD Life Cycle
Model
Ideaisation

Go:No-Go

Scoping

Go:No-Go

Planning

Go:No-Go

Development

Go:No-Go

Testing

Go:No-Go

Launch

Go:No-Go

Maintenance
Retirement

Project Lifecycle Framework
 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

EOL

Discussion

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Away
Recommendations
“For which of you,
desiring to build a
tower, doesn't first sit
down and count the
cost, to see if he has
enough to complete it?”
Jesus
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation


Ready-Aim-Fire


Haste makes waste (penny wise, pound foolish)
• Choosing the wrong models will result in unfulfilled
expectations and delays

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Ready


Recognizing the difference between








product management,
marketing, and
project management

Having a well defined NPD process
Not standardizing on only one project model
Having a positive teamwork environment,
inspirational leadership, focused vision, and
necessary skills

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Aim
Ensuring up-front homework done first
 Ensuring the resources(staff) & time to do
it right
 Verifying available resource costs (people
and time)
 Selecting the most appropriate project
model
 Taking the time to do the planning right


Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Fire
Being flexible within parameters
 Regular review of processes and methods
 Regular, frequent review of new ideas
and market information


Fini


Robert Grupe





[email protected]
+1.314.266.7321

Further reading







Forrester “Making Product Management A Strategic
Resource”
Winning at New Products, Robert G Cooper
Rapid Development, Steve McConnell
PDMA Visions magazine, Jun & Sept 2008

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.


Slide 8

7 Management Solutions

Red

Accelerating Innovation
Overview and discussion of NPD
and project management life cycle
models
Robert Grupe
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Introduction
An overview and discussion of integrated
new product development and project life
cycle models for best practice approaches
to successful innovation and accelerated
time to market.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agenda






Clarification of PM Terminology
Strategically Focused PM
NPD vs. Project Management
Models







Waterfall Models
Iterative Models
Agile Approaches

Discussion
Roundup
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Clarification of Terminology
Product Management
 Project Management
 Program Management


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Product Management



Planning and marketing of a product or products at all stages of the
product lifecycle.
Product planning (in-bound marketing)
[Product Manager (PM)]






Defining new products
Gathering market requirements (VoC)
Building product roadmaps
Product Life Cycle considerations
• Stages: introduction, growth, mature, saturation/decline





Competitive differentiation

Product marketing (outbound marketing)
[Product Marketing Manager (PMM)]





Product positioning and outbound messaging
Promotion: press, customers, and partners
Packaging and delivery
Competition messaging monitoring

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Project Management



Project Planning
[Project Manager (PjM)]
Achieve all of the goals of the project charter while
adhering to




Project constraints: scope, time, cost and quality.

Project management life cycle



5 Process Groups: Project Initiation, Project Planning, Project
Execution, Project monitoring and control, and Project closeout.
9 Knowledge Areas: integration management, scope
management, time management, cost management, quality
management, human resource management, communications
management,risk management and procurement management.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology: Program Management
[& Product Portfolio Management]













Layer above project management focusing on selecting the best group of programs [and
products,] defining them in terms of their constituent projects and providing an infrastructure
where projects can be run successfully
Governance: The structure, process, and procedure to control operations and changes to
performance objectives.
Standards: Define the performance architecture.
Alignment: The program must support higher level vision, goals and objectives.
Assurance: Verify and validate the program, ensuring adherence to standards and alignment
with the vision.
Management: Ensure there are regular reviews, there is accountability, and that management of
projects, stakeholders and suppliers is in place.
Integration: Optimize performance across the program value chain, functionally and technically.
Finances: Tracking of finances is an important part of Program management and basic costs
together with wider costs of administering the program are all tracked.
Infrastructure: Allocation of resources influences the cost and success of the program.
Infrastructure might cover offices, version control, and IT. Planning: Develop the plan bringing
together the information on projects, resources, timescales, monitoring and control.[1]
Improvement: Continuously assess performance; research and develop new capabilities; and
systemically apply learning and knowledge to the program.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Why is this important?


Without clearly defined and integrated product,
marketing, and project management, innovation
will be haphazard, chaotic, and un-scaleable
with complexity and growth.


You can’t improve or accelerate what you can’t
understand or control.
• Putting random people on a galley ship won’t ensure you
will get where you want to go or make it go faster.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Research: Most PM’s
not being used effectively


Distracting challenges
Product and
company
strategy
10%

Customers
and market
8%

Internal
process and
organization
28%

Development
process
16%

Prioritization
and Focus
16%

2008-11-11

Time and
resources
22%

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Recommendation:
PM for Strategic Advantage
Focused on inbound tasks
 PM decision-making power






Roadmap, release contents, release
acceptance

Report to CEO/GM

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

New Product Development (NPD)
& Project Life Cycle Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Code & Fix
(AKA Cowboy Coding)

S ys tem
S pe cific atio n
(m a yb e )

2008-11-11

C o de -a nd -F ix

R elea se
(m ay be )

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Traditional NPD Process
Stage-Gate Process
Discovery
QuickTim e™ and a
de co m pres sor
are n eed ed to se e this p ictu re .

Scoping

Business
Case

Stage
1

Stage
2

Development

Test /
Validation

Launch

Stage
3

Stage
4

Stage
5

Gate
1

Gate
2

Gate
3

Gate
4

Gate
5

Idea
Screen

Second
Screen

Go To
Dev

Go To
Test

Go To
Launch

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Review
Qui ckT ime™ and a
deco mpre sso r
are nee ded t o see t his p ict ure.

Traditional Project Management
Waterfall Model
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Risk Reduction
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Subprojects
Pr od u ct
C o n ce pt

R e qu ire m en ts
A n a lysis

D e ta ile d
D e sig n

A rch itec tur a l
D e s ig n

C o din g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S u b sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S ub sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g a nd
D e b u gin g

D e ta ile d
D e s ig n

S ub s yste m
T e sting

C o d in g a nd
D eb u g in g

S yste m
T e sting
S u bs yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Overlapping
Phases (Sashimi)
P rodu ct
C o nc ep t

R equ ire m e nts
A na lysis

A rchite ctura l
D esig n

D etaile d
D e sign

C o din g an d
D e bu ging

S yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Design-to-Schedule
P roduct
C oncept

R equ irem ents
An alysis

Architectural
D esign

H ig h P rio rity: D etailed design , code, d ebug, test

M edium H igh Priority: D etailed desig n, code , debug, te st

R u n ou t of tim e or
m oney h ere

M ed ium P riority: D e tailed design , code, debug , test

M ediu m Low P riority: D etailed design , co de, de bug, test

Low Priority: D etailed design, code , debug , test

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

R elease

Design-to-Tools
F u n ctio n a lity s u p p o rte d b y
th e to o ls

F u n ctio n a lity th a t w ill
n o t b e in th e p ro d u ct

Fu n c tio n a lity th a t w ill b e
b u ilt

Id e a l fu n c tio n a lity

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Iterative Project Management
Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Spiral (Boehm)

R epe at as requ ire d

1. D eter m ine
ob jective s,
alte rnatives,
constraints

2008-11-11

2 . Iden tify and
reso lve risks

3. E va lu ate
a ltern atives

4 . D evelop
ite ration
d elivera ble s a nd
verify co rrect

5 . P la n the ne xt
ite ratio n

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

6.
C om m it to an
a ppro ach for ne xt
ite ratio n

Evolutionary Prototyping
No

In itial
con ce pt

2008-11-11

D esign and
im p lem ent
initia l
proto typ e

R efin e
p ro to typ e

C usto m e r
a ccep tab le ?

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

C om p lete
a nd
relea se

Staged Delivery
(AKA Incremental Implementation)
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

R e q u ire m e nts
A n a ly sis

A rch ite c tu ra l
D e sig n

S ta g e 1 : D e ta ile d d e s ig n , c o d e , d e b u g , te st, d e liv e ry

S ta g e 2 : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e liv e ry

S ta g e n : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e live ry

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Evolutionary Delivery
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

P re lim in a ry
R e q u ire m e n ts
A n a lys is

A rch ite ctu ra l
D e s ig n a n d
S ys te m C o re

D e liv e r F in a l
V e rsio n

D e v e lo p a V e rsio n

In c o rp o ra te
C u s to m e r
F e e d b a ck

D e liv e ry th e
V e rs io n

E licit C u sto m e r
F e e d b a ck

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Project Management
“There is nothing new
under the sun but there
are lots of old things
we don't know.”
Ambrose Bierce

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Principles (2001)













Customer satisfaction by rapid, continuous delivery of useful software
Working software is delivered frequently (weeks rather than months)
Working software is the principal measure of progress
Even late changes in requirements are welcomed
Close, daily cooperation between business people and developers
Face-to-face conversation is the best form of communication (Co-location)
Projects are built around motivated individuals, who should be trusted
Continuous attention to technical excellence and good design
Simplicity
Self-organizing teams
Regular adaptation to changing circumstances

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Characteristics


Time periods in weeks rather than months


time period as a strict timebox.

Work is performed in a highly
collaborative manner.
 If the sponsors of the project are
concerned about completing certain goals
with a defined timeline or budget, agile
may not be appropriate.


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Methodologies (Partial)


Agile Unified Process (AUP)







Simplified IBM Rational Unified Process (RUP)

Extreme programming (XP)
Feature Driven Development (FDD)
Scrum


“Pig” Roles
• Product owner (VOC - Product Manager)
• ScrumMaster (Project Manager)
• Team (Developers)



“Chicken” Roles
• Users
• Stakeholders (customers, vendors)
• Managers

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Adaptive (Agile) vs
Predictive (Plan-driven)
Strengths of each:


Adaptive










Low criticality
Senior developers
Requirements change
very often
Small number of
developers
Culture that thrives on
chaos

2008-11-11

Predictive








High criticality
Junior developers
Requirements don't
change too often
Large number of
developers
Culture that demands
order

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Model Selection Criteria













How well do my customer and we understand the requirements at the beginning of
the project? Is our understanding likely to change significantly as we move through
the project?
How well do we understand the system architecture? Are we likely to need to make
major architectural changes midway through the project?
How much reliable do we need?
How much do we need to plan ahead and design ahead during this project for future
versions?
How much risk does the project entail?
Are we constrained by a predefined schedule?
Do we need to be able to make midcourse corrections?
Do we need to provide customers with visible progress throughout the project?
Do we need to provide management with visible progress throughout the project?
How much sophistication do we need to use this lifecycle model successfully?

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Project Management Models:
Strengths and Weaknesses
M od el C apa city
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
requ ire m en ts
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
arch ite ctu re
Pr od uce s h ig h ly
rel iable sy stem
Pr od uce s sy stem wi th
la rg e g ro wth en v elop
M ana g es ri sk s
Can be c o n strain ed to
p re de te rm in ed
sc h ed u le
Ha s lo w ove rh e ad
A llo w s for m id co ur se
co rre ct ion s
Pr ovid es c u stom ers
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Pr ovid es ma n ag em en t
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Requ ir es little m ana ge r
o r d evelop er
sop h istic atio n

Pure
W ate rfall

C od e-an d F ix

Spi ral

M odi fied
W ate rfall

E vol ut io nar y
Pr o to ty pin g

S tag ed
De liv er y

E vol ut io nar y
De liv er y

De sig n -to sc h ed u le

De sig n to -too ls

C o mme rcial
Of f-th e -sh elf
so ft w are

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

F air

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r to
fai r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

2008-11-11

F air to
exc ellent
F air to
exc ellent

P oo r

N/ A

P oo r to
fai r

N/ A

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air to
exc ellent

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

N/ A

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

N/ A

P oo r

P oo r to
fai r

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Accelerating the NPD Life Cycle
Model
Ideaisation

Go:No-Go

Scoping

Go:No-Go

Planning

Go:No-Go

Development

Go:No-Go

Testing

Go:No-Go

Launch

Go:No-Go

Maintenance
Retirement

Project Lifecycle Framework
 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

EOL

Discussion

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Away
Recommendations
“For which of you,
desiring to build a
tower, doesn't first sit
down and count the
cost, to see if he has
enough to complete it?”
Jesus
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation


Ready-Aim-Fire


Haste makes waste (penny wise, pound foolish)
• Choosing the wrong models will result in unfulfilled
expectations and delays

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Ready


Recognizing the difference between








product management,
marketing, and
project management

Having a well defined NPD process
Not standardizing on only one project model
Having a positive teamwork environment,
inspirational leadership, focused vision, and
necessary skills

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Aim
Ensuring up-front homework done first
 Ensuring the resources(staff) & time to do
it right
 Verifying available resource costs (people
and time)
 Selecting the most appropriate project
model
 Taking the time to do the planning right


Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Fire
Being flexible within parameters
 Regular review of processes and methods
 Regular, frequent review of new ideas
and market information


Fini


Robert Grupe





[email protected]
+1.314.266.7321

Further reading







Forrester “Making Product Management A Strategic
Resource”
Winning at New Products, Robert G Cooper
Rapid Development, Steve McConnell
PDMA Visions magazine, Jun & Sept 2008

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.


Slide 9

7 Management Solutions

Red

Accelerating Innovation
Overview and discussion of NPD
and project management life cycle
models
Robert Grupe
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Introduction
An overview and discussion of integrated
new product development and project life
cycle models for best practice approaches
to successful innovation and accelerated
time to market.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agenda






Clarification of PM Terminology
Strategically Focused PM
NPD vs. Project Management
Models







Waterfall Models
Iterative Models
Agile Approaches

Discussion
Roundup
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Clarification of Terminology
Product Management
 Project Management
 Program Management


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Product Management



Planning and marketing of a product or products at all stages of the
product lifecycle.
Product planning (in-bound marketing)
[Product Manager (PM)]






Defining new products
Gathering market requirements (VoC)
Building product roadmaps
Product Life Cycle considerations
• Stages: introduction, growth, mature, saturation/decline





Competitive differentiation

Product marketing (outbound marketing)
[Product Marketing Manager (PMM)]





Product positioning and outbound messaging
Promotion: press, customers, and partners
Packaging and delivery
Competition messaging monitoring

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Project Management



Project Planning
[Project Manager (PjM)]
Achieve all of the goals of the project charter while
adhering to




Project constraints: scope, time, cost and quality.

Project management life cycle



5 Process Groups: Project Initiation, Project Planning, Project
Execution, Project monitoring and control, and Project closeout.
9 Knowledge Areas: integration management, scope
management, time management, cost management, quality
management, human resource management, communications
management,risk management and procurement management.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology: Program Management
[& Product Portfolio Management]













Layer above project management focusing on selecting the best group of programs [and
products,] defining them in terms of their constituent projects and providing an infrastructure
where projects can be run successfully
Governance: The structure, process, and procedure to control operations and changes to
performance objectives.
Standards: Define the performance architecture.
Alignment: The program must support higher level vision, goals and objectives.
Assurance: Verify and validate the program, ensuring adherence to standards and alignment
with the vision.
Management: Ensure there are regular reviews, there is accountability, and that management of
projects, stakeholders and suppliers is in place.
Integration: Optimize performance across the program value chain, functionally and technically.
Finances: Tracking of finances is an important part of Program management and basic costs
together with wider costs of administering the program are all tracked.
Infrastructure: Allocation of resources influences the cost and success of the program.
Infrastructure might cover offices, version control, and IT. Planning: Develop the plan bringing
together the information on projects, resources, timescales, monitoring and control.[1]
Improvement: Continuously assess performance; research and develop new capabilities; and
systemically apply learning and knowledge to the program.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Why is this important?


Without clearly defined and integrated product,
marketing, and project management, innovation
will be haphazard, chaotic, and un-scaleable
with complexity and growth.


You can’t improve or accelerate what you can’t
understand or control.
• Putting random people on a galley ship won’t ensure you
will get where you want to go or make it go faster.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Research: Most PM’s
not being used effectively


Distracting challenges
Product and
company
strategy
10%

Customers
and market
8%

Internal
process and
organization
28%

Development
process
16%

Prioritization
and Focus
16%

2008-11-11

Time and
resources
22%

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Recommendation:
PM for Strategic Advantage
Focused on inbound tasks
 PM decision-making power






Roadmap, release contents, release
acceptance

Report to CEO/GM

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

New Product Development (NPD)
& Project Life Cycle Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Code & Fix
(AKA Cowboy Coding)

S ys tem
S pe cific atio n
(m a yb e )

2008-11-11

C o de -a nd -F ix

R elea se
(m ay be )

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Traditional NPD Process
Stage-Gate Process
Discovery
QuickTim e™ and a
de co m pres sor
are n eed ed to se e this p ictu re .

Scoping

Business
Case

Stage
1

Stage
2

Development

Test /
Validation

Launch

Stage
3

Stage
4

Stage
5

Gate
1

Gate
2

Gate
3

Gate
4

Gate
5

Idea
Screen

Second
Screen

Go To
Dev

Go To
Test

Go To
Launch

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Review
Qui ckT ime™ and a
deco mpre sso r
are nee ded t o see t his p ict ure.

Traditional Project Management
Waterfall Model
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Risk Reduction
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Subprojects
Pr od u ct
C o n ce pt

R e qu ire m en ts
A n a lysis

D e ta ile d
D e sig n

A rch itec tur a l
D e s ig n

C o din g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S u b sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S ub sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g a nd
D e b u gin g

D e ta ile d
D e s ig n

S ub s yste m
T e sting

C o d in g a nd
D eb u g in g

S yste m
T e sting
S u bs yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Overlapping
Phases (Sashimi)
P rodu ct
C o nc ep t

R equ ire m e nts
A na lysis

A rchite ctura l
D esig n

D etaile d
D e sign

C o din g an d
D e bu ging

S yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Design-to-Schedule
P roduct
C oncept

R equ irem ents
An alysis

Architectural
D esign

H ig h P rio rity: D etailed design , code, d ebug, test

M edium H igh Priority: D etailed desig n, code , debug, te st

R u n ou t of tim e or
m oney h ere

M ed ium P riority: D e tailed design , code, debug , test

M ediu m Low P riority: D etailed design , co de, de bug, test

Low Priority: D etailed design, code , debug , test

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

R elease

Design-to-Tools
F u n ctio n a lity s u p p o rte d b y
th e to o ls

F u n ctio n a lity th a t w ill
n o t b e in th e p ro d u ct

Fu n c tio n a lity th a t w ill b e
b u ilt

Id e a l fu n c tio n a lity

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Iterative Project Management
Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Spiral (Boehm)

R epe at as requ ire d

1. D eter m ine
ob jective s,
alte rnatives,
constraints

2008-11-11

2 . Iden tify and
reso lve risks

3. E va lu ate
a ltern atives

4 . D evelop
ite ration
d elivera ble s a nd
verify co rrect

5 . P la n the ne xt
ite ratio n

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

6.
C om m it to an
a ppro ach for ne xt
ite ratio n

Evolutionary Prototyping
No

In itial
con ce pt

2008-11-11

D esign and
im p lem ent
initia l
proto typ e

R efin e
p ro to typ e

C usto m e r
a ccep tab le ?

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

C om p lete
a nd
relea se

Staged Delivery
(AKA Incremental Implementation)
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

R e q u ire m e nts
A n a ly sis

A rch ite c tu ra l
D e sig n

S ta g e 1 : D e ta ile d d e s ig n , c o d e , d e b u g , te st, d e liv e ry

S ta g e 2 : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e liv e ry

S ta g e n : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e live ry

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Evolutionary Delivery
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

P re lim in a ry
R e q u ire m e n ts
A n a lys is

A rch ite ctu ra l
D e s ig n a n d
S ys te m C o re

D e liv e r F in a l
V e rsio n

D e v e lo p a V e rsio n

In c o rp o ra te
C u s to m e r
F e e d b a ck

D e liv e ry th e
V e rs io n

E licit C u sto m e r
F e e d b a ck

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Project Management
“There is nothing new
under the sun but there
are lots of old things
we don't know.”
Ambrose Bierce

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Principles (2001)













Customer satisfaction by rapid, continuous delivery of useful software
Working software is delivered frequently (weeks rather than months)
Working software is the principal measure of progress
Even late changes in requirements are welcomed
Close, daily cooperation between business people and developers
Face-to-face conversation is the best form of communication (Co-location)
Projects are built around motivated individuals, who should be trusted
Continuous attention to technical excellence and good design
Simplicity
Self-organizing teams
Regular adaptation to changing circumstances

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Characteristics


Time periods in weeks rather than months


time period as a strict timebox.

Work is performed in a highly
collaborative manner.
 If the sponsors of the project are
concerned about completing certain goals
with a defined timeline or budget, agile
may not be appropriate.


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Methodologies (Partial)


Agile Unified Process (AUP)







Simplified IBM Rational Unified Process (RUP)

Extreme programming (XP)
Feature Driven Development (FDD)
Scrum


“Pig” Roles
• Product owner (VOC - Product Manager)
• ScrumMaster (Project Manager)
• Team (Developers)



“Chicken” Roles
• Users
• Stakeholders (customers, vendors)
• Managers

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Adaptive (Agile) vs
Predictive (Plan-driven)
Strengths of each:


Adaptive










Low criticality
Senior developers
Requirements change
very often
Small number of
developers
Culture that thrives on
chaos

2008-11-11

Predictive








High criticality
Junior developers
Requirements don't
change too often
Large number of
developers
Culture that demands
order

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Model Selection Criteria













How well do my customer and we understand the requirements at the beginning of
the project? Is our understanding likely to change significantly as we move through
the project?
How well do we understand the system architecture? Are we likely to need to make
major architectural changes midway through the project?
How much reliable do we need?
How much do we need to plan ahead and design ahead during this project for future
versions?
How much risk does the project entail?
Are we constrained by a predefined schedule?
Do we need to be able to make midcourse corrections?
Do we need to provide customers with visible progress throughout the project?
Do we need to provide management with visible progress throughout the project?
How much sophistication do we need to use this lifecycle model successfully?

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Project Management Models:
Strengths and Weaknesses
M od el C apa city
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
requ ire m en ts
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
arch ite ctu re
Pr od uce s h ig h ly
rel iable sy stem
Pr od uce s sy stem wi th
la rg e g ro wth en v elop
M ana g es ri sk s
Can be c o n strain ed to
p re de te rm in ed
sc h ed u le
Ha s lo w ove rh e ad
A llo w s for m id co ur se
co rre ct ion s
Pr ovid es c u stom ers
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Pr ovid es ma n ag em en t
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Requ ir es little m ana ge r
o r d evelop er
sop h istic atio n

Pure
W ate rfall

C od e-an d F ix

Spi ral

M odi fied
W ate rfall

E vol ut io nar y
Pr o to ty pin g

S tag ed
De liv er y

E vol ut io nar y
De liv er y

De sig n -to sc h ed u le

De sig n to -too ls

C o mme rcial
Of f-th e -sh elf
so ft w are

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

F air

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r to
fai r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

2008-11-11

F air to
exc ellent
F air to
exc ellent

P oo r

N/ A

P oo r to
fai r

N/ A

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air to
exc ellent

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

N/ A

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

N/ A

P oo r

P oo r to
fai r

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Accelerating the NPD Life Cycle
Model
Ideaisation

Go:No-Go

Scoping

Go:No-Go

Planning

Go:No-Go

Development

Go:No-Go

Testing

Go:No-Go

Launch

Go:No-Go

Maintenance
Retirement

Project Lifecycle Framework
 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

EOL

Discussion

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Away
Recommendations
“For which of you,
desiring to build a
tower, doesn't first sit
down and count the
cost, to see if he has
enough to complete it?”
Jesus
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation


Ready-Aim-Fire


Haste makes waste (penny wise, pound foolish)
• Choosing the wrong models will result in unfulfilled
expectations and delays

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Ready


Recognizing the difference between








product management,
marketing, and
project management

Having a well defined NPD process
Not standardizing on only one project model
Having a positive teamwork environment,
inspirational leadership, focused vision, and
necessary skills

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Aim
Ensuring up-front homework done first
 Ensuring the resources(staff) & time to do
it right
 Verifying available resource costs (people
and time)
 Selecting the most appropriate project
model
 Taking the time to do the planning right


Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Fire
Being flexible within parameters
 Regular review of processes and methods
 Regular, frequent review of new ideas
and market information


Fini


Robert Grupe





[email protected]
+1.314.266.7321

Further reading







Forrester “Making Product Management A Strategic
Resource”
Winning at New Products, Robert G Cooper
Rapid Development, Steve McConnell
PDMA Visions magazine, Jun & Sept 2008

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.


Slide 10

7 Management Solutions

Red

Accelerating Innovation
Overview and discussion of NPD
and project management life cycle
models
Robert Grupe
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Introduction
An overview and discussion of integrated
new product development and project life
cycle models for best practice approaches
to successful innovation and accelerated
time to market.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agenda






Clarification of PM Terminology
Strategically Focused PM
NPD vs. Project Management
Models







Waterfall Models
Iterative Models
Agile Approaches

Discussion
Roundup
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Clarification of Terminology
Product Management
 Project Management
 Program Management


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Product Management



Planning and marketing of a product or products at all stages of the
product lifecycle.
Product planning (in-bound marketing)
[Product Manager (PM)]






Defining new products
Gathering market requirements (VoC)
Building product roadmaps
Product Life Cycle considerations
• Stages: introduction, growth, mature, saturation/decline





Competitive differentiation

Product marketing (outbound marketing)
[Product Marketing Manager (PMM)]





Product positioning and outbound messaging
Promotion: press, customers, and partners
Packaging and delivery
Competition messaging monitoring

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Project Management



Project Planning
[Project Manager (PjM)]
Achieve all of the goals of the project charter while
adhering to




Project constraints: scope, time, cost and quality.

Project management life cycle



5 Process Groups: Project Initiation, Project Planning, Project
Execution, Project monitoring and control, and Project closeout.
9 Knowledge Areas: integration management, scope
management, time management, cost management, quality
management, human resource management, communications
management,risk management and procurement management.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology: Program Management
[& Product Portfolio Management]













Layer above project management focusing on selecting the best group of programs [and
products,] defining them in terms of their constituent projects and providing an infrastructure
where projects can be run successfully
Governance: The structure, process, and procedure to control operations and changes to
performance objectives.
Standards: Define the performance architecture.
Alignment: The program must support higher level vision, goals and objectives.
Assurance: Verify and validate the program, ensuring adherence to standards and alignment
with the vision.
Management: Ensure there are regular reviews, there is accountability, and that management of
projects, stakeholders and suppliers is in place.
Integration: Optimize performance across the program value chain, functionally and technically.
Finances: Tracking of finances is an important part of Program management and basic costs
together with wider costs of administering the program are all tracked.
Infrastructure: Allocation of resources influences the cost and success of the program.
Infrastructure might cover offices, version control, and IT. Planning: Develop the plan bringing
together the information on projects, resources, timescales, monitoring and control.[1]
Improvement: Continuously assess performance; research and develop new capabilities; and
systemically apply learning and knowledge to the program.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Why is this important?


Without clearly defined and integrated product,
marketing, and project management, innovation
will be haphazard, chaotic, and un-scaleable
with complexity and growth.


You can’t improve or accelerate what you can’t
understand or control.
• Putting random people on a galley ship won’t ensure you
will get where you want to go or make it go faster.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Research: Most PM’s
not being used effectively


Distracting challenges
Product and
company
strategy
10%

Customers
and market
8%

Internal
process and
organization
28%

Development
process
16%

Prioritization
and Focus
16%

2008-11-11

Time and
resources
22%

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Recommendation:
PM for Strategic Advantage
Focused on inbound tasks
 PM decision-making power






Roadmap, release contents, release
acceptance

Report to CEO/GM

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

New Product Development (NPD)
& Project Life Cycle Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Code & Fix
(AKA Cowboy Coding)

S ys tem
S pe cific atio n
(m a yb e )

2008-11-11

C o de -a nd -F ix

R elea se
(m ay be )

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Traditional NPD Process
Stage-Gate Process
Discovery
QuickTim e™ and a
de co m pres sor
are n eed ed to se e this p ictu re .

Scoping

Business
Case

Stage
1

Stage
2

Development

Test /
Validation

Launch

Stage
3

Stage
4

Stage
5

Gate
1

Gate
2

Gate
3

Gate
4

Gate
5

Idea
Screen

Second
Screen

Go To
Dev

Go To
Test

Go To
Launch

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Review
Qui ckT ime™ and a
deco mpre sso r
are nee ded t o see t his p ict ure.

Traditional Project Management
Waterfall Model
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Risk Reduction
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Subprojects
Pr od u ct
C o n ce pt

R e qu ire m en ts
A n a lysis

D e ta ile d
D e sig n

A rch itec tur a l
D e s ig n

C o din g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S u b sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S ub sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g a nd
D e b u gin g

D e ta ile d
D e s ig n

S ub s yste m
T e sting

C o d in g a nd
D eb u g in g

S yste m
T e sting
S u bs yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Overlapping
Phases (Sashimi)
P rodu ct
C o nc ep t

R equ ire m e nts
A na lysis

A rchite ctura l
D esig n

D etaile d
D e sign

C o din g an d
D e bu ging

S yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Design-to-Schedule
P roduct
C oncept

R equ irem ents
An alysis

Architectural
D esign

H ig h P rio rity: D etailed design , code, d ebug, test

M edium H igh Priority: D etailed desig n, code , debug, te st

R u n ou t of tim e or
m oney h ere

M ed ium P riority: D e tailed design , code, debug , test

M ediu m Low P riority: D etailed design , co de, de bug, test

Low Priority: D etailed design, code , debug , test

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

R elease

Design-to-Tools
F u n ctio n a lity s u p p o rte d b y
th e to o ls

F u n ctio n a lity th a t w ill
n o t b e in th e p ro d u ct

Fu n c tio n a lity th a t w ill b e
b u ilt

Id e a l fu n c tio n a lity

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Iterative Project Management
Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Spiral (Boehm)

R epe at as requ ire d

1. D eter m ine
ob jective s,
alte rnatives,
constraints

2008-11-11

2 . Iden tify and
reso lve risks

3. E va lu ate
a ltern atives

4 . D evelop
ite ration
d elivera ble s a nd
verify co rrect

5 . P la n the ne xt
ite ratio n

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

6.
C om m it to an
a ppro ach for ne xt
ite ratio n

Evolutionary Prototyping
No

In itial
con ce pt

2008-11-11

D esign and
im p lem ent
initia l
proto typ e

R efin e
p ro to typ e

C usto m e r
a ccep tab le ?

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

C om p lete
a nd
relea se

Staged Delivery
(AKA Incremental Implementation)
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

R e q u ire m e nts
A n a ly sis

A rch ite c tu ra l
D e sig n

S ta g e 1 : D e ta ile d d e s ig n , c o d e , d e b u g , te st, d e liv e ry

S ta g e 2 : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e liv e ry

S ta g e n : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e live ry

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Evolutionary Delivery
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

P re lim in a ry
R e q u ire m e n ts
A n a lys is

A rch ite ctu ra l
D e s ig n a n d
S ys te m C o re

D e liv e r F in a l
V e rsio n

D e v e lo p a V e rsio n

In c o rp o ra te
C u s to m e r
F e e d b a ck

D e liv e ry th e
V e rs io n

E licit C u sto m e r
F e e d b a ck

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Project Management
“There is nothing new
under the sun but there
are lots of old things
we don't know.”
Ambrose Bierce

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Principles (2001)













Customer satisfaction by rapid, continuous delivery of useful software
Working software is delivered frequently (weeks rather than months)
Working software is the principal measure of progress
Even late changes in requirements are welcomed
Close, daily cooperation between business people and developers
Face-to-face conversation is the best form of communication (Co-location)
Projects are built around motivated individuals, who should be trusted
Continuous attention to technical excellence and good design
Simplicity
Self-organizing teams
Regular adaptation to changing circumstances

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Characteristics


Time periods in weeks rather than months


time period as a strict timebox.

Work is performed in a highly
collaborative manner.
 If the sponsors of the project are
concerned about completing certain goals
with a defined timeline or budget, agile
may not be appropriate.


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Methodologies (Partial)


Agile Unified Process (AUP)







Simplified IBM Rational Unified Process (RUP)

Extreme programming (XP)
Feature Driven Development (FDD)
Scrum


“Pig” Roles
• Product owner (VOC - Product Manager)
• ScrumMaster (Project Manager)
• Team (Developers)



“Chicken” Roles
• Users
• Stakeholders (customers, vendors)
• Managers

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Adaptive (Agile) vs
Predictive (Plan-driven)
Strengths of each:


Adaptive










Low criticality
Senior developers
Requirements change
very often
Small number of
developers
Culture that thrives on
chaos

2008-11-11

Predictive








High criticality
Junior developers
Requirements don't
change too often
Large number of
developers
Culture that demands
order

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Model Selection Criteria













How well do my customer and we understand the requirements at the beginning of
the project? Is our understanding likely to change significantly as we move through
the project?
How well do we understand the system architecture? Are we likely to need to make
major architectural changes midway through the project?
How much reliable do we need?
How much do we need to plan ahead and design ahead during this project for future
versions?
How much risk does the project entail?
Are we constrained by a predefined schedule?
Do we need to be able to make midcourse corrections?
Do we need to provide customers with visible progress throughout the project?
Do we need to provide management with visible progress throughout the project?
How much sophistication do we need to use this lifecycle model successfully?

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Project Management Models:
Strengths and Weaknesses
M od el C apa city
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
requ ire m en ts
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
arch ite ctu re
Pr od uce s h ig h ly
rel iable sy stem
Pr od uce s sy stem wi th
la rg e g ro wth en v elop
M ana g es ri sk s
Can be c o n strain ed to
p re de te rm in ed
sc h ed u le
Ha s lo w ove rh e ad
A llo w s for m id co ur se
co rre ct ion s
Pr ovid es c u stom ers
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Pr ovid es ma n ag em en t
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Requ ir es little m ana ge r
o r d evelop er
sop h istic atio n

Pure
W ate rfall

C od e-an d F ix

Spi ral

M odi fied
W ate rfall

E vol ut io nar y
Pr o to ty pin g

S tag ed
De liv er y

E vol ut io nar y
De liv er y

De sig n -to sc h ed u le

De sig n to -too ls

C o mme rcial
Of f-th e -sh elf
so ft w are

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

F air

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r to
fai r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

2008-11-11

F air to
exc ellent
F air to
exc ellent

P oo r

N/ A

P oo r to
fai r

N/ A

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air to
exc ellent

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

N/ A

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

N/ A

P oo r

P oo r to
fai r

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Accelerating the NPD Life Cycle
Model
Ideaisation

Go:No-Go

Scoping

Go:No-Go

Planning

Go:No-Go

Development

Go:No-Go

Testing

Go:No-Go

Launch

Go:No-Go

Maintenance
Retirement

Project Lifecycle Framework
 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

EOL

Discussion

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Away
Recommendations
“For which of you,
desiring to build a
tower, doesn't first sit
down and count the
cost, to see if he has
enough to complete it?”
Jesus
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation


Ready-Aim-Fire


Haste makes waste (penny wise, pound foolish)
• Choosing the wrong models will result in unfulfilled
expectations and delays

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Ready


Recognizing the difference between








product management,
marketing, and
project management

Having a well defined NPD process
Not standardizing on only one project model
Having a positive teamwork environment,
inspirational leadership, focused vision, and
necessary skills

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Aim
Ensuring up-front homework done first
 Ensuring the resources(staff) & time to do
it right
 Verifying available resource costs (people
and time)
 Selecting the most appropriate project
model
 Taking the time to do the planning right


Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Fire
Being flexible within parameters
 Regular review of processes and methods
 Regular, frequent review of new ideas
and market information


Fini


Robert Grupe





[email protected]
+1.314.266.7321

Further reading







Forrester “Making Product Management A Strategic
Resource”
Winning at New Products, Robert G Cooper
Rapid Development, Steve McConnell
PDMA Visions magazine, Jun & Sept 2008

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.


Slide 11

7 Management Solutions

Red

Accelerating Innovation
Overview and discussion of NPD
and project management life cycle
models
Robert Grupe
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Introduction
An overview and discussion of integrated
new product development and project life
cycle models for best practice approaches
to successful innovation and accelerated
time to market.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agenda






Clarification of PM Terminology
Strategically Focused PM
NPD vs. Project Management
Models







Waterfall Models
Iterative Models
Agile Approaches

Discussion
Roundup
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Clarification of Terminology
Product Management
 Project Management
 Program Management


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Product Management



Planning and marketing of a product or products at all stages of the
product lifecycle.
Product planning (in-bound marketing)
[Product Manager (PM)]






Defining new products
Gathering market requirements (VoC)
Building product roadmaps
Product Life Cycle considerations
• Stages: introduction, growth, mature, saturation/decline





Competitive differentiation

Product marketing (outbound marketing)
[Product Marketing Manager (PMM)]





Product positioning and outbound messaging
Promotion: press, customers, and partners
Packaging and delivery
Competition messaging monitoring

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Project Management



Project Planning
[Project Manager (PjM)]
Achieve all of the goals of the project charter while
adhering to




Project constraints: scope, time, cost and quality.

Project management life cycle



5 Process Groups: Project Initiation, Project Planning, Project
Execution, Project monitoring and control, and Project closeout.
9 Knowledge Areas: integration management, scope
management, time management, cost management, quality
management, human resource management, communications
management,risk management and procurement management.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology: Program Management
[& Product Portfolio Management]













Layer above project management focusing on selecting the best group of programs [and
products,] defining them in terms of their constituent projects and providing an infrastructure
where projects can be run successfully
Governance: The structure, process, and procedure to control operations and changes to
performance objectives.
Standards: Define the performance architecture.
Alignment: The program must support higher level vision, goals and objectives.
Assurance: Verify and validate the program, ensuring adherence to standards and alignment
with the vision.
Management: Ensure there are regular reviews, there is accountability, and that management of
projects, stakeholders and suppliers is in place.
Integration: Optimize performance across the program value chain, functionally and technically.
Finances: Tracking of finances is an important part of Program management and basic costs
together with wider costs of administering the program are all tracked.
Infrastructure: Allocation of resources influences the cost and success of the program.
Infrastructure might cover offices, version control, and IT. Planning: Develop the plan bringing
together the information on projects, resources, timescales, monitoring and control.[1]
Improvement: Continuously assess performance; research and develop new capabilities; and
systemically apply learning and knowledge to the program.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Why is this important?


Without clearly defined and integrated product,
marketing, and project management, innovation
will be haphazard, chaotic, and un-scaleable
with complexity and growth.


You can’t improve or accelerate what you can’t
understand or control.
• Putting random people on a galley ship won’t ensure you
will get where you want to go or make it go faster.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Research: Most PM’s
not being used effectively


Distracting challenges
Product and
company
strategy
10%

Customers
and market
8%

Internal
process and
organization
28%

Development
process
16%

Prioritization
and Focus
16%

2008-11-11

Time and
resources
22%

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Recommendation:
PM for Strategic Advantage
Focused on inbound tasks
 PM decision-making power






Roadmap, release contents, release
acceptance

Report to CEO/GM

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

New Product Development (NPD)
& Project Life Cycle Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Code & Fix
(AKA Cowboy Coding)

S ys tem
S pe cific atio n
(m a yb e )

2008-11-11

C o de -a nd -F ix

R elea se
(m ay be )

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Traditional NPD Process
Stage-Gate Process
Discovery
QuickTim e™ and a
de co m pres sor
are n eed ed to se e this p ictu re .

Scoping

Business
Case

Stage
1

Stage
2

Development

Test /
Validation

Launch

Stage
3

Stage
4

Stage
5

Gate
1

Gate
2

Gate
3

Gate
4

Gate
5

Idea
Screen

Second
Screen

Go To
Dev

Go To
Test

Go To
Launch

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Review
Qui ckT ime™ and a
deco mpre sso r
are nee ded t o see t his p ict ure.

Traditional Project Management
Waterfall Model
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Risk Reduction
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Subprojects
Pr od u ct
C o n ce pt

R e qu ire m en ts
A n a lysis

D e ta ile d
D e sig n

A rch itec tur a l
D e s ig n

C o din g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S u b sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S ub sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g a nd
D e b u gin g

D e ta ile d
D e s ig n

S ub s yste m
T e sting

C o d in g a nd
D eb u g in g

S yste m
T e sting
S u bs yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Overlapping
Phases (Sashimi)
P rodu ct
C o nc ep t

R equ ire m e nts
A na lysis

A rchite ctura l
D esig n

D etaile d
D e sign

C o din g an d
D e bu ging

S yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Design-to-Schedule
P roduct
C oncept

R equ irem ents
An alysis

Architectural
D esign

H ig h P rio rity: D etailed design , code, d ebug, test

M edium H igh Priority: D etailed desig n, code , debug, te st

R u n ou t of tim e or
m oney h ere

M ed ium P riority: D e tailed design , code, debug , test

M ediu m Low P riority: D etailed design , co de, de bug, test

Low Priority: D etailed design, code , debug , test

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

R elease

Design-to-Tools
F u n ctio n a lity s u p p o rte d b y
th e to o ls

F u n ctio n a lity th a t w ill
n o t b e in th e p ro d u ct

Fu n c tio n a lity th a t w ill b e
b u ilt

Id e a l fu n c tio n a lity

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Iterative Project Management
Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Spiral (Boehm)

R epe at as requ ire d

1. D eter m ine
ob jective s,
alte rnatives,
constraints

2008-11-11

2 . Iden tify and
reso lve risks

3. E va lu ate
a ltern atives

4 . D evelop
ite ration
d elivera ble s a nd
verify co rrect

5 . P la n the ne xt
ite ratio n

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

6.
C om m it to an
a ppro ach for ne xt
ite ratio n

Evolutionary Prototyping
No

In itial
con ce pt

2008-11-11

D esign and
im p lem ent
initia l
proto typ e

R efin e
p ro to typ e

C usto m e r
a ccep tab le ?

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

C om p lete
a nd
relea se

Staged Delivery
(AKA Incremental Implementation)
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

R e q u ire m e nts
A n a ly sis

A rch ite c tu ra l
D e sig n

S ta g e 1 : D e ta ile d d e s ig n , c o d e , d e b u g , te st, d e liv e ry

S ta g e 2 : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e liv e ry

S ta g e n : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e live ry

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Evolutionary Delivery
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

P re lim in a ry
R e q u ire m e n ts
A n a lys is

A rch ite ctu ra l
D e s ig n a n d
S ys te m C o re

D e liv e r F in a l
V e rsio n

D e v e lo p a V e rsio n

In c o rp o ra te
C u s to m e r
F e e d b a ck

D e liv e ry th e
V e rs io n

E licit C u sto m e r
F e e d b a ck

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Project Management
“There is nothing new
under the sun but there
are lots of old things
we don't know.”
Ambrose Bierce

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Principles (2001)













Customer satisfaction by rapid, continuous delivery of useful software
Working software is delivered frequently (weeks rather than months)
Working software is the principal measure of progress
Even late changes in requirements are welcomed
Close, daily cooperation between business people and developers
Face-to-face conversation is the best form of communication (Co-location)
Projects are built around motivated individuals, who should be trusted
Continuous attention to technical excellence and good design
Simplicity
Self-organizing teams
Regular adaptation to changing circumstances

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Characteristics


Time periods in weeks rather than months


time period as a strict timebox.

Work is performed in a highly
collaborative manner.
 If the sponsors of the project are
concerned about completing certain goals
with a defined timeline or budget, agile
may not be appropriate.


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Methodologies (Partial)


Agile Unified Process (AUP)







Simplified IBM Rational Unified Process (RUP)

Extreme programming (XP)
Feature Driven Development (FDD)
Scrum


“Pig” Roles
• Product owner (VOC - Product Manager)
• ScrumMaster (Project Manager)
• Team (Developers)



“Chicken” Roles
• Users
• Stakeholders (customers, vendors)
• Managers

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Adaptive (Agile) vs
Predictive (Plan-driven)
Strengths of each:


Adaptive










Low criticality
Senior developers
Requirements change
very often
Small number of
developers
Culture that thrives on
chaos

2008-11-11

Predictive








High criticality
Junior developers
Requirements don't
change too often
Large number of
developers
Culture that demands
order

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Model Selection Criteria













How well do my customer and we understand the requirements at the beginning of
the project? Is our understanding likely to change significantly as we move through
the project?
How well do we understand the system architecture? Are we likely to need to make
major architectural changes midway through the project?
How much reliable do we need?
How much do we need to plan ahead and design ahead during this project for future
versions?
How much risk does the project entail?
Are we constrained by a predefined schedule?
Do we need to be able to make midcourse corrections?
Do we need to provide customers with visible progress throughout the project?
Do we need to provide management with visible progress throughout the project?
How much sophistication do we need to use this lifecycle model successfully?

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Project Management Models:
Strengths and Weaknesses
M od el C apa city
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
requ ire m en ts
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
arch ite ctu re
Pr od uce s h ig h ly
rel iable sy stem
Pr od uce s sy stem wi th
la rg e g ro wth en v elop
M ana g es ri sk s
Can be c o n strain ed to
p re de te rm in ed
sc h ed u le
Ha s lo w ove rh e ad
A llo w s for m id co ur se
co rre ct ion s
Pr ovid es c u stom ers
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Pr ovid es ma n ag em en t
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Requ ir es little m ana ge r
o r d evelop er
sop h istic atio n

Pure
W ate rfall

C od e-an d F ix

Spi ral

M odi fied
W ate rfall

E vol ut io nar y
Pr o to ty pin g

S tag ed
De liv er y

E vol ut io nar y
De liv er y

De sig n -to sc h ed u le

De sig n to -too ls

C o mme rcial
Of f-th e -sh elf
so ft w are

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

F air

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r to
fai r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

2008-11-11

F air to
exc ellent
F air to
exc ellent

P oo r

N/ A

P oo r to
fai r

N/ A

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air to
exc ellent

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

N/ A

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

N/ A

P oo r

P oo r to
fai r

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Accelerating the NPD Life Cycle
Model
Ideaisation

Go:No-Go

Scoping

Go:No-Go

Planning

Go:No-Go

Development

Go:No-Go

Testing

Go:No-Go

Launch

Go:No-Go

Maintenance
Retirement

Project Lifecycle Framework
 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

EOL

Discussion

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Away
Recommendations
“For which of you,
desiring to build a
tower, doesn't first sit
down and count the
cost, to see if he has
enough to complete it?”
Jesus
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation


Ready-Aim-Fire


Haste makes waste (penny wise, pound foolish)
• Choosing the wrong models will result in unfulfilled
expectations and delays

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Ready


Recognizing the difference between








product management,
marketing, and
project management

Having a well defined NPD process
Not standardizing on only one project model
Having a positive teamwork environment,
inspirational leadership, focused vision, and
necessary skills

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Aim
Ensuring up-front homework done first
 Ensuring the resources(staff) & time to do
it right
 Verifying available resource costs (people
and time)
 Selecting the most appropriate project
model
 Taking the time to do the planning right


Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Fire
Being flexible within parameters
 Regular review of processes and methods
 Regular, frequent review of new ideas
and market information


Fini


Robert Grupe





[email protected]
+1.314.266.7321

Further reading







Forrester “Making Product Management A Strategic
Resource”
Winning at New Products, Robert G Cooper
Rapid Development, Steve McConnell
PDMA Visions magazine, Jun & Sept 2008

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.


Slide 12

7 Management Solutions

Red

Accelerating Innovation
Overview and discussion of NPD
and project management life cycle
models
Robert Grupe
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Introduction
An overview and discussion of integrated
new product development and project life
cycle models for best practice approaches
to successful innovation and accelerated
time to market.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agenda






Clarification of PM Terminology
Strategically Focused PM
NPD vs. Project Management
Models







Waterfall Models
Iterative Models
Agile Approaches

Discussion
Roundup
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Clarification of Terminology
Product Management
 Project Management
 Program Management


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Product Management



Planning and marketing of a product or products at all stages of the
product lifecycle.
Product planning (in-bound marketing)
[Product Manager (PM)]






Defining new products
Gathering market requirements (VoC)
Building product roadmaps
Product Life Cycle considerations
• Stages: introduction, growth, mature, saturation/decline





Competitive differentiation

Product marketing (outbound marketing)
[Product Marketing Manager (PMM)]





Product positioning and outbound messaging
Promotion: press, customers, and partners
Packaging and delivery
Competition messaging monitoring

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Project Management



Project Planning
[Project Manager (PjM)]
Achieve all of the goals of the project charter while
adhering to




Project constraints: scope, time, cost and quality.

Project management life cycle



5 Process Groups: Project Initiation, Project Planning, Project
Execution, Project monitoring and control, and Project closeout.
9 Knowledge Areas: integration management, scope
management, time management, cost management, quality
management, human resource management, communications
management,risk management and procurement management.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology: Program Management
[& Product Portfolio Management]













Layer above project management focusing on selecting the best group of programs [and
products,] defining them in terms of their constituent projects and providing an infrastructure
where projects can be run successfully
Governance: The structure, process, and procedure to control operations and changes to
performance objectives.
Standards: Define the performance architecture.
Alignment: The program must support higher level vision, goals and objectives.
Assurance: Verify and validate the program, ensuring adherence to standards and alignment
with the vision.
Management: Ensure there are regular reviews, there is accountability, and that management of
projects, stakeholders and suppliers is in place.
Integration: Optimize performance across the program value chain, functionally and technically.
Finances: Tracking of finances is an important part of Program management and basic costs
together with wider costs of administering the program are all tracked.
Infrastructure: Allocation of resources influences the cost and success of the program.
Infrastructure might cover offices, version control, and IT. Planning: Develop the plan bringing
together the information on projects, resources, timescales, monitoring and control.[1]
Improvement: Continuously assess performance; research and develop new capabilities; and
systemically apply learning and knowledge to the program.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Why is this important?


Without clearly defined and integrated product,
marketing, and project management, innovation
will be haphazard, chaotic, and un-scaleable
with complexity and growth.


You can’t improve or accelerate what you can’t
understand or control.
• Putting random people on a galley ship won’t ensure you
will get where you want to go or make it go faster.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Research: Most PM’s
not being used effectively


Distracting challenges
Product and
company
strategy
10%

Customers
and market
8%

Internal
process and
organization
28%

Development
process
16%

Prioritization
and Focus
16%

2008-11-11

Time and
resources
22%

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Recommendation:
PM for Strategic Advantage
Focused on inbound tasks
 PM decision-making power






Roadmap, release contents, release
acceptance

Report to CEO/GM

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

New Product Development (NPD)
& Project Life Cycle Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Code & Fix
(AKA Cowboy Coding)

S ys tem
S pe cific atio n
(m a yb e )

2008-11-11

C o de -a nd -F ix

R elea se
(m ay be )

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Traditional NPD Process
Stage-Gate Process
Discovery
QuickTim e™ and a
de co m pres sor
are n eed ed to se e this p ictu re .

Scoping

Business
Case

Stage
1

Stage
2

Development

Test /
Validation

Launch

Stage
3

Stage
4

Stage
5

Gate
1

Gate
2

Gate
3

Gate
4

Gate
5

Idea
Screen

Second
Screen

Go To
Dev

Go To
Test

Go To
Launch

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Review
Qui ckT ime™ and a
deco mpre sso r
are nee ded t o see t his p ict ure.

Traditional Project Management
Waterfall Model
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Risk Reduction
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Subprojects
Pr od u ct
C o n ce pt

R e qu ire m en ts
A n a lysis

D e ta ile d
D e sig n

A rch itec tur a l
D e s ig n

C o din g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S u b sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S ub sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g a nd
D e b u gin g

D e ta ile d
D e s ig n

S ub s yste m
T e sting

C o d in g a nd
D eb u g in g

S yste m
T e sting
S u bs yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Overlapping
Phases (Sashimi)
P rodu ct
C o nc ep t

R equ ire m e nts
A na lysis

A rchite ctura l
D esig n

D etaile d
D e sign

C o din g an d
D e bu ging

S yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Design-to-Schedule
P roduct
C oncept

R equ irem ents
An alysis

Architectural
D esign

H ig h P rio rity: D etailed design , code, d ebug, test

M edium H igh Priority: D etailed desig n, code , debug, te st

R u n ou t of tim e or
m oney h ere

M ed ium P riority: D e tailed design , code, debug , test

M ediu m Low P riority: D etailed design , co de, de bug, test

Low Priority: D etailed design, code , debug , test

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

R elease

Design-to-Tools
F u n ctio n a lity s u p p o rte d b y
th e to o ls

F u n ctio n a lity th a t w ill
n o t b e in th e p ro d u ct

Fu n c tio n a lity th a t w ill b e
b u ilt

Id e a l fu n c tio n a lity

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Iterative Project Management
Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Spiral (Boehm)

R epe at as requ ire d

1. D eter m ine
ob jective s,
alte rnatives,
constraints

2008-11-11

2 . Iden tify and
reso lve risks

3. E va lu ate
a ltern atives

4 . D evelop
ite ration
d elivera ble s a nd
verify co rrect

5 . P la n the ne xt
ite ratio n

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

6.
C om m it to an
a ppro ach for ne xt
ite ratio n

Evolutionary Prototyping
No

In itial
con ce pt

2008-11-11

D esign and
im p lem ent
initia l
proto typ e

R efin e
p ro to typ e

C usto m e r
a ccep tab le ?

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

C om p lete
a nd
relea se

Staged Delivery
(AKA Incremental Implementation)
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

R e q u ire m e nts
A n a ly sis

A rch ite c tu ra l
D e sig n

S ta g e 1 : D e ta ile d d e s ig n , c o d e , d e b u g , te st, d e liv e ry

S ta g e 2 : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e liv e ry

S ta g e n : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e live ry

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Evolutionary Delivery
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

P re lim in a ry
R e q u ire m e n ts
A n a lys is

A rch ite ctu ra l
D e s ig n a n d
S ys te m C o re

D e liv e r F in a l
V e rsio n

D e v e lo p a V e rsio n

In c o rp o ra te
C u s to m e r
F e e d b a ck

D e liv e ry th e
V e rs io n

E licit C u sto m e r
F e e d b a ck

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Project Management
“There is nothing new
under the sun but there
are lots of old things
we don't know.”
Ambrose Bierce

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Principles (2001)













Customer satisfaction by rapid, continuous delivery of useful software
Working software is delivered frequently (weeks rather than months)
Working software is the principal measure of progress
Even late changes in requirements are welcomed
Close, daily cooperation between business people and developers
Face-to-face conversation is the best form of communication (Co-location)
Projects are built around motivated individuals, who should be trusted
Continuous attention to technical excellence and good design
Simplicity
Self-organizing teams
Regular adaptation to changing circumstances

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Characteristics


Time periods in weeks rather than months


time period as a strict timebox.

Work is performed in a highly
collaborative manner.
 If the sponsors of the project are
concerned about completing certain goals
with a defined timeline or budget, agile
may not be appropriate.


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Methodologies (Partial)


Agile Unified Process (AUP)







Simplified IBM Rational Unified Process (RUP)

Extreme programming (XP)
Feature Driven Development (FDD)
Scrum


“Pig” Roles
• Product owner (VOC - Product Manager)
• ScrumMaster (Project Manager)
• Team (Developers)



“Chicken” Roles
• Users
• Stakeholders (customers, vendors)
• Managers

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Adaptive (Agile) vs
Predictive (Plan-driven)
Strengths of each:


Adaptive










Low criticality
Senior developers
Requirements change
very often
Small number of
developers
Culture that thrives on
chaos

2008-11-11

Predictive








High criticality
Junior developers
Requirements don't
change too often
Large number of
developers
Culture that demands
order

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Model Selection Criteria













How well do my customer and we understand the requirements at the beginning of
the project? Is our understanding likely to change significantly as we move through
the project?
How well do we understand the system architecture? Are we likely to need to make
major architectural changes midway through the project?
How much reliable do we need?
How much do we need to plan ahead and design ahead during this project for future
versions?
How much risk does the project entail?
Are we constrained by a predefined schedule?
Do we need to be able to make midcourse corrections?
Do we need to provide customers with visible progress throughout the project?
Do we need to provide management with visible progress throughout the project?
How much sophistication do we need to use this lifecycle model successfully?

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Project Management Models:
Strengths and Weaknesses
M od el C apa city
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
requ ire m en ts
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
arch ite ctu re
Pr od uce s h ig h ly
rel iable sy stem
Pr od uce s sy stem wi th
la rg e g ro wth en v elop
M ana g es ri sk s
Can be c o n strain ed to
p re de te rm in ed
sc h ed u le
Ha s lo w ove rh e ad
A llo w s for m id co ur se
co rre ct ion s
Pr ovid es c u stom ers
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Pr ovid es ma n ag em en t
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Requ ir es little m ana ge r
o r d evelop er
sop h istic atio n

Pure
W ate rfall

C od e-an d F ix

Spi ral

M odi fied
W ate rfall

E vol ut io nar y
Pr o to ty pin g

S tag ed
De liv er y

E vol ut io nar y
De liv er y

De sig n -to sc h ed u le

De sig n to -too ls

C o mme rcial
Of f-th e -sh elf
so ft w are

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

F air

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r to
fai r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

2008-11-11

F air to
exc ellent
F air to
exc ellent

P oo r

N/ A

P oo r to
fai r

N/ A

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air to
exc ellent

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

N/ A

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

N/ A

P oo r

P oo r to
fai r

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Accelerating the NPD Life Cycle
Model
Ideaisation

Go:No-Go

Scoping

Go:No-Go

Planning

Go:No-Go

Development

Go:No-Go

Testing

Go:No-Go

Launch

Go:No-Go

Maintenance
Retirement

Project Lifecycle Framework
 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

EOL

Discussion

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Away
Recommendations
“For which of you,
desiring to build a
tower, doesn't first sit
down and count the
cost, to see if he has
enough to complete it?”
Jesus
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation


Ready-Aim-Fire


Haste makes waste (penny wise, pound foolish)
• Choosing the wrong models will result in unfulfilled
expectations and delays

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Ready


Recognizing the difference between








product management,
marketing, and
project management

Having a well defined NPD process
Not standardizing on only one project model
Having a positive teamwork environment,
inspirational leadership, focused vision, and
necessary skills

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Aim
Ensuring up-front homework done first
 Ensuring the resources(staff) & time to do
it right
 Verifying available resource costs (people
and time)
 Selecting the most appropriate project
model
 Taking the time to do the planning right


Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Fire
Being flexible within parameters
 Regular review of processes and methods
 Regular, frequent review of new ideas
and market information


Fini


Robert Grupe





[email protected]
+1.314.266.7321

Further reading







Forrester “Making Product Management A Strategic
Resource”
Winning at New Products, Robert G Cooper
Rapid Development, Steve McConnell
PDMA Visions magazine, Jun & Sept 2008

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.


Slide 13

7 Management Solutions

Red

Accelerating Innovation
Overview and discussion of NPD
and project management life cycle
models
Robert Grupe
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Introduction
An overview and discussion of integrated
new product development and project life
cycle models for best practice approaches
to successful innovation and accelerated
time to market.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agenda






Clarification of PM Terminology
Strategically Focused PM
NPD vs. Project Management
Models







Waterfall Models
Iterative Models
Agile Approaches

Discussion
Roundup
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Clarification of Terminology
Product Management
 Project Management
 Program Management


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Product Management



Planning and marketing of a product or products at all stages of the
product lifecycle.
Product planning (in-bound marketing)
[Product Manager (PM)]






Defining new products
Gathering market requirements (VoC)
Building product roadmaps
Product Life Cycle considerations
• Stages: introduction, growth, mature, saturation/decline





Competitive differentiation

Product marketing (outbound marketing)
[Product Marketing Manager (PMM)]





Product positioning and outbound messaging
Promotion: press, customers, and partners
Packaging and delivery
Competition messaging monitoring

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Project Management



Project Planning
[Project Manager (PjM)]
Achieve all of the goals of the project charter while
adhering to




Project constraints: scope, time, cost and quality.

Project management life cycle



5 Process Groups: Project Initiation, Project Planning, Project
Execution, Project monitoring and control, and Project closeout.
9 Knowledge Areas: integration management, scope
management, time management, cost management, quality
management, human resource management, communications
management,risk management and procurement management.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology: Program Management
[& Product Portfolio Management]













Layer above project management focusing on selecting the best group of programs [and
products,] defining them in terms of their constituent projects and providing an infrastructure
where projects can be run successfully
Governance: The structure, process, and procedure to control operations and changes to
performance objectives.
Standards: Define the performance architecture.
Alignment: The program must support higher level vision, goals and objectives.
Assurance: Verify and validate the program, ensuring adherence to standards and alignment
with the vision.
Management: Ensure there are regular reviews, there is accountability, and that management of
projects, stakeholders and suppliers is in place.
Integration: Optimize performance across the program value chain, functionally and technically.
Finances: Tracking of finances is an important part of Program management and basic costs
together with wider costs of administering the program are all tracked.
Infrastructure: Allocation of resources influences the cost and success of the program.
Infrastructure might cover offices, version control, and IT. Planning: Develop the plan bringing
together the information on projects, resources, timescales, monitoring and control.[1]
Improvement: Continuously assess performance; research and develop new capabilities; and
systemically apply learning and knowledge to the program.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Why is this important?


Without clearly defined and integrated product,
marketing, and project management, innovation
will be haphazard, chaotic, and un-scaleable
with complexity and growth.


You can’t improve or accelerate what you can’t
understand or control.
• Putting random people on a galley ship won’t ensure you
will get where you want to go or make it go faster.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Research: Most PM’s
not being used effectively


Distracting challenges
Product and
company
strategy
10%

Customers
and market
8%

Internal
process and
organization
28%

Development
process
16%

Prioritization
and Focus
16%

2008-11-11

Time and
resources
22%

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Recommendation:
PM for Strategic Advantage
Focused on inbound tasks
 PM decision-making power






Roadmap, release contents, release
acceptance

Report to CEO/GM

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

New Product Development (NPD)
& Project Life Cycle Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Code & Fix
(AKA Cowboy Coding)

S ys tem
S pe cific atio n
(m a yb e )

2008-11-11

C o de -a nd -F ix

R elea se
(m ay be )

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Traditional NPD Process
Stage-Gate Process
Discovery
QuickTim e™ and a
de co m pres sor
are n eed ed to se e this p ictu re .

Scoping

Business
Case

Stage
1

Stage
2

Development

Test /
Validation

Launch

Stage
3

Stage
4

Stage
5

Gate
1

Gate
2

Gate
3

Gate
4

Gate
5

Idea
Screen

Second
Screen

Go To
Dev

Go To
Test

Go To
Launch

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Review
Qui ckT ime™ and a
deco mpre sso r
are nee ded t o see t his p ict ure.

Traditional Project Management
Waterfall Model
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Risk Reduction
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Subprojects
Pr od u ct
C o n ce pt

R e qu ire m en ts
A n a lysis

D e ta ile d
D e sig n

A rch itec tur a l
D e s ig n

C o din g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S u b sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S ub sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g a nd
D e b u gin g

D e ta ile d
D e s ig n

S ub s yste m
T e sting

C o d in g a nd
D eb u g in g

S yste m
T e sting
S u bs yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Overlapping
Phases (Sashimi)
P rodu ct
C o nc ep t

R equ ire m e nts
A na lysis

A rchite ctura l
D esig n

D etaile d
D e sign

C o din g an d
D e bu ging

S yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Design-to-Schedule
P roduct
C oncept

R equ irem ents
An alysis

Architectural
D esign

H ig h P rio rity: D etailed design , code, d ebug, test

M edium H igh Priority: D etailed desig n, code , debug, te st

R u n ou t of tim e or
m oney h ere

M ed ium P riority: D e tailed design , code, debug , test

M ediu m Low P riority: D etailed design , co de, de bug, test

Low Priority: D etailed design, code , debug , test

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

R elease

Design-to-Tools
F u n ctio n a lity s u p p o rte d b y
th e to o ls

F u n ctio n a lity th a t w ill
n o t b e in th e p ro d u ct

Fu n c tio n a lity th a t w ill b e
b u ilt

Id e a l fu n c tio n a lity

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Iterative Project Management
Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Spiral (Boehm)

R epe at as requ ire d

1. D eter m ine
ob jective s,
alte rnatives,
constraints

2008-11-11

2 . Iden tify and
reso lve risks

3. E va lu ate
a ltern atives

4 . D evelop
ite ration
d elivera ble s a nd
verify co rrect

5 . P la n the ne xt
ite ratio n

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

6.
C om m it to an
a ppro ach for ne xt
ite ratio n

Evolutionary Prototyping
No

In itial
con ce pt

2008-11-11

D esign and
im p lem ent
initia l
proto typ e

R efin e
p ro to typ e

C usto m e r
a ccep tab le ?

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

C om p lete
a nd
relea se

Staged Delivery
(AKA Incremental Implementation)
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

R e q u ire m e nts
A n a ly sis

A rch ite c tu ra l
D e sig n

S ta g e 1 : D e ta ile d d e s ig n , c o d e , d e b u g , te st, d e liv e ry

S ta g e 2 : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e liv e ry

S ta g e n : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e live ry

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Evolutionary Delivery
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

P re lim in a ry
R e q u ire m e n ts
A n a lys is

A rch ite ctu ra l
D e s ig n a n d
S ys te m C o re

D e liv e r F in a l
V e rsio n

D e v e lo p a V e rsio n

In c o rp o ra te
C u s to m e r
F e e d b a ck

D e liv e ry th e
V e rs io n

E licit C u sto m e r
F e e d b a ck

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Project Management
“There is nothing new
under the sun but there
are lots of old things
we don't know.”
Ambrose Bierce

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Principles (2001)













Customer satisfaction by rapid, continuous delivery of useful software
Working software is delivered frequently (weeks rather than months)
Working software is the principal measure of progress
Even late changes in requirements are welcomed
Close, daily cooperation between business people and developers
Face-to-face conversation is the best form of communication (Co-location)
Projects are built around motivated individuals, who should be trusted
Continuous attention to technical excellence and good design
Simplicity
Self-organizing teams
Regular adaptation to changing circumstances

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Characteristics


Time periods in weeks rather than months


time period as a strict timebox.

Work is performed in a highly
collaborative manner.
 If the sponsors of the project are
concerned about completing certain goals
with a defined timeline or budget, agile
may not be appropriate.


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Methodologies (Partial)


Agile Unified Process (AUP)







Simplified IBM Rational Unified Process (RUP)

Extreme programming (XP)
Feature Driven Development (FDD)
Scrum


“Pig” Roles
• Product owner (VOC - Product Manager)
• ScrumMaster (Project Manager)
• Team (Developers)



“Chicken” Roles
• Users
• Stakeholders (customers, vendors)
• Managers

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Adaptive (Agile) vs
Predictive (Plan-driven)
Strengths of each:


Adaptive










Low criticality
Senior developers
Requirements change
very often
Small number of
developers
Culture that thrives on
chaos

2008-11-11

Predictive








High criticality
Junior developers
Requirements don't
change too often
Large number of
developers
Culture that demands
order

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Model Selection Criteria













How well do my customer and we understand the requirements at the beginning of
the project? Is our understanding likely to change significantly as we move through
the project?
How well do we understand the system architecture? Are we likely to need to make
major architectural changes midway through the project?
How much reliable do we need?
How much do we need to plan ahead and design ahead during this project for future
versions?
How much risk does the project entail?
Are we constrained by a predefined schedule?
Do we need to be able to make midcourse corrections?
Do we need to provide customers with visible progress throughout the project?
Do we need to provide management with visible progress throughout the project?
How much sophistication do we need to use this lifecycle model successfully?

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Project Management Models:
Strengths and Weaknesses
M od el C apa city
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
requ ire m en ts
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
arch ite ctu re
Pr od uce s h ig h ly
rel iable sy stem
Pr od uce s sy stem wi th
la rg e g ro wth en v elop
M ana g es ri sk s
Can be c o n strain ed to
p re de te rm in ed
sc h ed u le
Ha s lo w ove rh e ad
A llo w s for m id co ur se
co rre ct ion s
Pr ovid es c u stom ers
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Pr ovid es ma n ag em en t
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Requ ir es little m ana ge r
o r d evelop er
sop h istic atio n

Pure
W ate rfall

C od e-an d F ix

Spi ral

M odi fied
W ate rfall

E vol ut io nar y
Pr o to ty pin g

S tag ed
De liv er y

E vol ut io nar y
De liv er y

De sig n -to sc h ed u le

De sig n to -too ls

C o mme rcial
Of f-th e -sh elf
so ft w are

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

F air

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r to
fai r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

2008-11-11

F air to
exc ellent
F air to
exc ellent

P oo r

N/ A

P oo r to
fai r

N/ A

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air to
exc ellent

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

N/ A

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

N/ A

P oo r

P oo r to
fai r

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Accelerating the NPD Life Cycle
Model
Ideaisation

Go:No-Go

Scoping

Go:No-Go

Planning

Go:No-Go

Development

Go:No-Go

Testing

Go:No-Go

Launch

Go:No-Go

Maintenance
Retirement

Project Lifecycle Framework
 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

EOL

Discussion

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Away
Recommendations
“For which of you,
desiring to build a
tower, doesn't first sit
down and count the
cost, to see if he has
enough to complete it?”
Jesus
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation


Ready-Aim-Fire


Haste makes waste (penny wise, pound foolish)
• Choosing the wrong models will result in unfulfilled
expectations and delays

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Ready


Recognizing the difference between








product management,
marketing, and
project management

Having a well defined NPD process
Not standardizing on only one project model
Having a positive teamwork environment,
inspirational leadership, focused vision, and
necessary skills

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Aim
Ensuring up-front homework done first
 Ensuring the resources(staff) & time to do
it right
 Verifying available resource costs (people
and time)
 Selecting the most appropriate project
model
 Taking the time to do the planning right


Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Fire
Being flexible within parameters
 Regular review of processes and methods
 Regular, frequent review of new ideas
and market information


Fini


Robert Grupe





[email protected]
+1.314.266.7321

Further reading







Forrester “Making Product Management A Strategic
Resource”
Winning at New Products, Robert G Cooper
Rapid Development, Steve McConnell
PDMA Visions magazine, Jun & Sept 2008

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.


Slide 14

7 Management Solutions

Red

Accelerating Innovation
Overview and discussion of NPD
and project management life cycle
models
Robert Grupe
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Introduction
An overview and discussion of integrated
new product development and project life
cycle models for best practice approaches
to successful innovation and accelerated
time to market.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agenda






Clarification of PM Terminology
Strategically Focused PM
NPD vs. Project Management
Models







Waterfall Models
Iterative Models
Agile Approaches

Discussion
Roundup
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Clarification of Terminology
Product Management
 Project Management
 Program Management


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Product Management



Planning and marketing of a product or products at all stages of the
product lifecycle.
Product planning (in-bound marketing)
[Product Manager (PM)]






Defining new products
Gathering market requirements (VoC)
Building product roadmaps
Product Life Cycle considerations
• Stages: introduction, growth, mature, saturation/decline





Competitive differentiation

Product marketing (outbound marketing)
[Product Marketing Manager (PMM)]





Product positioning and outbound messaging
Promotion: press, customers, and partners
Packaging and delivery
Competition messaging monitoring

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Project Management



Project Planning
[Project Manager (PjM)]
Achieve all of the goals of the project charter while
adhering to




Project constraints: scope, time, cost and quality.

Project management life cycle



5 Process Groups: Project Initiation, Project Planning, Project
Execution, Project monitoring and control, and Project closeout.
9 Knowledge Areas: integration management, scope
management, time management, cost management, quality
management, human resource management, communications
management,risk management and procurement management.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology: Program Management
[& Product Portfolio Management]













Layer above project management focusing on selecting the best group of programs [and
products,] defining them in terms of their constituent projects and providing an infrastructure
where projects can be run successfully
Governance: The structure, process, and procedure to control operations and changes to
performance objectives.
Standards: Define the performance architecture.
Alignment: The program must support higher level vision, goals and objectives.
Assurance: Verify and validate the program, ensuring adherence to standards and alignment
with the vision.
Management: Ensure there are regular reviews, there is accountability, and that management of
projects, stakeholders and suppliers is in place.
Integration: Optimize performance across the program value chain, functionally and technically.
Finances: Tracking of finances is an important part of Program management and basic costs
together with wider costs of administering the program are all tracked.
Infrastructure: Allocation of resources influences the cost and success of the program.
Infrastructure might cover offices, version control, and IT. Planning: Develop the plan bringing
together the information on projects, resources, timescales, monitoring and control.[1]
Improvement: Continuously assess performance; research and develop new capabilities; and
systemically apply learning and knowledge to the program.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Why is this important?


Without clearly defined and integrated product,
marketing, and project management, innovation
will be haphazard, chaotic, and un-scaleable
with complexity and growth.


You can’t improve or accelerate what you can’t
understand or control.
• Putting random people on a galley ship won’t ensure you
will get where you want to go or make it go faster.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Research: Most PM’s
not being used effectively


Distracting challenges
Product and
company
strategy
10%

Customers
and market
8%

Internal
process and
organization
28%

Development
process
16%

Prioritization
and Focus
16%

2008-11-11

Time and
resources
22%

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Recommendation:
PM for Strategic Advantage
Focused on inbound tasks
 PM decision-making power






Roadmap, release contents, release
acceptance

Report to CEO/GM

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

New Product Development (NPD)
& Project Life Cycle Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Code & Fix
(AKA Cowboy Coding)

S ys tem
S pe cific atio n
(m a yb e )

2008-11-11

C o de -a nd -F ix

R elea se
(m ay be )

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Traditional NPD Process
Stage-Gate Process
Discovery
QuickTim e™ and a
de co m pres sor
are n eed ed to se e this p ictu re .

Scoping

Business
Case

Stage
1

Stage
2

Development

Test /
Validation

Launch

Stage
3

Stage
4

Stage
5

Gate
1

Gate
2

Gate
3

Gate
4

Gate
5

Idea
Screen

Second
Screen

Go To
Dev

Go To
Test

Go To
Launch

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Review
Qui ckT ime™ and a
deco mpre sso r
are nee ded t o see t his p ict ure.

Traditional Project Management
Waterfall Model
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Risk Reduction
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Subprojects
Pr od u ct
C o n ce pt

R e qu ire m en ts
A n a lysis

D e ta ile d
D e sig n

A rch itec tur a l
D e s ig n

C o din g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S u b sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S ub sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g a nd
D e b u gin g

D e ta ile d
D e s ig n

S ub s yste m
T e sting

C o d in g a nd
D eb u g in g

S yste m
T e sting
S u bs yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Overlapping
Phases (Sashimi)
P rodu ct
C o nc ep t

R equ ire m e nts
A na lysis

A rchite ctura l
D esig n

D etaile d
D e sign

C o din g an d
D e bu ging

S yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Design-to-Schedule
P roduct
C oncept

R equ irem ents
An alysis

Architectural
D esign

H ig h P rio rity: D etailed design , code, d ebug, test

M edium H igh Priority: D etailed desig n, code , debug, te st

R u n ou t of tim e or
m oney h ere

M ed ium P riority: D e tailed design , code, debug , test

M ediu m Low P riority: D etailed design , co de, de bug, test

Low Priority: D etailed design, code , debug , test

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

R elease

Design-to-Tools
F u n ctio n a lity s u p p o rte d b y
th e to o ls

F u n ctio n a lity th a t w ill
n o t b e in th e p ro d u ct

Fu n c tio n a lity th a t w ill b e
b u ilt

Id e a l fu n c tio n a lity

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Iterative Project Management
Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Spiral (Boehm)

R epe at as requ ire d

1. D eter m ine
ob jective s,
alte rnatives,
constraints

2008-11-11

2 . Iden tify and
reso lve risks

3. E va lu ate
a ltern atives

4 . D evelop
ite ration
d elivera ble s a nd
verify co rrect

5 . P la n the ne xt
ite ratio n

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

6.
C om m it to an
a ppro ach for ne xt
ite ratio n

Evolutionary Prototyping
No

In itial
con ce pt

2008-11-11

D esign and
im p lem ent
initia l
proto typ e

R efin e
p ro to typ e

C usto m e r
a ccep tab le ?

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

C om p lete
a nd
relea se

Staged Delivery
(AKA Incremental Implementation)
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

R e q u ire m e nts
A n a ly sis

A rch ite c tu ra l
D e sig n

S ta g e 1 : D e ta ile d d e s ig n , c o d e , d e b u g , te st, d e liv e ry

S ta g e 2 : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e liv e ry

S ta g e n : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e live ry

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Evolutionary Delivery
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

P re lim in a ry
R e q u ire m e n ts
A n a lys is

A rch ite ctu ra l
D e s ig n a n d
S ys te m C o re

D e liv e r F in a l
V e rsio n

D e v e lo p a V e rsio n

In c o rp o ra te
C u s to m e r
F e e d b a ck

D e liv e ry th e
V e rs io n

E licit C u sto m e r
F e e d b a ck

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Project Management
“There is nothing new
under the sun but there
are lots of old things
we don't know.”
Ambrose Bierce

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Principles (2001)













Customer satisfaction by rapid, continuous delivery of useful software
Working software is delivered frequently (weeks rather than months)
Working software is the principal measure of progress
Even late changes in requirements are welcomed
Close, daily cooperation between business people and developers
Face-to-face conversation is the best form of communication (Co-location)
Projects are built around motivated individuals, who should be trusted
Continuous attention to technical excellence and good design
Simplicity
Self-organizing teams
Regular adaptation to changing circumstances

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Characteristics


Time periods in weeks rather than months


time period as a strict timebox.

Work is performed in a highly
collaborative manner.
 If the sponsors of the project are
concerned about completing certain goals
with a defined timeline or budget, agile
may not be appropriate.


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Methodologies (Partial)


Agile Unified Process (AUP)







Simplified IBM Rational Unified Process (RUP)

Extreme programming (XP)
Feature Driven Development (FDD)
Scrum


“Pig” Roles
• Product owner (VOC - Product Manager)
• ScrumMaster (Project Manager)
• Team (Developers)



“Chicken” Roles
• Users
• Stakeholders (customers, vendors)
• Managers

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Adaptive (Agile) vs
Predictive (Plan-driven)
Strengths of each:


Adaptive










Low criticality
Senior developers
Requirements change
very often
Small number of
developers
Culture that thrives on
chaos

2008-11-11

Predictive








High criticality
Junior developers
Requirements don't
change too often
Large number of
developers
Culture that demands
order

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Model Selection Criteria













How well do my customer and we understand the requirements at the beginning of
the project? Is our understanding likely to change significantly as we move through
the project?
How well do we understand the system architecture? Are we likely to need to make
major architectural changes midway through the project?
How much reliable do we need?
How much do we need to plan ahead and design ahead during this project for future
versions?
How much risk does the project entail?
Are we constrained by a predefined schedule?
Do we need to be able to make midcourse corrections?
Do we need to provide customers with visible progress throughout the project?
Do we need to provide management with visible progress throughout the project?
How much sophistication do we need to use this lifecycle model successfully?

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Project Management Models:
Strengths and Weaknesses
M od el C apa city
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
requ ire m en ts
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
arch ite ctu re
Pr od uce s h ig h ly
rel iable sy stem
Pr od uce s sy stem wi th
la rg e g ro wth en v elop
M ana g es ri sk s
Can be c o n strain ed to
p re de te rm in ed
sc h ed u le
Ha s lo w ove rh e ad
A llo w s for m id co ur se
co rre ct ion s
Pr ovid es c u stom ers
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Pr ovid es ma n ag em en t
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Requ ir es little m ana ge r
o r d evelop er
sop h istic atio n

Pure
W ate rfall

C od e-an d F ix

Spi ral

M odi fied
W ate rfall

E vol ut io nar y
Pr o to ty pin g

S tag ed
De liv er y

E vol ut io nar y
De liv er y

De sig n -to sc h ed u le

De sig n to -too ls

C o mme rcial
Of f-th e -sh elf
so ft w are

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

F air

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r to
fai r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

2008-11-11

F air to
exc ellent
F air to
exc ellent

P oo r

N/ A

P oo r to
fai r

N/ A

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air to
exc ellent

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

N/ A

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

N/ A

P oo r

P oo r to
fai r

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Accelerating the NPD Life Cycle
Model
Ideaisation

Go:No-Go

Scoping

Go:No-Go

Planning

Go:No-Go

Development

Go:No-Go

Testing

Go:No-Go

Launch

Go:No-Go

Maintenance
Retirement

Project Lifecycle Framework
 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

EOL

Discussion

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Away
Recommendations
“For which of you,
desiring to build a
tower, doesn't first sit
down and count the
cost, to see if he has
enough to complete it?”
Jesus
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation


Ready-Aim-Fire


Haste makes waste (penny wise, pound foolish)
• Choosing the wrong models will result in unfulfilled
expectations and delays

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Ready


Recognizing the difference between








product management,
marketing, and
project management

Having a well defined NPD process
Not standardizing on only one project model
Having a positive teamwork environment,
inspirational leadership, focused vision, and
necessary skills

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Aim
Ensuring up-front homework done first
 Ensuring the resources(staff) & time to do
it right
 Verifying available resource costs (people
and time)
 Selecting the most appropriate project
model
 Taking the time to do the planning right


Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Fire
Being flexible within parameters
 Regular review of processes and methods
 Regular, frequent review of new ideas
and market information


Fini


Robert Grupe





[email protected]
+1.314.266.7321

Further reading







Forrester “Making Product Management A Strategic
Resource”
Winning at New Products, Robert G Cooper
Rapid Development, Steve McConnell
PDMA Visions magazine, Jun & Sept 2008

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.


Slide 15

7 Management Solutions

Red

Accelerating Innovation
Overview and discussion of NPD
and project management life cycle
models
Robert Grupe
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Introduction
An overview and discussion of integrated
new product development and project life
cycle models for best practice approaches
to successful innovation and accelerated
time to market.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agenda






Clarification of PM Terminology
Strategically Focused PM
NPD vs. Project Management
Models







Waterfall Models
Iterative Models
Agile Approaches

Discussion
Roundup
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Clarification of Terminology
Product Management
 Project Management
 Program Management


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Product Management



Planning and marketing of a product or products at all stages of the
product lifecycle.
Product planning (in-bound marketing)
[Product Manager (PM)]






Defining new products
Gathering market requirements (VoC)
Building product roadmaps
Product Life Cycle considerations
• Stages: introduction, growth, mature, saturation/decline





Competitive differentiation

Product marketing (outbound marketing)
[Product Marketing Manager (PMM)]





Product positioning and outbound messaging
Promotion: press, customers, and partners
Packaging and delivery
Competition messaging monitoring

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Project Management



Project Planning
[Project Manager (PjM)]
Achieve all of the goals of the project charter while
adhering to




Project constraints: scope, time, cost and quality.

Project management life cycle



5 Process Groups: Project Initiation, Project Planning, Project
Execution, Project monitoring and control, and Project closeout.
9 Knowledge Areas: integration management, scope
management, time management, cost management, quality
management, human resource management, communications
management,risk management and procurement management.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology: Program Management
[& Product Portfolio Management]













Layer above project management focusing on selecting the best group of programs [and
products,] defining them in terms of their constituent projects and providing an infrastructure
where projects can be run successfully
Governance: The structure, process, and procedure to control operations and changes to
performance objectives.
Standards: Define the performance architecture.
Alignment: The program must support higher level vision, goals and objectives.
Assurance: Verify and validate the program, ensuring adherence to standards and alignment
with the vision.
Management: Ensure there are regular reviews, there is accountability, and that management of
projects, stakeholders and suppliers is in place.
Integration: Optimize performance across the program value chain, functionally and technically.
Finances: Tracking of finances is an important part of Program management and basic costs
together with wider costs of administering the program are all tracked.
Infrastructure: Allocation of resources influences the cost and success of the program.
Infrastructure might cover offices, version control, and IT. Planning: Develop the plan bringing
together the information on projects, resources, timescales, monitoring and control.[1]
Improvement: Continuously assess performance; research and develop new capabilities; and
systemically apply learning and knowledge to the program.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Why is this important?


Without clearly defined and integrated product,
marketing, and project management, innovation
will be haphazard, chaotic, and un-scaleable
with complexity and growth.


You can’t improve or accelerate what you can’t
understand or control.
• Putting random people on a galley ship won’t ensure you
will get where you want to go or make it go faster.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Research: Most PM’s
not being used effectively


Distracting challenges
Product and
company
strategy
10%

Customers
and market
8%

Internal
process and
organization
28%

Development
process
16%

Prioritization
and Focus
16%

2008-11-11

Time and
resources
22%

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Recommendation:
PM for Strategic Advantage
Focused on inbound tasks
 PM decision-making power






Roadmap, release contents, release
acceptance

Report to CEO/GM

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

New Product Development (NPD)
& Project Life Cycle Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Code & Fix
(AKA Cowboy Coding)

S ys tem
S pe cific atio n
(m a yb e )

2008-11-11

C o de -a nd -F ix

R elea se
(m ay be )

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Traditional NPD Process
Stage-Gate Process
Discovery
QuickTim e™ and a
de co m pres sor
are n eed ed to se e this p ictu re .

Scoping

Business
Case

Stage
1

Stage
2

Development

Test /
Validation

Launch

Stage
3

Stage
4

Stage
5

Gate
1

Gate
2

Gate
3

Gate
4

Gate
5

Idea
Screen

Second
Screen

Go To
Dev

Go To
Test

Go To
Launch

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Review
Qui ckT ime™ and a
deco mpre sso r
are nee ded t o see t his p ict ure.

Traditional Project Management
Waterfall Model
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Risk Reduction
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Subprojects
Pr od u ct
C o n ce pt

R e qu ire m en ts
A n a lysis

D e ta ile d
D e sig n

A rch itec tur a l
D e s ig n

C o din g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S u b sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S ub sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g a nd
D e b u gin g

D e ta ile d
D e s ig n

S ub s yste m
T e sting

C o d in g a nd
D eb u g in g

S yste m
T e sting
S u bs yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Overlapping
Phases (Sashimi)
P rodu ct
C o nc ep t

R equ ire m e nts
A na lysis

A rchite ctura l
D esig n

D etaile d
D e sign

C o din g an d
D e bu ging

S yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Design-to-Schedule
P roduct
C oncept

R equ irem ents
An alysis

Architectural
D esign

H ig h P rio rity: D etailed design , code, d ebug, test

M edium H igh Priority: D etailed desig n, code , debug, te st

R u n ou t of tim e or
m oney h ere

M ed ium P riority: D e tailed design , code, debug , test

M ediu m Low P riority: D etailed design , co de, de bug, test

Low Priority: D etailed design, code , debug , test

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

R elease

Design-to-Tools
F u n ctio n a lity s u p p o rte d b y
th e to o ls

F u n ctio n a lity th a t w ill
n o t b e in th e p ro d u ct

Fu n c tio n a lity th a t w ill b e
b u ilt

Id e a l fu n c tio n a lity

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Iterative Project Management
Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Spiral (Boehm)

R epe at as requ ire d

1. D eter m ine
ob jective s,
alte rnatives,
constraints

2008-11-11

2 . Iden tify and
reso lve risks

3. E va lu ate
a ltern atives

4 . D evelop
ite ration
d elivera ble s a nd
verify co rrect

5 . P la n the ne xt
ite ratio n

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

6.
C om m it to an
a ppro ach for ne xt
ite ratio n

Evolutionary Prototyping
No

In itial
con ce pt

2008-11-11

D esign and
im p lem ent
initia l
proto typ e

R efin e
p ro to typ e

C usto m e r
a ccep tab le ?

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

C om p lete
a nd
relea se

Staged Delivery
(AKA Incremental Implementation)
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

R e q u ire m e nts
A n a ly sis

A rch ite c tu ra l
D e sig n

S ta g e 1 : D e ta ile d d e s ig n , c o d e , d e b u g , te st, d e liv e ry

S ta g e 2 : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e liv e ry

S ta g e n : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e live ry

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Evolutionary Delivery
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

P re lim in a ry
R e q u ire m e n ts
A n a lys is

A rch ite ctu ra l
D e s ig n a n d
S ys te m C o re

D e liv e r F in a l
V e rsio n

D e v e lo p a V e rsio n

In c o rp o ra te
C u s to m e r
F e e d b a ck

D e liv e ry th e
V e rs io n

E licit C u sto m e r
F e e d b a ck

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Project Management
“There is nothing new
under the sun but there
are lots of old things
we don't know.”
Ambrose Bierce

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Principles (2001)













Customer satisfaction by rapid, continuous delivery of useful software
Working software is delivered frequently (weeks rather than months)
Working software is the principal measure of progress
Even late changes in requirements are welcomed
Close, daily cooperation between business people and developers
Face-to-face conversation is the best form of communication (Co-location)
Projects are built around motivated individuals, who should be trusted
Continuous attention to technical excellence and good design
Simplicity
Self-organizing teams
Regular adaptation to changing circumstances

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Characteristics


Time periods in weeks rather than months


time period as a strict timebox.

Work is performed in a highly
collaborative manner.
 If the sponsors of the project are
concerned about completing certain goals
with a defined timeline or budget, agile
may not be appropriate.


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Methodologies (Partial)


Agile Unified Process (AUP)







Simplified IBM Rational Unified Process (RUP)

Extreme programming (XP)
Feature Driven Development (FDD)
Scrum


“Pig” Roles
• Product owner (VOC - Product Manager)
• ScrumMaster (Project Manager)
• Team (Developers)



“Chicken” Roles
• Users
• Stakeholders (customers, vendors)
• Managers

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Adaptive (Agile) vs
Predictive (Plan-driven)
Strengths of each:


Adaptive










Low criticality
Senior developers
Requirements change
very often
Small number of
developers
Culture that thrives on
chaos

2008-11-11

Predictive








High criticality
Junior developers
Requirements don't
change too often
Large number of
developers
Culture that demands
order

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Model Selection Criteria













How well do my customer and we understand the requirements at the beginning of
the project? Is our understanding likely to change significantly as we move through
the project?
How well do we understand the system architecture? Are we likely to need to make
major architectural changes midway through the project?
How much reliable do we need?
How much do we need to plan ahead and design ahead during this project for future
versions?
How much risk does the project entail?
Are we constrained by a predefined schedule?
Do we need to be able to make midcourse corrections?
Do we need to provide customers with visible progress throughout the project?
Do we need to provide management with visible progress throughout the project?
How much sophistication do we need to use this lifecycle model successfully?

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Project Management Models:
Strengths and Weaknesses
M od el C apa city
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
requ ire m en ts
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
arch ite ctu re
Pr od uce s h ig h ly
rel iable sy stem
Pr od uce s sy stem wi th
la rg e g ro wth en v elop
M ana g es ri sk s
Can be c o n strain ed to
p re de te rm in ed
sc h ed u le
Ha s lo w ove rh e ad
A llo w s for m id co ur se
co rre ct ion s
Pr ovid es c u stom ers
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Pr ovid es ma n ag em en t
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Requ ir es little m ana ge r
o r d evelop er
sop h istic atio n

Pure
W ate rfall

C od e-an d F ix

Spi ral

M odi fied
W ate rfall

E vol ut io nar y
Pr o to ty pin g

S tag ed
De liv er y

E vol ut io nar y
De liv er y

De sig n -to sc h ed u le

De sig n to -too ls

C o mme rcial
Of f-th e -sh elf
so ft w are

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

F air

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r to
fai r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

2008-11-11

F air to
exc ellent
F air to
exc ellent

P oo r

N/ A

P oo r to
fai r

N/ A

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air to
exc ellent

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

N/ A

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

N/ A

P oo r

P oo r to
fai r

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Accelerating the NPD Life Cycle
Model
Ideaisation

Go:No-Go

Scoping

Go:No-Go

Planning

Go:No-Go

Development

Go:No-Go

Testing

Go:No-Go

Launch

Go:No-Go

Maintenance
Retirement

Project Lifecycle Framework
 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

EOL

Discussion

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Away
Recommendations
“For which of you,
desiring to build a
tower, doesn't first sit
down and count the
cost, to see if he has
enough to complete it?”
Jesus
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation


Ready-Aim-Fire


Haste makes waste (penny wise, pound foolish)
• Choosing the wrong models will result in unfulfilled
expectations and delays

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Ready


Recognizing the difference between








product management,
marketing, and
project management

Having a well defined NPD process
Not standardizing on only one project model
Having a positive teamwork environment,
inspirational leadership, focused vision, and
necessary skills

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Aim
Ensuring up-front homework done first
 Ensuring the resources(staff) & time to do
it right
 Verifying available resource costs (people
and time)
 Selecting the most appropriate project
model
 Taking the time to do the planning right


Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Fire
Being flexible within parameters
 Regular review of processes and methods
 Regular, frequent review of new ideas
and market information


Fini


Robert Grupe





[email protected]
+1.314.266.7321

Further reading







Forrester “Making Product Management A Strategic
Resource”
Winning at New Products, Robert G Cooper
Rapid Development, Steve McConnell
PDMA Visions magazine, Jun & Sept 2008

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.


Slide 16

7 Management Solutions

Red

Accelerating Innovation
Overview and discussion of NPD
and project management life cycle
models
Robert Grupe
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Introduction
An overview and discussion of integrated
new product development and project life
cycle models for best practice approaches
to successful innovation and accelerated
time to market.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agenda






Clarification of PM Terminology
Strategically Focused PM
NPD vs. Project Management
Models







Waterfall Models
Iterative Models
Agile Approaches

Discussion
Roundup
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Clarification of Terminology
Product Management
 Project Management
 Program Management


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Product Management



Planning and marketing of a product or products at all stages of the
product lifecycle.
Product planning (in-bound marketing)
[Product Manager (PM)]






Defining new products
Gathering market requirements (VoC)
Building product roadmaps
Product Life Cycle considerations
• Stages: introduction, growth, mature, saturation/decline





Competitive differentiation

Product marketing (outbound marketing)
[Product Marketing Manager (PMM)]





Product positioning and outbound messaging
Promotion: press, customers, and partners
Packaging and delivery
Competition messaging monitoring

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Project Management



Project Planning
[Project Manager (PjM)]
Achieve all of the goals of the project charter while
adhering to




Project constraints: scope, time, cost and quality.

Project management life cycle



5 Process Groups: Project Initiation, Project Planning, Project
Execution, Project monitoring and control, and Project closeout.
9 Knowledge Areas: integration management, scope
management, time management, cost management, quality
management, human resource management, communications
management,risk management and procurement management.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology: Program Management
[& Product Portfolio Management]













Layer above project management focusing on selecting the best group of programs [and
products,] defining them in terms of their constituent projects and providing an infrastructure
where projects can be run successfully
Governance: The structure, process, and procedure to control operations and changes to
performance objectives.
Standards: Define the performance architecture.
Alignment: The program must support higher level vision, goals and objectives.
Assurance: Verify and validate the program, ensuring adherence to standards and alignment
with the vision.
Management: Ensure there are regular reviews, there is accountability, and that management of
projects, stakeholders and suppliers is in place.
Integration: Optimize performance across the program value chain, functionally and technically.
Finances: Tracking of finances is an important part of Program management and basic costs
together with wider costs of administering the program are all tracked.
Infrastructure: Allocation of resources influences the cost and success of the program.
Infrastructure might cover offices, version control, and IT. Planning: Develop the plan bringing
together the information on projects, resources, timescales, monitoring and control.[1]
Improvement: Continuously assess performance; research and develop new capabilities; and
systemically apply learning and knowledge to the program.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Why is this important?


Without clearly defined and integrated product,
marketing, and project management, innovation
will be haphazard, chaotic, and un-scaleable
with complexity and growth.


You can’t improve or accelerate what you can’t
understand or control.
• Putting random people on a galley ship won’t ensure you
will get where you want to go or make it go faster.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Research: Most PM’s
not being used effectively


Distracting challenges
Product and
company
strategy
10%

Customers
and market
8%

Internal
process and
organization
28%

Development
process
16%

Prioritization
and Focus
16%

2008-11-11

Time and
resources
22%

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Recommendation:
PM for Strategic Advantage
Focused on inbound tasks
 PM decision-making power






Roadmap, release contents, release
acceptance

Report to CEO/GM

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

New Product Development (NPD)
& Project Life Cycle Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Code & Fix
(AKA Cowboy Coding)

S ys tem
S pe cific atio n
(m a yb e )

2008-11-11

C o de -a nd -F ix

R elea se
(m ay be )

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Traditional NPD Process
Stage-Gate Process
Discovery
QuickTim e™ and a
de co m pres sor
are n eed ed to se e this p ictu re .

Scoping

Business
Case

Stage
1

Stage
2

Development

Test /
Validation

Launch

Stage
3

Stage
4

Stage
5

Gate
1

Gate
2

Gate
3

Gate
4

Gate
5

Idea
Screen

Second
Screen

Go To
Dev

Go To
Test

Go To
Launch

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Review
Qui ckT ime™ and a
deco mpre sso r
are nee ded t o see t his p ict ure.

Traditional Project Management
Waterfall Model
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Risk Reduction
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Subprojects
Pr od u ct
C o n ce pt

R e qu ire m en ts
A n a lysis

D e ta ile d
D e sig n

A rch itec tur a l
D e s ig n

C o din g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S u b sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S ub sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g a nd
D e b u gin g

D e ta ile d
D e s ig n

S ub s yste m
T e sting

C o d in g a nd
D eb u g in g

S yste m
T e sting
S u bs yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Overlapping
Phases (Sashimi)
P rodu ct
C o nc ep t

R equ ire m e nts
A na lysis

A rchite ctura l
D esig n

D etaile d
D e sign

C o din g an d
D e bu ging

S yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Design-to-Schedule
P roduct
C oncept

R equ irem ents
An alysis

Architectural
D esign

H ig h P rio rity: D etailed design , code, d ebug, test

M edium H igh Priority: D etailed desig n, code , debug, te st

R u n ou t of tim e or
m oney h ere

M ed ium P riority: D e tailed design , code, debug , test

M ediu m Low P riority: D etailed design , co de, de bug, test

Low Priority: D etailed design, code , debug , test

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

R elease

Design-to-Tools
F u n ctio n a lity s u p p o rte d b y
th e to o ls

F u n ctio n a lity th a t w ill
n o t b e in th e p ro d u ct

Fu n c tio n a lity th a t w ill b e
b u ilt

Id e a l fu n c tio n a lity

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Iterative Project Management
Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Spiral (Boehm)

R epe at as requ ire d

1. D eter m ine
ob jective s,
alte rnatives,
constraints

2008-11-11

2 . Iden tify and
reso lve risks

3. E va lu ate
a ltern atives

4 . D evelop
ite ration
d elivera ble s a nd
verify co rrect

5 . P la n the ne xt
ite ratio n

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

6.
C om m it to an
a ppro ach for ne xt
ite ratio n

Evolutionary Prototyping
No

In itial
con ce pt

2008-11-11

D esign and
im p lem ent
initia l
proto typ e

R efin e
p ro to typ e

C usto m e r
a ccep tab le ?

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

C om p lete
a nd
relea se

Staged Delivery
(AKA Incremental Implementation)
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

R e q u ire m e nts
A n a ly sis

A rch ite c tu ra l
D e sig n

S ta g e 1 : D e ta ile d d e s ig n , c o d e , d e b u g , te st, d e liv e ry

S ta g e 2 : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e liv e ry

S ta g e n : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e live ry

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Evolutionary Delivery
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

P re lim in a ry
R e q u ire m e n ts
A n a lys is

A rch ite ctu ra l
D e s ig n a n d
S ys te m C o re

D e liv e r F in a l
V e rsio n

D e v e lo p a V e rsio n

In c o rp o ra te
C u s to m e r
F e e d b a ck

D e liv e ry th e
V e rs io n

E licit C u sto m e r
F e e d b a ck

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Project Management
“There is nothing new
under the sun but there
are lots of old things
we don't know.”
Ambrose Bierce

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Principles (2001)













Customer satisfaction by rapid, continuous delivery of useful software
Working software is delivered frequently (weeks rather than months)
Working software is the principal measure of progress
Even late changes in requirements are welcomed
Close, daily cooperation between business people and developers
Face-to-face conversation is the best form of communication (Co-location)
Projects are built around motivated individuals, who should be trusted
Continuous attention to technical excellence and good design
Simplicity
Self-organizing teams
Regular adaptation to changing circumstances

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Characteristics


Time periods in weeks rather than months


time period as a strict timebox.

Work is performed in a highly
collaborative manner.
 If the sponsors of the project are
concerned about completing certain goals
with a defined timeline or budget, agile
may not be appropriate.


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Methodologies (Partial)


Agile Unified Process (AUP)







Simplified IBM Rational Unified Process (RUP)

Extreme programming (XP)
Feature Driven Development (FDD)
Scrum


“Pig” Roles
• Product owner (VOC - Product Manager)
• ScrumMaster (Project Manager)
• Team (Developers)



“Chicken” Roles
• Users
• Stakeholders (customers, vendors)
• Managers

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Adaptive (Agile) vs
Predictive (Plan-driven)
Strengths of each:


Adaptive










Low criticality
Senior developers
Requirements change
very often
Small number of
developers
Culture that thrives on
chaos

2008-11-11

Predictive








High criticality
Junior developers
Requirements don't
change too often
Large number of
developers
Culture that demands
order

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Model Selection Criteria













How well do my customer and we understand the requirements at the beginning of
the project? Is our understanding likely to change significantly as we move through
the project?
How well do we understand the system architecture? Are we likely to need to make
major architectural changes midway through the project?
How much reliable do we need?
How much do we need to plan ahead and design ahead during this project for future
versions?
How much risk does the project entail?
Are we constrained by a predefined schedule?
Do we need to be able to make midcourse corrections?
Do we need to provide customers with visible progress throughout the project?
Do we need to provide management with visible progress throughout the project?
How much sophistication do we need to use this lifecycle model successfully?

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Project Management Models:
Strengths and Weaknesses
M od el C apa city
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
requ ire m en ts
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
arch ite ctu re
Pr od uce s h ig h ly
rel iable sy stem
Pr od uce s sy stem wi th
la rg e g ro wth en v elop
M ana g es ri sk s
Can be c o n strain ed to
p re de te rm in ed
sc h ed u le
Ha s lo w ove rh e ad
A llo w s for m id co ur se
co rre ct ion s
Pr ovid es c u stom ers
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Pr ovid es ma n ag em en t
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Requ ir es little m ana ge r
o r d evelop er
sop h istic atio n

Pure
W ate rfall

C od e-an d F ix

Spi ral

M odi fied
W ate rfall

E vol ut io nar y
Pr o to ty pin g

S tag ed
De liv er y

E vol ut io nar y
De liv er y

De sig n -to sc h ed u le

De sig n to -too ls

C o mme rcial
Of f-th e -sh elf
so ft w are

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

F air

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r to
fai r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

2008-11-11

F air to
exc ellent
F air to
exc ellent

P oo r

N/ A

P oo r to
fai r

N/ A

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air to
exc ellent

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

N/ A

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

N/ A

P oo r

P oo r to
fai r

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Accelerating the NPD Life Cycle
Model
Ideaisation

Go:No-Go

Scoping

Go:No-Go

Planning

Go:No-Go

Development

Go:No-Go

Testing

Go:No-Go

Launch

Go:No-Go

Maintenance
Retirement

Project Lifecycle Framework
 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

EOL

Discussion

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Away
Recommendations
“For which of you,
desiring to build a
tower, doesn't first sit
down and count the
cost, to see if he has
enough to complete it?”
Jesus
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation


Ready-Aim-Fire


Haste makes waste (penny wise, pound foolish)
• Choosing the wrong models will result in unfulfilled
expectations and delays

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Ready


Recognizing the difference between








product management,
marketing, and
project management

Having a well defined NPD process
Not standardizing on only one project model
Having a positive teamwork environment,
inspirational leadership, focused vision, and
necessary skills

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Aim
Ensuring up-front homework done first
 Ensuring the resources(staff) & time to do
it right
 Verifying available resource costs (people
and time)
 Selecting the most appropriate project
model
 Taking the time to do the planning right


Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Fire
Being flexible within parameters
 Regular review of processes and methods
 Regular, frequent review of new ideas
and market information


Fini


Robert Grupe





[email protected]
+1.314.266.7321

Further reading







Forrester “Making Product Management A Strategic
Resource”
Winning at New Products, Robert G Cooper
Rapid Development, Steve McConnell
PDMA Visions magazine, Jun & Sept 2008

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.


Slide 17

7 Management Solutions

Red

Accelerating Innovation
Overview and discussion of NPD
and project management life cycle
models
Robert Grupe
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Introduction
An overview and discussion of integrated
new product development and project life
cycle models for best practice approaches
to successful innovation and accelerated
time to market.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agenda






Clarification of PM Terminology
Strategically Focused PM
NPD vs. Project Management
Models







Waterfall Models
Iterative Models
Agile Approaches

Discussion
Roundup
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Clarification of Terminology
Product Management
 Project Management
 Program Management


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Product Management



Planning and marketing of a product or products at all stages of the
product lifecycle.
Product planning (in-bound marketing)
[Product Manager (PM)]






Defining new products
Gathering market requirements (VoC)
Building product roadmaps
Product Life Cycle considerations
• Stages: introduction, growth, mature, saturation/decline





Competitive differentiation

Product marketing (outbound marketing)
[Product Marketing Manager (PMM)]





Product positioning and outbound messaging
Promotion: press, customers, and partners
Packaging and delivery
Competition messaging monitoring

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Project Management



Project Planning
[Project Manager (PjM)]
Achieve all of the goals of the project charter while
adhering to




Project constraints: scope, time, cost and quality.

Project management life cycle



5 Process Groups: Project Initiation, Project Planning, Project
Execution, Project monitoring and control, and Project closeout.
9 Knowledge Areas: integration management, scope
management, time management, cost management, quality
management, human resource management, communications
management,risk management and procurement management.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology: Program Management
[& Product Portfolio Management]













Layer above project management focusing on selecting the best group of programs [and
products,] defining them in terms of their constituent projects and providing an infrastructure
where projects can be run successfully
Governance: The structure, process, and procedure to control operations and changes to
performance objectives.
Standards: Define the performance architecture.
Alignment: The program must support higher level vision, goals and objectives.
Assurance: Verify and validate the program, ensuring adherence to standards and alignment
with the vision.
Management: Ensure there are regular reviews, there is accountability, and that management of
projects, stakeholders and suppliers is in place.
Integration: Optimize performance across the program value chain, functionally and technically.
Finances: Tracking of finances is an important part of Program management and basic costs
together with wider costs of administering the program are all tracked.
Infrastructure: Allocation of resources influences the cost and success of the program.
Infrastructure might cover offices, version control, and IT. Planning: Develop the plan bringing
together the information on projects, resources, timescales, monitoring and control.[1]
Improvement: Continuously assess performance; research and develop new capabilities; and
systemically apply learning and knowledge to the program.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Why is this important?


Without clearly defined and integrated product,
marketing, and project management, innovation
will be haphazard, chaotic, and un-scaleable
with complexity and growth.


You can’t improve or accelerate what you can’t
understand or control.
• Putting random people on a galley ship won’t ensure you
will get where you want to go or make it go faster.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Research: Most PM’s
not being used effectively


Distracting challenges
Product and
company
strategy
10%

Customers
and market
8%

Internal
process and
organization
28%

Development
process
16%

Prioritization
and Focus
16%

2008-11-11

Time and
resources
22%

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Recommendation:
PM for Strategic Advantage
Focused on inbound tasks
 PM decision-making power






Roadmap, release contents, release
acceptance

Report to CEO/GM

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

New Product Development (NPD)
& Project Life Cycle Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Code & Fix
(AKA Cowboy Coding)

S ys tem
S pe cific atio n
(m a yb e )

2008-11-11

C o de -a nd -F ix

R elea se
(m ay be )

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Traditional NPD Process
Stage-Gate Process
Discovery
QuickTim e™ and a
de co m pres sor
are n eed ed to se e this p ictu re .

Scoping

Business
Case

Stage
1

Stage
2

Development

Test /
Validation

Launch

Stage
3

Stage
4

Stage
5

Gate
1

Gate
2

Gate
3

Gate
4

Gate
5

Idea
Screen

Second
Screen

Go To
Dev

Go To
Test

Go To
Launch

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Review
Qui ckT ime™ and a
deco mpre sso r
are nee ded t o see t his p ict ure.

Traditional Project Management
Waterfall Model
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Risk Reduction
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Subprojects
Pr od u ct
C o n ce pt

R e qu ire m en ts
A n a lysis

D e ta ile d
D e sig n

A rch itec tur a l
D e s ig n

C o din g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S u b sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S ub sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g a nd
D e b u gin g

D e ta ile d
D e s ig n

S ub s yste m
T e sting

C o d in g a nd
D eb u g in g

S yste m
T e sting
S u bs yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Overlapping
Phases (Sashimi)
P rodu ct
C o nc ep t

R equ ire m e nts
A na lysis

A rchite ctura l
D esig n

D etaile d
D e sign

C o din g an d
D e bu ging

S yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Design-to-Schedule
P roduct
C oncept

R equ irem ents
An alysis

Architectural
D esign

H ig h P rio rity: D etailed design , code, d ebug, test

M edium H igh Priority: D etailed desig n, code , debug, te st

R u n ou t of tim e or
m oney h ere

M ed ium P riority: D e tailed design , code, debug , test

M ediu m Low P riority: D etailed design , co de, de bug, test

Low Priority: D etailed design, code , debug , test

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

R elease

Design-to-Tools
F u n ctio n a lity s u p p o rte d b y
th e to o ls

F u n ctio n a lity th a t w ill
n o t b e in th e p ro d u ct

Fu n c tio n a lity th a t w ill b e
b u ilt

Id e a l fu n c tio n a lity

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Iterative Project Management
Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Spiral (Boehm)

R epe at as requ ire d

1. D eter m ine
ob jective s,
alte rnatives,
constraints

2008-11-11

2 . Iden tify and
reso lve risks

3. E va lu ate
a ltern atives

4 . D evelop
ite ration
d elivera ble s a nd
verify co rrect

5 . P la n the ne xt
ite ratio n

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

6.
C om m it to an
a ppro ach for ne xt
ite ratio n

Evolutionary Prototyping
No

In itial
con ce pt

2008-11-11

D esign and
im p lem ent
initia l
proto typ e

R efin e
p ro to typ e

C usto m e r
a ccep tab le ?

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

C om p lete
a nd
relea se

Staged Delivery
(AKA Incremental Implementation)
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

R e q u ire m e nts
A n a ly sis

A rch ite c tu ra l
D e sig n

S ta g e 1 : D e ta ile d d e s ig n , c o d e , d e b u g , te st, d e liv e ry

S ta g e 2 : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e liv e ry

S ta g e n : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e live ry

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Evolutionary Delivery
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

P re lim in a ry
R e q u ire m e n ts
A n a lys is

A rch ite ctu ra l
D e s ig n a n d
S ys te m C o re

D e liv e r F in a l
V e rsio n

D e v e lo p a V e rsio n

In c o rp o ra te
C u s to m e r
F e e d b a ck

D e liv e ry th e
V e rs io n

E licit C u sto m e r
F e e d b a ck

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Project Management
“There is nothing new
under the sun but there
are lots of old things
we don't know.”
Ambrose Bierce

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Principles (2001)













Customer satisfaction by rapid, continuous delivery of useful software
Working software is delivered frequently (weeks rather than months)
Working software is the principal measure of progress
Even late changes in requirements are welcomed
Close, daily cooperation between business people and developers
Face-to-face conversation is the best form of communication (Co-location)
Projects are built around motivated individuals, who should be trusted
Continuous attention to technical excellence and good design
Simplicity
Self-organizing teams
Regular adaptation to changing circumstances

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Characteristics


Time periods in weeks rather than months


time period as a strict timebox.

Work is performed in a highly
collaborative manner.
 If the sponsors of the project are
concerned about completing certain goals
with a defined timeline or budget, agile
may not be appropriate.


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Methodologies (Partial)


Agile Unified Process (AUP)







Simplified IBM Rational Unified Process (RUP)

Extreme programming (XP)
Feature Driven Development (FDD)
Scrum


“Pig” Roles
• Product owner (VOC - Product Manager)
• ScrumMaster (Project Manager)
• Team (Developers)



“Chicken” Roles
• Users
• Stakeholders (customers, vendors)
• Managers

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Adaptive (Agile) vs
Predictive (Plan-driven)
Strengths of each:


Adaptive










Low criticality
Senior developers
Requirements change
very often
Small number of
developers
Culture that thrives on
chaos

2008-11-11

Predictive








High criticality
Junior developers
Requirements don't
change too often
Large number of
developers
Culture that demands
order

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Model Selection Criteria













How well do my customer and we understand the requirements at the beginning of
the project? Is our understanding likely to change significantly as we move through
the project?
How well do we understand the system architecture? Are we likely to need to make
major architectural changes midway through the project?
How much reliable do we need?
How much do we need to plan ahead and design ahead during this project for future
versions?
How much risk does the project entail?
Are we constrained by a predefined schedule?
Do we need to be able to make midcourse corrections?
Do we need to provide customers with visible progress throughout the project?
Do we need to provide management with visible progress throughout the project?
How much sophistication do we need to use this lifecycle model successfully?

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Project Management Models:
Strengths and Weaknesses
M od el C apa city
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
requ ire m en ts
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
arch ite ctu re
Pr od uce s h ig h ly
rel iable sy stem
Pr od uce s sy stem wi th
la rg e g ro wth en v elop
M ana g es ri sk s
Can be c o n strain ed to
p re de te rm in ed
sc h ed u le
Ha s lo w ove rh e ad
A llo w s for m id co ur se
co rre ct ion s
Pr ovid es c u stom ers
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Pr ovid es ma n ag em en t
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Requ ir es little m ana ge r
o r d evelop er
sop h istic atio n

Pure
W ate rfall

C od e-an d F ix

Spi ral

M odi fied
W ate rfall

E vol ut io nar y
Pr o to ty pin g

S tag ed
De liv er y

E vol ut io nar y
De liv er y

De sig n -to sc h ed u le

De sig n to -too ls

C o mme rcial
Of f-th e -sh elf
so ft w are

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

F air

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r to
fai r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

2008-11-11

F air to
exc ellent
F air to
exc ellent

P oo r

N/ A

P oo r to
fai r

N/ A

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air to
exc ellent

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

N/ A

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

N/ A

P oo r

P oo r to
fai r

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Accelerating the NPD Life Cycle
Model
Ideaisation

Go:No-Go

Scoping

Go:No-Go

Planning

Go:No-Go

Development

Go:No-Go

Testing

Go:No-Go

Launch

Go:No-Go

Maintenance
Retirement

Project Lifecycle Framework
 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

EOL

Discussion

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Away
Recommendations
“For which of you,
desiring to build a
tower, doesn't first sit
down and count the
cost, to see if he has
enough to complete it?”
Jesus
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation


Ready-Aim-Fire


Haste makes waste (penny wise, pound foolish)
• Choosing the wrong models will result in unfulfilled
expectations and delays

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Ready


Recognizing the difference between








product management,
marketing, and
project management

Having a well defined NPD process
Not standardizing on only one project model
Having a positive teamwork environment,
inspirational leadership, focused vision, and
necessary skills

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Aim
Ensuring up-front homework done first
 Ensuring the resources(staff) & time to do
it right
 Verifying available resource costs (people
and time)
 Selecting the most appropriate project
model
 Taking the time to do the planning right


Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Fire
Being flexible within parameters
 Regular review of processes and methods
 Regular, frequent review of new ideas
and market information


Fini


Robert Grupe





[email protected]
+1.314.266.7321

Further reading







Forrester “Making Product Management A Strategic
Resource”
Winning at New Products, Robert G Cooper
Rapid Development, Steve McConnell
PDMA Visions magazine, Jun & Sept 2008

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.


Slide 18

7 Management Solutions

Red

Accelerating Innovation
Overview and discussion of NPD
and project management life cycle
models
Robert Grupe
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Introduction
An overview and discussion of integrated
new product development and project life
cycle models for best practice approaches
to successful innovation and accelerated
time to market.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agenda






Clarification of PM Terminology
Strategically Focused PM
NPD vs. Project Management
Models







Waterfall Models
Iterative Models
Agile Approaches

Discussion
Roundup
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Clarification of Terminology
Product Management
 Project Management
 Program Management


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Product Management



Planning and marketing of a product or products at all stages of the
product lifecycle.
Product planning (in-bound marketing)
[Product Manager (PM)]






Defining new products
Gathering market requirements (VoC)
Building product roadmaps
Product Life Cycle considerations
• Stages: introduction, growth, mature, saturation/decline





Competitive differentiation

Product marketing (outbound marketing)
[Product Marketing Manager (PMM)]





Product positioning and outbound messaging
Promotion: press, customers, and partners
Packaging and delivery
Competition messaging monitoring

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Project Management



Project Planning
[Project Manager (PjM)]
Achieve all of the goals of the project charter while
adhering to




Project constraints: scope, time, cost and quality.

Project management life cycle



5 Process Groups: Project Initiation, Project Planning, Project
Execution, Project monitoring and control, and Project closeout.
9 Knowledge Areas: integration management, scope
management, time management, cost management, quality
management, human resource management, communications
management,risk management and procurement management.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology: Program Management
[& Product Portfolio Management]













Layer above project management focusing on selecting the best group of programs [and
products,] defining them in terms of their constituent projects and providing an infrastructure
where projects can be run successfully
Governance: The structure, process, and procedure to control operations and changes to
performance objectives.
Standards: Define the performance architecture.
Alignment: The program must support higher level vision, goals and objectives.
Assurance: Verify and validate the program, ensuring adherence to standards and alignment
with the vision.
Management: Ensure there are regular reviews, there is accountability, and that management of
projects, stakeholders and suppliers is in place.
Integration: Optimize performance across the program value chain, functionally and technically.
Finances: Tracking of finances is an important part of Program management and basic costs
together with wider costs of administering the program are all tracked.
Infrastructure: Allocation of resources influences the cost and success of the program.
Infrastructure might cover offices, version control, and IT. Planning: Develop the plan bringing
together the information on projects, resources, timescales, monitoring and control.[1]
Improvement: Continuously assess performance; research and develop new capabilities; and
systemically apply learning and knowledge to the program.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Why is this important?


Without clearly defined and integrated product,
marketing, and project management, innovation
will be haphazard, chaotic, and un-scaleable
with complexity and growth.


You can’t improve or accelerate what you can’t
understand or control.
• Putting random people on a galley ship won’t ensure you
will get where you want to go or make it go faster.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Research: Most PM’s
not being used effectively


Distracting challenges
Product and
company
strategy
10%

Customers
and market
8%

Internal
process and
organization
28%

Development
process
16%

Prioritization
and Focus
16%

2008-11-11

Time and
resources
22%

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Recommendation:
PM for Strategic Advantage
Focused on inbound tasks
 PM decision-making power






Roadmap, release contents, release
acceptance

Report to CEO/GM

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

New Product Development (NPD)
& Project Life Cycle Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Code & Fix
(AKA Cowboy Coding)

S ys tem
S pe cific atio n
(m a yb e )

2008-11-11

C o de -a nd -F ix

R elea se
(m ay be )

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Traditional NPD Process
Stage-Gate Process
Discovery
QuickTim e™ and a
de co m pres sor
are n eed ed to se e this p ictu re .

Scoping

Business
Case

Stage
1

Stage
2

Development

Test /
Validation

Launch

Stage
3

Stage
4

Stage
5

Gate
1

Gate
2

Gate
3

Gate
4

Gate
5

Idea
Screen

Second
Screen

Go To
Dev

Go To
Test

Go To
Launch

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Review
Qui ckT ime™ and a
deco mpre sso r
are nee ded t o see t his p ict ure.

Traditional Project Management
Waterfall Model
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Risk Reduction
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Subprojects
Pr od u ct
C o n ce pt

R e qu ire m en ts
A n a lysis

D e ta ile d
D e sig n

A rch itec tur a l
D e s ig n

C o din g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S u b sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S ub sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g a nd
D e b u gin g

D e ta ile d
D e s ig n

S ub s yste m
T e sting

C o d in g a nd
D eb u g in g

S yste m
T e sting
S u bs yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Overlapping
Phases (Sashimi)
P rodu ct
C o nc ep t

R equ ire m e nts
A na lysis

A rchite ctura l
D esig n

D etaile d
D e sign

C o din g an d
D e bu ging

S yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Design-to-Schedule
P roduct
C oncept

R equ irem ents
An alysis

Architectural
D esign

H ig h P rio rity: D etailed design , code, d ebug, test

M edium H igh Priority: D etailed desig n, code , debug, te st

R u n ou t of tim e or
m oney h ere

M ed ium P riority: D e tailed design , code, debug , test

M ediu m Low P riority: D etailed design , co de, de bug, test

Low Priority: D etailed design, code , debug , test

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

R elease

Design-to-Tools
F u n ctio n a lity s u p p o rte d b y
th e to o ls

F u n ctio n a lity th a t w ill
n o t b e in th e p ro d u ct

Fu n c tio n a lity th a t w ill b e
b u ilt

Id e a l fu n c tio n a lity

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Iterative Project Management
Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Spiral (Boehm)

R epe at as requ ire d

1. D eter m ine
ob jective s,
alte rnatives,
constraints

2008-11-11

2 . Iden tify and
reso lve risks

3. E va lu ate
a ltern atives

4 . D evelop
ite ration
d elivera ble s a nd
verify co rrect

5 . P la n the ne xt
ite ratio n

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

6.
C om m it to an
a ppro ach for ne xt
ite ratio n

Evolutionary Prototyping
No

In itial
con ce pt

2008-11-11

D esign and
im p lem ent
initia l
proto typ e

R efin e
p ro to typ e

C usto m e r
a ccep tab le ?

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

C om p lete
a nd
relea se

Staged Delivery
(AKA Incremental Implementation)
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

R e q u ire m e nts
A n a ly sis

A rch ite c tu ra l
D e sig n

S ta g e 1 : D e ta ile d d e s ig n , c o d e , d e b u g , te st, d e liv e ry

S ta g e 2 : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e liv e ry

S ta g e n : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e live ry

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Evolutionary Delivery
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

P re lim in a ry
R e q u ire m e n ts
A n a lys is

A rch ite ctu ra l
D e s ig n a n d
S ys te m C o re

D e liv e r F in a l
V e rsio n

D e v e lo p a V e rsio n

In c o rp o ra te
C u s to m e r
F e e d b a ck

D e liv e ry th e
V e rs io n

E licit C u sto m e r
F e e d b a ck

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Project Management
“There is nothing new
under the sun but there
are lots of old things
we don't know.”
Ambrose Bierce

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Principles (2001)













Customer satisfaction by rapid, continuous delivery of useful software
Working software is delivered frequently (weeks rather than months)
Working software is the principal measure of progress
Even late changes in requirements are welcomed
Close, daily cooperation between business people and developers
Face-to-face conversation is the best form of communication (Co-location)
Projects are built around motivated individuals, who should be trusted
Continuous attention to technical excellence and good design
Simplicity
Self-organizing teams
Regular adaptation to changing circumstances

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Characteristics


Time periods in weeks rather than months


time period as a strict timebox.

Work is performed in a highly
collaborative manner.
 If the sponsors of the project are
concerned about completing certain goals
with a defined timeline or budget, agile
may not be appropriate.


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Methodologies (Partial)


Agile Unified Process (AUP)







Simplified IBM Rational Unified Process (RUP)

Extreme programming (XP)
Feature Driven Development (FDD)
Scrum


“Pig” Roles
• Product owner (VOC - Product Manager)
• ScrumMaster (Project Manager)
• Team (Developers)



“Chicken” Roles
• Users
• Stakeholders (customers, vendors)
• Managers

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Adaptive (Agile) vs
Predictive (Plan-driven)
Strengths of each:


Adaptive










Low criticality
Senior developers
Requirements change
very often
Small number of
developers
Culture that thrives on
chaos

2008-11-11

Predictive








High criticality
Junior developers
Requirements don't
change too often
Large number of
developers
Culture that demands
order

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Model Selection Criteria













How well do my customer and we understand the requirements at the beginning of
the project? Is our understanding likely to change significantly as we move through
the project?
How well do we understand the system architecture? Are we likely to need to make
major architectural changes midway through the project?
How much reliable do we need?
How much do we need to plan ahead and design ahead during this project for future
versions?
How much risk does the project entail?
Are we constrained by a predefined schedule?
Do we need to be able to make midcourse corrections?
Do we need to provide customers with visible progress throughout the project?
Do we need to provide management with visible progress throughout the project?
How much sophistication do we need to use this lifecycle model successfully?

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Project Management Models:
Strengths and Weaknesses
M od el C apa city
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
requ ire m en ts
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
arch ite ctu re
Pr od uce s h ig h ly
rel iable sy stem
Pr od uce s sy stem wi th
la rg e g ro wth en v elop
M ana g es ri sk s
Can be c o n strain ed to
p re de te rm in ed
sc h ed u le
Ha s lo w ove rh e ad
A llo w s for m id co ur se
co rre ct ion s
Pr ovid es c u stom ers
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Pr ovid es ma n ag em en t
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Requ ir es little m ana ge r
o r d evelop er
sop h istic atio n

Pure
W ate rfall

C od e-an d F ix

Spi ral

M odi fied
W ate rfall

E vol ut io nar y
Pr o to ty pin g

S tag ed
De liv er y

E vol ut io nar y
De liv er y

De sig n -to sc h ed u le

De sig n to -too ls

C o mme rcial
Of f-th e -sh elf
so ft w are

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

F air

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r to
fai r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

2008-11-11

F air to
exc ellent
F air to
exc ellent

P oo r

N/ A

P oo r to
fai r

N/ A

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air to
exc ellent

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

N/ A

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

N/ A

P oo r

P oo r to
fai r

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Accelerating the NPD Life Cycle
Model
Ideaisation

Go:No-Go

Scoping

Go:No-Go

Planning

Go:No-Go

Development

Go:No-Go

Testing

Go:No-Go

Launch

Go:No-Go

Maintenance
Retirement

Project Lifecycle Framework
 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

EOL

Discussion

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Away
Recommendations
“For which of you,
desiring to build a
tower, doesn't first sit
down and count the
cost, to see if he has
enough to complete it?”
Jesus
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation


Ready-Aim-Fire


Haste makes waste (penny wise, pound foolish)
• Choosing the wrong models will result in unfulfilled
expectations and delays

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Ready


Recognizing the difference between








product management,
marketing, and
project management

Having a well defined NPD process
Not standardizing on only one project model
Having a positive teamwork environment,
inspirational leadership, focused vision, and
necessary skills

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Aim
Ensuring up-front homework done first
 Ensuring the resources(staff) & time to do
it right
 Verifying available resource costs (people
and time)
 Selecting the most appropriate project
model
 Taking the time to do the planning right


Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Fire
Being flexible within parameters
 Regular review of processes and methods
 Regular, frequent review of new ideas
and market information


Fini


Robert Grupe





[email protected]
+1.314.266.7321

Further reading







Forrester “Making Product Management A Strategic
Resource”
Winning at New Products, Robert G Cooper
Rapid Development, Steve McConnell
PDMA Visions magazine, Jun & Sept 2008

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.


Slide 19

7 Management Solutions

Red

Accelerating Innovation
Overview and discussion of NPD
and project management life cycle
models
Robert Grupe
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Introduction
An overview and discussion of integrated
new product development and project life
cycle models for best practice approaches
to successful innovation and accelerated
time to market.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agenda






Clarification of PM Terminology
Strategically Focused PM
NPD vs. Project Management
Models







Waterfall Models
Iterative Models
Agile Approaches

Discussion
Roundup
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Clarification of Terminology
Product Management
 Project Management
 Program Management


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Product Management



Planning and marketing of a product or products at all stages of the
product lifecycle.
Product planning (in-bound marketing)
[Product Manager (PM)]






Defining new products
Gathering market requirements (VoC)
Building product roadmaps
Product Life Cycle considerations
• Stages: introduction, growth, mature, saturation/decline





Competitive differentiation

Product marketing (outbound marketing)
[Product Marketing Manager (PMM)]





Product positioning and outbound messaging
Promotion: press, customers, and partners
Packaging and delivery
Competition messaging monitoring

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Project Management



Project Planning
[Project Manager (PjM)]
Achieve all of the goals of the project charter while
adhering to




Project constraints: scope, time, cost and quality.

Project management life cycle



5 Process Groups: Project Initiation, Project Planning, Project
Execution, Project monitoring and control, and Project closeout.
9 Knowledge Areas: integration management, scope
management, time management, cost management, quality
management, human resource management, communications
management,risk management and procurement management.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology: Program Management
[& Product Portfolio Management]













Layer above project management focusing on selecting the best group of programs [and
products,] defining them in terms of their constituent projects and providing an infrastructure
where projects can be run successfully
Governance: The structure, process, and procedure to control operations and changes to
performance objectives.
Standards: Define the performance architecture.
Alignment: The program must support higher level vision, goals and objectives.
Assurance: Verify and validate the program, ensuring adherence to standards and alignment
with the vision.
Management: Ensure there are regular reviews, there is accountability, and that management of
projects, stakeholders and suppliers is in place.
Integration: Optimize performance across the program value chain, functionally and technically.
Finances: Tracking of finances is an important part of Program management and basic costs
together with wider costs of administering the program are all tracked.
Infrastructure: Allocation of resources influences the cost and success of the program.
Infrastructure might cover offices, version control, and IT. Planning: Develop the plan bringing
together the information on projects, resources, timescales, monitoring and control.[1]
Improvement: Continuously assess performance; research and develop new capabilities; and
systemically apply learning and knowledge to the program.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Why is this important?


Without clearly defined and integrated product,
marketing, and project management, innovation
will be haphazard, chaotic, and un-scaleable
with complexity and growth.


You can’t improve or accelerate what you can’t
understand or control.
• Putting random people on a galley ship won’t ensure you
will get where you want to go or make it go faster.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Research: Most PM’s
not being used effectively


Distracting challenges
Product and
company
strategy
10%

Customers
and market
8%

Internal
process and
organization
28%

Development
process
16%

Prioritization
and Focus
16%

2008-11-11

Time and
resources
22%

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Recommendation:
PM for Strategic Advantage
Focused on inbound tasks
 PM decision-making power






Roadmap, release contents, release
acceptance

Report to CEO/GM

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

New Product Development (NPD)
& Project Life Cycle Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Code & Fix
(AKA Cowboy Coding)

S ys tem
S pe cific atio n
(m a yb e )

2008-11-11

C o de -a nd -F ix

R elea se
(m ay be )

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Traditional NPD Process
Stage-Gate Process
Discovery
QuickTim e™ and a
de co m pres sor
are n eed ed to se e this p ictu re .

Scoping

Business
Case

Stage
1

Stage
2

Development

Test /
Validation

Launch

Stage
3

Stage
4

Stage
5

Gate
1

Gate
2

Gate
3

Gate
4

Gate
5

Idea
Screen

Second
Screen

Go To
Dev

Go To
Test

Go To
Launch

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Review
Qui ckT ime™ and a
deco mpre sso r
are nee ded t o see t his p ict ure.

Traditional Project Management
Waterfall Model
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Risk Reduction
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Subprojects
Pr od u ct
C o n ce pt

R e qu ire m en ts
A n a lysis

D e ta ile d
D e sig n

A rch itec tur a l
D e s ig n

C o din g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S u b sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S ub sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g a nd
D e b u gin g

D e ta ile d
D e s ig n

S ub s yste m
T e sting

C o d in g a nd
D eb u g in g

S yste m
T e sting
S u bs yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Overlapping
Phases (Sashimi)
P rodu ct
C o nc ep t

R equ ire m e nts
A na lysis

A rchite ctura l
D esig n

D etaile d
D e sign

C o din g an d
D e bu ging

S yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Design-to-Schedule
P roduct
C oncept

R equ irem ents
An alysis

Architectural
D esign

H ig h P rio rity: D etailed design , code, d ebug, test

M edium H igh Priority: D etailed desig n, code , debug, te st

R u n ou t of tim e or
m oney h ere

M ed ium P riority: D e tailed design , code, debug , test

M ediu m Low P riority: D etailed design , co de, de bug, test

Low Priority: D etailed design, code , debug , test

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

R elease

Design-to-Tools
F u n ctio n a lity s u p p o rte d b y
th e to o ls

F u n ctio n a lity th a t w ill
n o t b e in th e p ro d u ct

Fu n c tio n a lity th a t w ill b e
b u ilt

Id e a l fu n c tio n a lity

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Iterative Project Management
Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Spiral (Boehm)

R epe at as requ ire d

1. D eter m ine
ob jective s,
alte rnatives,
constraints

2008-11-11

2 . Iden tify and
reso lve risks

3. E va lu ate
a ltern atives

4 . D evelop
ite ration
d elivera ble s a nd
verify co rrect

5 . P la n the ne xt
ite ratio n

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

6.
C om m it to an
a ppro ach for ne xt
ite ratio n

Evolutionary Prototyping
No

In itial
con ce pt

2008-11-11

D esign and
im p lem ent
initia l
proto typ e

R efin e
p ro to typ e

C usto m e r
a ccep tab le ?

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

C om p lete
a nd
relea se

Staged Delivery
(AKA Incremental Implementation)
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

R e q u ire m e nts
A n a ly sis

A rch ite c tu ra l
D e sig n

S ta g e 1 : D e ta ile d d e s ig n , c o d e , d e b u g , te st, d e liv e ry

S ta g e 2 : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e liv e ry

S ta g e n : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e live ry

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Evolutionary Delivery
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

P re lim in a ry
R e q u ire m e n ts
A n a lys is

A rch ite ctu ra l
D e s ig n a n d
S ys te m C o re

D e liv e r F in a l
V e rsio n

D e v e lo p a V e rsio n

In c o rp o ra te
C u s to m e r
F e e d b a ck

D e liv e ry th e
V e rs io n

E licit C u sto m e r
F e e d b a ck

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Project Management
“There is nothing new
under the sun but there
are lots of old things
we don't know.”
Ambrose Bierce

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Principles (2001)













Customer satisfaction by rapid, continuous delivery of useful software
Working software is delivered frequently (weeks rather than months)
Working software is the principal measure of progress
Even late changes in requirements are welcomed
Close, daily cooperation between business people and developers
Face-to-face conversation is the best form of communication (Co-location)
Projects are built around motivated individuals, who should be trusted
Continuous attention to technical excellence and good design
Simplicity
Self-organizing teams
Regular adaptation to changing circumstances

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Characteristics


Time periods in weeks rather than months


time period as a strict timebox.

Work is performed in a highly
collaborative manner.
 If the sponsors of the project are
concerned about completing certain goals
with a defined timeline or budget, agile
may not be appropriate.


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Methodologies (Partial)


Agile Unified Process (AUP)







Simplified IBM Rational Unified Process (RUP)

Extreme programming (XP)
Feature Driven Development (FDD)
Scrum


“Pig” Roles
• Product owner (VOC - Product Manager)
• ScrumMaster (Project Manager)
• Team (Developers)



“Chicken” Roles
• Users
• Stakeholders (customers, vendors)
• Managers

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Adaptive (Agile) vs
Predictive (Plan-driven)
Strengths of each:


Adaptive










Low criticality
Senior developers
Requirements change
very often
Small number of
developers
Culture that thrives on
chaos

2008-11-11

Predictive








High criticality
Junior developers
Requirements don't
change too often
Large number of
developers
Culture that demands
order

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Model Selection Criteria













How well do my customer and we understand the requirements at the beginning of
the project? Is our understanding likely to change significantly as we move through
the project?
How well do we understand the system architecture? Are we likely to need to make
major architectural changes midway through the project?
How much reliable do we need?
How much do we need to plan ahead and design ahead during this project for future
versions?
How much risk does the project entail?
Are we constrained by a predefined schedule?
Do we need to be able to make midcourse corrections?
Do we need to provide customers with visible progress throughout the project?
Do we need to provide management with visible progress throughout the project?
How much sophistication do we need to use this lifecycle model successfully?

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Project Management Models:
Strengths and Weaknesses
M od el C apa city
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
requ ire m en ts
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
arch ite ctu re
Pr od uce s h ig h ly
rel iable sy stem
Pr od uce s sy stem wi th
la rg e g ro wth en v elop
M ana g es ri sk s
Can be c o n strain ed to
p re de te rm in ed
sc h ed u le
Ha s lo w ove rh e ad
A llo w s for m id co ur se
co rre ct ion s
Pr ovid es c u stom ers
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Pr ovid es ma n ag em en t
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Requ ir es little m ana ge r
o r d evelop er
sop h istic atio n

Pure
W ate rfall

C od e-an d F ix

Spi ral

M odi fied
W ate rfall

E vol ut io nar y
Pr o to ty pin g

S tag ed
De liv er y

E vol ut io nar y
De liv er y

De sig n -to sc h ed u le

De sig n to -too ls

C o mme rcial
Of f-th e -sh elf
so ft w are

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

F air

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r to
fai r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

2008-11-11

F air to
exc ellent
F air to
exc ellent

P oo r

N/ A

P oo r to
fai r

N/ A

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air to
exc ellent

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

N/ A

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

N/ A

P oo r

P oo r to
fai r

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Accelerating the NPD Life Cycle
Model
Ideaisation

Go:No-Go

Scoping

Go:No-Go

Planning

Go:No-Go

Development

Go:No-Go

Testing

Go:No-Go

Launch

Go:No-Go

Maintenance
Retirement

Project Lifecycle Framework
 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

EOL

Discussion

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Away
Recommendations
“For which of you,
desiring to build a
tower, doesn't first sit
down and count the
cost, to see if he has
enough to complete it?”
Jesus
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation


Ready-Aim-Fire


Haste makes waste (penny wise, pound foolish)
• Choosing the wrong models will result in unfulfilled
expectations and delays

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Ready


Recognizing the difference between








product management,
marketing, and
project management

Having a well defined NPD process
Not standardizing on only one project model
Having a positive teamwork environment,
inspirational leadership, focused vision, and
necessary skills

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Aim
Ensuring up-front homework done first
 Ensuring the resources(staff) & time to do
it right
 Verifying available resource costs (people
and time)
 Selecting the most appropriate project
model
 Taking the time to do the planning right


Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Fire
Being flexible within parameters
 Regular review of processes and methods
 Regular, frequent review of new ideas
and market information


Fini


Robert Grupe





[email protected]
+1.314.266.7321

Further reading







Forrester “Making Product Management A Strategic
Resource”
Winning at New Products, Robert G Cooper
Rapid Development, Steve McConnell
PDMA Visions magazine, Jun & Sept 2008

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.


Slide 20

7 Management Solutions

Red

Accelerating Innovation
Overview and discussion of NPD
and project management life cycle
models
Robert Grupe
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Introduction
An overview and discussion of integrated
new product development and project life
cycle models for best practice approaches
to successful innovation and accelerated
time to market.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agenda






Clarification of PM Terminology
Strategically Focused PM
NPD vs. Project Management
Models







Waterfall Models
Iterative Models
Agile Approaches

Discussion
Roundup
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Clarification of Terminology
Product Management
 Project Management
 Program Management


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Product Management



Planning and marketing of a product or products at all stages of the
product lifecycle.
Product planning (in-bound marketing)
[Product Manager (PM)]






Defining new products
Gathering market requirements (VoC)
Building product roadmaps
Product Life Cycle considerations
• Stages: introduction, growth, mature, saturation/decline





Competitive differentiation

Product marketing (outbound marketing)
[Product Marketing Manager (PMM)]





Product positioning and outbound messaging
Promotion: press, customers, and partners
Packaging and delivery
Competition messaging monitoring

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Project Management



Project Planning
[Project Manager (PjM)]
Achieve all of the goals of the project charter while
adhering to




Project constraints: scope, time, cost and quality.

Project management life cycle



5 Process Groups: Project Initiation, Project Planning, Project
Execution, Project monitoring and control, and Project closeout.
9 Knowledge Areas: integration management, scope
management, time management, cost management, quality
management, human resource management, communications
management,risk management and procurement management.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology: Program Management
[& Product Portfolio Management]













Layer above project management focusing on selecting the best group of programs [and
products,] defining them in terms of their constituent projects and providing an infrastructure
where projects can be run successfully
Governance: The structure, process, and procedure to control operations and changes to
performance objectives.
Standards: Define the performance architecture.
Alignment: The program must support higher level vision, goals and objectives.
Assurance: Verify and validate the program, ensuring adherence to standards and alignment
with the vision.
Management: Ensure there are regular reviews, there is accountability, and that management of
projects, stakeholders and suppliers is in place.
Integration: Optimize performance across the program value chain, functionally and technically.
Finances: Tracking of finances is an important part of Program management and basic costs
together with wider costs of administering the program are all tracked.
Infrastructure: Allocation of resources influences the cost and success of the program.
Infrastructure might cover offices, version control, and IT. Planning: Develop the plan bringing
together the information on projects, resources, timescales, monitoring and control.[1]
Improvement: Continuously assess performance; research and develop new capabilities; and
systemically apply learning and knowledge to the program.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Why is this important?


Without clearly defined and integrated product,
marketing, and project management, innovation
will be haphazard, chaotic, and un-scaleable
with complexity and growth.


You can’t improve or accelerate what you can’t
understand or control.
• Putting random people on a galley ship won’t ensure you
will get where you want to go or make it go faster.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Research: Most PM’s
not being used effectively


Distracting challenges
Product and
company
strategy
10%

Customers
and market
8%

Internal
process and
organization
28%

Development
process
16%

Prioritization
and Focus
16%

2008-11-11

Time and
resources
22%

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Recommendation:
PM for Strategic Advantage
Focused on inbound tasks
 PM decision-making power






Roadmap, release contents, release
acceptance

Report to CEO/GM

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

New Product Development (NPD)
& Project Life Cycle Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Code & Fix
(AKA Cowboy Coding)

S ys tem
S pe cific atio n
(m a yb e )

2008-11-11

C o de -a nd -F ix

R elea se
(m ay be )

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Traditional NPD Process
Stage-Gate Process
Discovery
QuickTim e™ and a
de co m pres sor
are n eed ed to se e this p ictu re .

Scoping

Business
Case

Stage
1

Stage
2

Development

Test /
Validation

Launch

Stage
3

Stage
4

Stage
5

Gate
1

Gate
2

Gate
3

Gate
4

Gate
5

Idea
Screen

Second
Screen

Go To
Dev

Go To
Test

Go To
Launch

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Review
Qui ckT ime™ and a
deco mpre sso r
are nee ded t o see t his p ict ure.

Traditional Project Management
Waterfall Model
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Risk Reduction
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Subprojects
Pr od u ct
C o n ce pt

R e qu ire m en ts
A n a lysis

D e ta ile d
D e sig n

A rch itec tur a l
D e s ig n

C o din g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S u b sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S ub sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g a nd
D e b u gin g

D e ta ile d
D e s ig n

S ub s yste m
T e sting

C o d in g a nd
D eb u g in g

S yste m
T e sting
S u bs yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Overlapping
Phases (Sashimi)
P rodu ct
C o nc ep t

R equ ire m e nts
A na lysis

A rchite ctura l
D esig n

D etaile d
D e sign

C o din g an d
D e bu ging

S yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Design-to-Schedule
P roduct
C oncept

R equ irem ents
An alysis

Architectural
D esign

H ig h P rio rity: D etailed design , code, d ebug, test

M edium H igh Priority: D etailed desig n, code , debug, te st

R u n ou t of tim e or
m oney h ere

M ed ium P riority: D e tailed design , code, debug , test

M ediu m Low P riority: D etailed design , co de, de bug, test

Low Priority: D etailed design, code , debug , test

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

R elease

Design-to-Tools
F u n ctio n a lity s u p p o rte d b y
th e to o ls

F u n ctio n a lity th a t w ill
n o t b e in th e p ro d u ct

Fu n c tio n a lity th a t w ill b e
b u ilt

Id e a l fu n c tio n a lity

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Iterative Project Management
Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Spiral (Boehm)

R epe at as requ ire d

1. D eter m ine
ob jective s,
alte rnatives,
constraints

2008-11-11

2 . Iden tify and
reso lve risks

3. E va lu ate
a ltern atives

4 . D evelop
ite ration
d elivera ble s a nd
verify co rrect

5 . P la n the ne xt
ite ratio n

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

6.
C om m it to an
a ppro ach for ne xt
ite ratio n

Evolutionary Prototyping
No

In itial
con ce pt

2008-11-11

D esign and
im p lem ent
initia l
proto typ e

R efin e
p ro to typ e

C usto m e r
a ccep tab le ?

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

C om p lete
a nd
relea se

Staged Delivery
(AKA Incremental Implementation)
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

R e q u ire m e nts
A n a ly sis

A rch ite c tu ra l
D e sig n

S ta g e 1 : D e ta ile d d e s ig n , c o d e , d e b u g , te st, d e liv e ry

S ta g e 2 : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e liv e ry

S ta g e n : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e live ry

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Evolutionary Delivery
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

P re lim in a ry
R e q u ire m e n ts
A n a lys is

A rch ite ctu ra l
D e s ig n a n d
S ys te m C o re

D e liv e r F in a l
V e rsio n

D e v e lo p a V e rsio n

In c o rp o ra te
C u s to m e r
F e e d b a ck

D e liv e ry th e
V e rs io n

E licit C u sto m e r
F e e d b a ck

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Project Management
“There is nothing new
under the sun but there
are lots of old things
we don't know.”
Ambrose Bierce

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Principles (2001)













Customer satisfaction by rapid, continuous delivery of useful software
Working software is delivered frequently (weeks rather than months)
Working software is the principal measure of progress
Even late changes in requirements are welcomed
Close, daily cooperation between business people and developers
Face-to-face conversation is the best form of communication (Co-location)
Projects are built around motivated individuals, who should be trusted
Continuous attention to technical excellence and good design
Simplicity
Self-organizing teams
Regular adaptation to changing circumstances

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Characteristics


Time periods in weeks rather than months


time period as a strict timebox.

Work is performed in a highly
collaborative manner.
 If the sponsors of the project are
concerned about completing certain goals
with a defined timeline or budget, agile
may not be appropriate.


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Methodologies (Partial)


Agile Unified Process (AUP)







Simplified IBM Rational Unified Process (RUP)

Extreme programming (XP)
Feature Driven Development (FDD)
Scrum


“Pig” Roles
• Product owner (VOC - Product Manager)
• ScrumMaster (Project Manager)
• Team (Developers)



“Chicken” Roles
• Users
• Stakeholders (customers, vendors)
• Managers

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Adaptive (Agile) vs
Predictive (Plan-driven)
Strengths of each:


Adaptive










Low criticality
Senior developers
Requirements change
very often
Small number of
developers
Culture that thrives on
chaos

2008-11-11

Predictive








High criticality
Junior developers
Requirements don't
change too often
Large number of
developers
Culture that demands
order

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Model Selection Criteria













How well do my customer and we understand the requirements at the beginning of
the project? Is our understanding likely to change significantly as we move through
the project?
How well do we understand the system architecture? Are we likely to need to make
major architectural changes midway through the project?
How much reliable do we need?
How much do we need to plan ahead and design ahead during this project for future
versions?
How much risk does the project entail?
Are we constrained by a predefined schedule?
Do we need to be able to make midcourse corrections?
Do we need to provide customers with visible progress throughout the project?
Do we need to provide management with visible progress throughout the project?
How much sophistication do we need to use this lifecycle model successfully?

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Project Management Models:
Strengths and Weaknesses
M od el C apa city
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
requ ire m en ts
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
arch ite ctu re
Pr od uce s h ig h ly
rel iable sy stem
Pr od uce s sy stem wi th
la rg e g ro wth en v elop
M ana g es ri sk s
Can be c o n strain ed to
p re de te rm in ed
sc h ed u le
Ha s lo w ove rh e ad
A llo w s for m id co ur se
co rre ct ion s
Pr ovid es c u stom ers
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Pr ovid es ma n ag em en t
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Requ ir es little m ana ge r
o r d evelop er
sop h istic atio n

Pure
W ate rfall

C od e-an d F ix

Spi ral

M odi fied
W ate rfall

E vol ut io nar y
Pr o to ty pin g

S tag ed
De liv er y

E vol ut io nar y
De liv er y

De sig n -to sc h ed u le

De sig n to -too ls

C o mme rcial
Of f-th e -sh elf
so ft w are

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

F air

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r to
fai r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

2008-11-11

F air to
exc ellent
F air to
exc ellent

P oo r

N/ A

P oo r to
fai r

N/ A

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air to
exc ellent

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

N/ A

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

N/ A

P oo r

P oo r to
fai r

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Accelerating the NPD Life Cycle
Model
Ideaisation

Go:No-Go

Scoping

Go:No-Go

Planning

Go:No-Go

Development

Go:No-Go

Testing

Go:No-Go

Launch

Go:No-Go

Maintenance
Retirement

Project Lifecycle Framework
 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

EOL

Discussion

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Away
Recommendations
“For which of you,
desiring to build a
tower, doesn't first sit
down and count the
cost, to see if he has
enough to complete it?”
Jesus
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation


Ready-Aim-Fire


Haste makes waste (penny wise, pound foolish)
• Choosing the wrong models will result in unfulfilled
expectations and delays

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Ready


Recognizing the difference between








product management,
marketing, and
project management

Having a well defined NPD process
Not standardizing on only one project model
Having a positive teamwork environment,
inspirational leadership, focused vision, and
necessary skills

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Aim
Ensuring up-front homework done first
 Ensuring the resources(staff) & time to do
it right
 Verifying available resource costs (people
and time)
 Selecting the most appropriate project
model
 Taking the time to do the planning right


Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Fire
Being flexible within parameters
 Regular review of processes and methods
 Regular, frequent review of new ideas
and market information


Fini


Robert Grupe





[email protected]
+1.314.266.7321

Further reading







Forrester “Making Product Management A Strategic
Resource”
Winning at New Products, Robert G Cooper
Rapid Development, Steve McConnell
PDMA Visions magazine, Jun & Sept 2008

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.


Slide 21

7 Management Solutions

Red

Accelerating Innovation
Overview and discussion of NPD
and project management life cycle
models
Robert Grupe
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Introduction
An overview and discussion of integrated
new product development and project life
cycle models for best practice approaches
to successful innovation and accelerated
time to market.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agenda






Clarification of PM Terminology
Strategically Focused PM
NPD vs. Project Management
Models







Waterfall Models
Iterative Models
Agile Approaches

Discussion
Roundup
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Clarification of Terminology
Product Management
 Project Management
 Program Management


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Product Management



Planning and marketing of a product or products at all stages of the
product lifecycle.
Product planning (in-bound marketing)
[Product Manager (PM)]






Defining new products
Gathering market requirements (VoC)
Building product roadmaps
Product Life Cycle considerations
• Stages: introduction, growth, mature, saturation/decline





Competitive differentiation

Product marketing (outbound marketing)
[Product Marketing Manager (PMM)]





Product positioning and outbound messaging
Promotion: press, customers, and partners
Packaging and delivery
Competition messaging monitoring

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Project Management



Project Planning
[Project Manager (PjM)]
Achieve all of the goals of the project charter while
adhering to




Project constraints: scope, time, cost and quality.

Project management life cycle



5 Process Groups: Project Initiation, Project Planning, Project
Execution, Project monitoring and control, and Project closeout.
9 Knowledge Areas: integration management, scope
management, time management, cost management, quality
management, human resource management, communications
management,risk management and procurement management.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology: Program Management
[& Product Portfolio Management]













Layer above project management focusing on selecting the best group of programs [and
products,] defining them in terms of their constituent projects and providing an infrastructure
where projects can be run successfully
Governance: The structure, process, and procedure to control operations and changes to
performance objectives.
Standards: Define the performance architecture.
Alignment: The program must support higher level vision, goals and objectives.
Assurance: Verify and validate the program, ensuring adherence to standards and alignment
with the vision.
Management: Ensure there are regular reviews, there is accountability, and that management of
projects, stakeholders and suppliers is in place.
Integration: Optimize performance across the program value chain, functionally and technically.
Finances: Tracking of finances is an important part of Program management and basic costs
together with wider costs of administering the program are all tracked.
Infrastructure: Allocation of resources influences the cost and success of the program.
Infrastructure might cover offices, version control, and IT. Planning: Develop the plan bringing
together the information on projects, resources, timescales, monitoring and control.[1]
Improvement: Continuously assess performance; research and develop new capabilities; and
systemically apply learning and knowledge to the program.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Why is this important?


Without clearly defined and integrated product,
marketing, and project management, innovation
will be haphazard, chaotic, and un-scaleable
with complexity and growth.


You can’t improve or accelerate what you can’t
understand or control.
• Putting random people on a galley ship won’t ensure you
will get where you want to go or make it go faster.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Research: Most PM’s
not being used effectively


Distracting challenges
Product and
company
strategy
10%

Customers
and market
8%

Internal
process and
organization
28%

Development
process
16%

Prioritization
and Focus
16%

2008-11-11

Time and
resources
22%

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Recommendation:
PM for Strategic Advantage
Focused on inbound tasks
 PM decision-making power






Roadmap, release contents, release
acceptance

Report to CEO/GM

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

New Product Development (NPD)
& Project Life Cycle Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Code & Fix
(AKA Cowboy Coding)

S ys tem
S pe cific atio n
(m a yb e )

2008-11-11

C o de -a nd -F ix

R elea se
(m ay be )

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Traditional NPD Process
Stage-Gate Process
Discovery
QuickTim e™ and a
de co m pres sor
are n eed ed to se e this p ictu re .

Scoping

Business
Case

Stage
1

Stage
2

Development

Test /
Validation

Launch

Stage
3

Stage
4

Stage
5

Gate
1

Gate
2

Gate
3

Gate
4

Gate
5

Idea
Screen

Second
Screen

Go To
Dev

Go To
Test

Go To
Launch

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Review
Qui ckT ime™ and a
deco mpre sso r
are nee ded t o see t his p ict ure.

Traditional Project Management
Waterfall Model
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Risk Reduction
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Subprojects
Pr od u ct
C o n ce pt

R e qu ire m en ts
A n a lysis

D e ta ile d
D e sig n

A rch itec tur a l
D e s ig n

C o din g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S u b sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S ub sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g a nd
D e b u gin g

D e ta ile d
D e s ig n

S ub s yste m
T e sting

C o d in g a nd
D eb u g in g

S yste m
T e sting
S u bs yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Overlapping
Phases (Sashimi)
P rodu ct
C o nc ep t

R equ ire m e nts
A na lysis

A rchite ctura l
D esig n

D etaile d
D e sign

C o din g an d
D e bu ging

S yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Design-to-Schedule
P roduct
C oncept

R equ irem ents
An alysis

Architectural
D esign

H ig h P rio rity: D etailed design , code, d ebug, test

M edium H igh Priority: D etailed desig n, code , debug, te st

R u n ou t of tim e or
m oney h ere

M ed ium P riority: D e tailed design , code, debug , test

M ediu m Low P riority: D etailed design , co de, de bug, test

Low Priority: D etailed design, code , debug , test

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

R elease

Design-to-Tools
F u n ctio n a lity s u p p o rte d b y
th e to o ls

F u n ctio n a lity th a t w ill
n o t b e in th e p ro d u ct

Fu n c tio n a lity th a t w ill b e
b u ilt

Id e a l fu n c tio n a lity

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Iterative Project Management
Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Spiral (Boehm)

R epe at as requ ire d

1. D eter m ine
ob jective s,
alte rnatives,
constraints

2008-11-11

2 . Iden tify and
reso lve risks

3. E va lu ate
a ltern atives

4 . D evelop
ite ration
d elivera ble s a nd
verify co rrect

5 . P la n the ne xt
ite ratio n

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

6.
C om m it to an
a ppro ach for ne xt
ite ratio n

Evolutionary Prototyping
No

In itial
con ce pt

2008-11-11

D esign and
im p lem ent
initia l
proto typ e

R efin e
p ro to typ e

C usto m e r
a ccep tab le ?

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

C om p lete
a nd
relea se

Staged Delivery
(AKA Incremental Implementation)
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

R e q u ire m e nts
A n a ly sis

A rch ite c tu ra l
D e sig n

S ta g e 1 : D e ta ile d d e s ig n , c o d e , d e b u g , te st, d e liv e ry

S ta g e 2 : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e liv e ry

S ta g e n : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e live ry

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Evolutionary Delivery
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

P re lim in a ry
R e q u ire m e n ts
A n a lys is

A rch ite ctu ra l
D e s ig n a n d
S ys te m C o re

D e liv e r F in a l
V e rsio n

D e v e lo p a V e rsio n

In c o rp o ra te
C u s to m e r
F e e d b a ck

D e liv e ry th e
V e rs io n

E licit C u sto m e r
F e e d b a ck

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Project Management
“There is nothing new
under the sun but there
are lots of old things
we don't know.”
Ambrose Bierce

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Principles (2001)













Customer satisfaction by rapid, continuous delivery of useful software
Working software is delivered frequently (weeks rather than months)
Working software is the principal measure of progress
Even late changes in requirements are welcomed
Close, daily cooperation between business people and developers
Face-to-face conversation is the best form of communication (Co-location)
Projects are built around motivated individuals, who should be trusted
Continuous attention to technical excellence and good design
Simplicity
Self-organizing teams
Regular adaptation to changing circumstances

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Characteristics


Time periods in weeks rather than months


time period as a strict timebox.

Work is performed in a highly
collaborative manner.
 If the sponsors of the project are
concerned about completing certain goals
with a defined timeline or budget, agile
may not be appropriate.


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Methodologies (Partial)


Agile Unified Process (AUP)







Simplified IBM Rational Unified Process (RUP)

Extreme programming (XP)
Feature Driven Development (FDD)
Scrum


“Pig” Roles
• Product owner (VOC - Product Manager)
• ScrumMaster (Project Manager)
• Team (Developers)



“Chicken” Roles
• Users
• Stakeholders (customers, vendors)
• Managers

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Adaptive (Agile) vs
Predictive (Plan-driven)
Strengths of each:


Adaptive










Low criticality
Senior developers
Requirements change
very often
Small number of
developers
Culture that thrives on
chaos

2008-11-11

Predictive








High criticality
Junior developers
Requirements don't
change too often
Large number of
developers
Culture that demands
order

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Model Selection Criteria













How well do my customer and we understand the requirements at the beginning of
the project? Is our understanding likely to change significantly as we move through
the project?
How well do we understand the system architecture? Are we likely to need to make
major architectural changes midway through the project?
How much reliable do we need?
How much do we need to plan ahead and design ahead during this project for future
versions?
How much risk does the project entail?
Are we constrained by a predefined schedule?
Do we need to be able to make midcourse corrections?
Do we need to provide customers with visible progress throughout the project?
Do we need to provide management with visible progress throughout the project?
How much sophistication do we need to use this lifecycle model successfully?

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Project Management Models:
Strengths and Weaknesses
M od el C apa city
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
requ ire m en ts
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
arch ite ctu re
Pr od uce s h ig h ly
rel iable sy stem
Pr od uce s sy stem wi th
la rg e g ro wth en v elop
M ana g es ri sk s
Can be c o n strain ed to
p re de te rm in ed
sc h ed u le
Ha s lo w ove rh e ad
A llo w s for m id co ur se
co rre ct ion s
Pr ovid es c u stom ers
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Pr ovid es ma n ag em en t
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Requ ir es little m ana ge r
o r d evelop er
sop h istic atio n

Pure
W ate rfall

C od e-an d F ix

Spi ral

M odi fied
W ate rfall

E vol ut io nar y
Pr o to ty pin g

S tag ed
De liv er y

E vol ut io nar y
De liv er y

De sig n -to sc h ed u le

De sig n to -too ls

C o mme rcial
Of f-th e -sh elf
so ft w are

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

F air

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r to
fai r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

2008-11-11

F air to
exc ellent
F air to
exc ellent

P oo r

N/ A

P oo r to
fai r

N/ A

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air to
exc ellent

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

N/ A

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

N/ A

P oo r

P oo r to
fai r

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Accelerating the NPD Life Cycle
Model
Ideaisation

Go:No-Go

Scoping

Go:No-Go

Planning

Go:No-Go

Development

Go:No-Go

Testing

Go:No-Go

Launch

Go:No-Go

Maintenance
Retirement

Project Lifecycle Framework
 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

EOL

Discussion

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Away
Recommendations
“For which of you,
desiring to build a
tower, doesn't first sit
down and count the
cost, to see if he has
enough to complete it?”
Jesus
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation


Ready-Aim-Fire


Haste makes waste (penny wise, pound foolish)
• Choosing the wrong models will result in unfulfilled
expectations and delays

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Ready


Recognizing the difference between








product management,
marketing, and
project management

Having a well defined NPD process
Not standardizing on only one project model
Having a positive teamwork environment,
inspirational leadership, focused vision, and
necessary skills

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Aim
Ensuring up-front homework done first
 Ensuring the resources(staff) & time to do
it right
 Verifying available resource costs (people
and time)
 Selecting the most appropriate project
model
 Taking the time to do the planning right


Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Fire
Being flexible within parameters
 Regular review of processes and methods
 Regular, frequent review of new ideas
and market information


Fini


Robert Grupe





[email protected]
+1.314.266.7321

Further reading







Forrester “Making Product Management A Strategic
Resource”
Winning at New Products, Robert G Cooper
Rapid Development, Steve McConnell
PDMA Visions magazine, Jun & Sept 2008

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.


Slide 22

7 Management Solutions

Red

Accelerating Innovation
Overview and discussion of NPD
and project management life cycle
models
Robert Grupe
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Introduction
An overview and discussion of integrated
new product development and project life
cycle models for best practice approaches
to successful innovation and accelerated
time to market.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agenda






Clarification of PM Terminology
Strategically Focused PM
NPD vs. Project Management
Models







Waterfall Models
Iterative Models
Agile Approaches

Discussion
Roundup
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Clarification of Terminology
Product Management
 Project Management
 Program Management


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Product Management



Planning and marketing of a product or products at all stages of the
product lifecycle.
Product planning (in-bound marketing)
[Product Manager (PM)]






Defining new products
Gathering market requirements (VoC)
Building product roadmaps
Product Life Cycle considerations
• Stages: introduction, growth, mature, saturation/decline





Competitive differentiation

Product marketing (outbound marketing)
[Product Marketing Manager (PMM)]





Product positioning and outbound messaging
Promotion: press, customers, and partners
Packaging and delivery
Competition messaging monitoring

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Project Management



Project Planning
[Project Manager (PjM)]
Achieve all of the goals of the project charter while
adhering to




Project constraints: scope, time, cost and quality.

Project management life cycle



5 Process Groups: Project Initiation, Project Planning, Project
Execution, Project monitoring and control, and Project closeout.
9 Knowledge Areas: integration management, scope
management, time management, cost management, quality
management, human resource management, communications
management,risk management and procurement management.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology: Program Management
[& Product Portfolio Management]













Layer above project management focusing on selecting the best group of programs [and
products,] defining them in terms of their constituent projects and providing an infrastructure
where projects can be run successfully
Governance: The structure, process, and procedure to control operations and changes to
performance objectives.
Standards: Define the performance architecture.
Alignment: The program must support higher level vision, goals and objectives.
Assurance: Verify and validate the program, ensuring adherence to standards and alignment
with the vision.
Management: Ensure there are regular reviews, there is accountability, and that management of
projects, stakeholders and suppliers is in place.
Integration: Optimize performance across the program value chain, functionally and technically.
Finances: Tracking of finances is an important part of Program management and basic costs
together with wider costs of administering the program are all tracked.
Infrastructure: Allocation of resources influences the cost and success of the program.
Infrastructure might cover offices, version control, and IT. Planning: Develop the plan bringing
together the information on projects, resources, timescales, monitoring and control.[1]
Improvement: Continuously assess performance; research and develop new capabilities; and
systemically apply learning and knowledge to the program.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Why is this important?


Without clearly defined and integrated product,
marketing, and project management, innovation
will be haphazard, chaotic, and un-scaleable
with complexity and growth.


You can’t improve or accelerate what you can’t
understand or control.
• Putting random people on a galley ship won’t ensure you
will get where you want to go or make it go faster.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Research: Most PM’s
not being used effectively


Distracting challenges
Product and
company
strategy
10%

Customers
and market
8%

Internal
process and
organization
28%

Development
process
16%

Prioritization
and Focus
16%

2008-11-11

Time and
resources
22%

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Recommendation:
PM for Strategic Advantage
Focused on inbound tasks
 PM decision-making power






Roadmap, release contents, release
acceptance

Report to CEO/GM

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

New Product Development (NPD)
& Project Life Cycle Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Code & Fix
(AKA Cowboy Coding)

S ys tem
S pe cific atio n
(m a yb e )

2008-11-11

C o de -a nd -F ix

R elea se
(m ay be )

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Traditional NPD Process
Stage-Gate Process
Discovery
QuickTim e™ and a
de co m pres sor
are n eed ed to se e this p ictu re .

Scoping

Business
Case

Stage
1

Stage
2

Development

Test /
Validation

Launch

Stage
3

Stage
4

Stage
5

Gate
1

Gate
2

Gate
3

Gate
4

Gate
5

Idea
Screen

Second
Screen

Go To
Dev

Go To
Test

Go To
Launch

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Review
Qui ckT ime™ and a
deco mpre sso r
are nee ded t o see t his p ict ure.

Traditional Project Management
Waterfall Model
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Risk Reduction
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Subprojects
Pr od u ct
C o n ce pt

R e qu ire m en ts
A n a lysis

D e ta ile d
D e sig n

A rch itec tur a l
D e s ig n

C o din g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S u b sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S ub sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g a nd
D e b u gin g

D e ta ile d
D e s ig n

S ub s yste m
T e sting

C o d in g a nd
D eb u g in g

S yste m
T e sting
S u bs yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Overlapping
Phases (Sashimi)
P rodu ct
C o nc ep t

R equ ire m e nts
A na lysis

A rchite ctura l
D esig n

D etaile d
D e sign

C o din g an d
D e bu ging

S yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Design-to-Schedule
P roduct
C oncept

R equ irem ents
An alysis

Architectural
D esign

H ig h P rio rity: D etailed design , code, d ebug, test

M edium H igh Priority: D etailed desig n, code , debug, te st

R u n ou t of tim e or
m oney h ere

M ed ium P riority: D e tailed design , code, debug , test

M ediu m Low P riority: D etailed design , co de, de bug, test

Low Priority: D etailed design, code , debug , test

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

R elease

Design-to-Tools
F u n ctio n a lity s u p p o rte d b y
th e to o ls

F u n ctio n a lity th a t w ill
n o t b e in th e p ro d u ct

Fu n c tio n a lity th a t w ill b e
b u ilt

Id e a l fu n c tio n a lity

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Iterative Project Management
Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Spiral (Boehm)

R epe at as requ ire d

1. D eter m ine
ob jective s,
alte rnatives,
constraints

2008-11-11

2 . Iden tify and
reso lve risks

3. E va lu ate
a ltern atives

4 . D evelop
ite ration
d elivera ble s a nd
verify co rrect

5 . P la n the ne xt
ite ratio n

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

6.
C om m it to an
a ppro ach for ne xt
ite ratio n

Evolutionary Prototyping
No

In itial
con ce pt

2008-11-11

D esign and
im p lem ent
initia l
proto typ e

R efin e
p ro to typ e

C usto m e r
a ccep tab le ?

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

C om p lete
a nd
relea se

Staged Delivery
(AKA Incremental Implementation)
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

R e q u ire m e nts
A n a ly sis

A rch ite c tu ra l
D e sig n

S ta g e 1 : D e ta ile d d e s ig n , c o d e , d e b u g , te st, d e liv e ry

S ta g e 2 : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e liv e ry

S ta g e n : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e live ry

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Evolutionary Delivery
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

P re lim in a ry
R e q u ire m e n ts
A n a lys is

A rch ite ctu ra l
D e s ig n a n d
S ys te m C o re

D e liv e r F in a l
V e rsio n

D e v e lo p a V e rsio n

In c o rp o ra te
C u s to m e r
F e e d b a ck

D e liv e ry th e
V e rs io n

E licit C u sto m e r
F e e d b a ck

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Project Management
“There is nothing new
under the sun but there
are lots of old things
we don't know.”
Ambrose Bierce

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Principles (2001)













Customer satisfaction by rapid, continuous delivery of useful software
Working software is delivered frequently (weeks rather than months)
Working software is the principal measure of progress
Even late changes in requirements are welcomed
Close, daily cooperation between business people and developers
Face-to-face conversation is the best form of communication (Co-location)
Projects are built around motivated individuals, who should be trusted
Continuous attention to technical excellence and good design
Simplicity
Self-organizing teams
Regular adaptation to changing circumstances

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Characteristics


Time periods in weeks rather than months


time period as a strict timebox.

Work is performed in a highly
collaborative manner.
 If the sponsors of the project are
concerned about completing certain goals
with a defined timeline or budget, agile
may not be appropriate.


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Methodologies (Partial)


Agile Unified Process (AUP)







Simplified IBM Rational Unified Process (RUP)

Extreme programming (XP)
Feature Driven Development (FDD)
Scrum


“Pig” Roles
• Product owner (VOC - Product Manager)
• ScrumMaster (Project Manager)
• Team (Developers)



“Chicken” Roles
• Users
• Stakeholders (customers, vendors)
• Managers

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Adaptive (Agile) vs
Predictive (Plan-driven)
Strengths of each:


Adaptive










Low criticality
Senior developers
Requirements change
very often
Small number of
developers
Culture that thrives on
chaos

2008-11-11

Predictive








High criticality
Junior developers
Requirements don't
change too often
Large number of
developers
Culture that demands
order

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Model Selection Criteria













How well do my customer and we understand the requirements at the beginning of
the project? Is our understanding likely to change significantly as we move through
the project?
How well do we understand the system architecture? Are we likely to need to make
major architectural changes midway through the project?
How much reliable do we need?
How much do we need to plan ahead and design ahead during this project for future
versions?
How much risk does the project entail?
Are we constrained by a predefined schedule?
Do we need to be able to make midcourse corrections?
Do we need to provide customers with visible progress throughout the project?
Do we need to provide management with visible progress throughout the project?
How much sophistication do we need to use this lifecycle model successfully?

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Project Management Models:
Strengths and Weaknesses
M od el C apa city
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
requ ire m en ts
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
arch ite ctu re
Pr od uce s h ig h ly
rel iable sy stem
Pr od uce s sy stem wi th
la rg e g ro wth en v elop
M ana g es ri sk s
Can be c o n strain ed to
p re de te rm in ed
sc h ed u le
Ha s lo w ove rh e ad
A llo w s for m id co ur se
co rre ct ion s
Pr ovid es c u stom ers
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Pr ovid es ma n ag em en t
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Requ ir es little m ana ge r
o r d evelop er
sop h istic atio n

Pure
W ate rfall

C od e-an d F ix

Spi ral

M odi fied
W ate rfall

E vol ut io nar y
Pr o to ty pin g

S tag ed
De liv er y

E vol ut io nar y
De liv er y

De sig n -to sc h ed u le

De sig n to -too ls

C o mme rcial
Of f-th e -sh elf
so ft w are

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

F air

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r to
fai r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

2008-11-11

F air to
exc ellent
F air to
exc ellent

P oo r

N/ A

P oo r to
fai r

N/ A

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air to
exc ellent

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

N/ A

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

N/ A

P oo r

P oo r to
fai r

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Accelerating the NPD Life Cycle
Model
Ideaisation

Go:No-Go

Scoping

Go:No-Go

Planning

Go:No-Go

Development

Go:No-Go

Testing

Go:No-Go

Launch

Go:No-Go

Maintenance
Retirement

Project Lifecycle Framework
 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

EOL

Discussion

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Away
Recommendations
“For which of you,
desiring to build a
tower, doesn't first sit
down and count the
cost, to see if he has
enough to complete it?”
Jesus
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation


Ready-Aim-Fire


Haste makes waste (penny wise, pound foolish)
• Choosing the wrong models will result in unfulfilled
expectations and delays

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Ready


Recognizing the difference between








product management,
marketing, and
project management

Having a well defined NPD process
Not standardizing on only one project model
Having a positive teamwork environment,
inspirational leadership, focused vision, and
necessary skills

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Aim
Ensuring up-front homework done first
 Ensuring the resources(staff) & time to do
it right
 Verifying available resource costs (people
and time)
 Selecting the most appropriate project
model
 Taking the time to do the planning right


Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Fire
Being flexible within parameters
 Regular review of processes and methods
 Regular, frequent review of new ideas
and market information


Fini


Robert Grupe





[email protected]
+1.314.266.7321

Further reading







Forrester “Making Product Management A Strategic
Resource”
Winning at New Products, Robert G Cooper
Rapid Development, Steve McConnell
PDMA Visions magazine, Jun & Sept 2008

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.


Slide 23

7 Management Solutions

Red

Accelerating Innovation
Overview and discussion of NPD
and project management life cycle
models
Robert Grupe
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Introduction
An overview and discussion of integrated
new product development and project life
cycle models for best practice approaches
to successful innovation and accelerated
time to market.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agenda






Clarification of PM Terminology
Strategically Focused PM
NPD vs. Project Management
Models







Waterfall Models
Iterative Models
Agile Approaches

Discussion
Roundup
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Clarification of Terminology
Product Management
 Project Management
 Program Management


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Product Management



Planning and marketing of a product or products at all stages of the
product lifecycle.
Product planning (in-bound marketing)
[Product Manager (PM)]






Defining new products
Gathering market requirements (VoC)
Building product roadmaps
Product Life Cycle considerations
• Stages: introduction, growth, mature, saturation/decline





Competitive differentiation

Product marketing (outbound marketing)
[Product Marketing Manager (PMM)]





Product positioning and outbound messaging
Promotion: press, customers, and partners
Packaging and delivery
Competition messaging monitoring

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Project Management



Project Planning
[Project Manager (PjM)]
Achieve all of the goals of the project charter while
adhering to




Project constraints: scope, time, cost and quality.

Project management life cycle



5 Process Groups: Project Initiation, Project Planning, Project
Execution, Project monitoring and control, and Project closeout.
9 Knowledge Areas: integration management, scope
management, time management, cost management, quality
management, human resource management, communications
management,risk management and procurement management.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology: Program Management
[& Product Portfolio Management]













Layer above project management focusing on selecting the best group of programs [and
products,] defining them in terms of their constituent projects and providing an infrastructure
where projects can be run successfully
Governance: The structure, process, and procedure to control operations and changes to
performance objectives.
Standards: Define the performance architecture.
Alignment: The program must support higher level vision, goals and objectives.
Assurance: Verify and validate the program, ensuring adherence to standards and alignment
with the vision.
Management: Ensure there are regular reviews, there is accountability, and that management of
projects, stakeholders and suppliers is in place.
Integration: Optimize performance across the program value chain, functionally and technically.
Finances: Tracking of finances is an important part of Program management and basic costs
together with wider costs of administering the program are all tracked.
Infrastructure: Allocation of resources influences the cost and success of the program.
Infrastructure might cover offices, version control, and IT. Planning: Develop the plan bringing
together the information on projects, resources, timescales, monitoring and control.[1]
Improvement: Continuously assess performance; research and develop new capabilities; and
systemically apply learning and knowledge to the program.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Why is this important?


Without clearly defined and integrated product,
marketing, and project management, innovation
will be haphazard, chaotic, and un-scaleable
with complexity and growth.


You can’t improve or accelerate what you can’t
understand or control.
• Putting random people on a galley ship won’t ensure you
will get where you want to go or make it go faster.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Research: Most PM’s
not being used effectively


Distracting challenges
Product and
company
strategy
10%

Customers
and market
8%

Internal
process and
organization
28%

Development
process
16%

Prioritization
and Focus
16%

2008-11-11

Time and
resources
22%

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Recommendation:
PM for Strategic Advantage
Focused on inbound tasks
 PM decision-making power






Roadmap, release contents, release
acceptance

Report to CEO/GM

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

New Product Development (NPD)
& Project Life Cycle Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Code & Fix
(AKA Cowboy Coding)

S ys tem
S pe cific atio n
(m a yb e )

2008-11-11

C o de -a nd -F ix

R elea se
(m ay be )

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Traditional NPD Process
Stage-Gate Process
Discovery
QuickTim e™ and a
de co m pres sor
are n eed ed to se e this p ictu re .

Scoping

Business
Case

Stage
1

Stage
2

Development

Test /
Validation

Launch

Stage
3

Stage
4

Stage
5

Gate
1

Gate
2

Gate
3

Gate
4

Gate
5

Idea
Screen

Second
Screen

Go To
Dev

Go To
Test

Go To
Launch

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Review
Qui ckT ime™ and a
deco mpre sso r
are nee ded t o see t his p ict ure.

Traditional Project Management
Waterfall Model
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Risk Reduction
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Subprojects
Pr od u ct
C o n ce pt

R e qu ire m en ts
A n a lysis

D e ta ile d
D e sig n

A rch itec tur a l
D e s ig n

C o din g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S u b sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S ub sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g a nd
D e b u gin g

D e ta ile d
D e s ig n

S ub s yste m
T e sting

C o d in g a nd
D eb u g in g

S yste m
T e sting
S u bs yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Overlapping
Phases (Sashimi)
P rodu ct
C o nc ep t

R equ ire m e nts
A na lysis

A rchite ctura l
D esig n

D etaile d
D e sign

C o din g an d
D e bu ging

S yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Design-to-Schedule
P roduct
C oncept

R equ irem ents
An alysis

Architectural
D esign

H ig h P rio rity: D etailed design , code, d ebug, test

M edium H igh Priority: D etailed desig n, code , debug, te st

R u n ou t of tim e or
m oney h ere

M ed ium P riority: D e tailed design , code, debug , test

M ediu m Low P riority: D etailed design , co de, de bug, test

Low Priority: D etailed design, code , debug , test

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

R elease

Design-to-Tools
F u n ctio n a lity s u p p o rte d b y
th e to o ls

F u n ctio n a lity th a t w ill
n o t b e in th e p ro d u ct

Fu n c tio n a lity th a t w ill b e
b u ilt

Id e a l fu n c tio n a lity

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Iterative Project Management
Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Spiral (Boehm)

R epe at as requ ire d

1. D eter m ine
ob jective s,
alte rnatives,
constraints

2008-11-11

2 . Iden tify and
reso lve risks

3. E va lu ate
a ltern atives

4 . D evelop
ite ration
d elivera ble s a nd
verify co rrect

5 . P la n the ne xt
ite ratio n

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

6.
C om m it to an
a ppro ach for ne xt
ite ratio n

Evolutionary Prototyping
No

In itial
con ce pt

2008-11-11

D esign and
im p lem ent
initia l
proto typ e

R efin e
p ro to typ e

C usto m e r
a ccep tab le ?

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

C om p lete
a nd
relea se

Staged Delivery
(AKA Incremental Implementation)
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

R e q u ire m e nts
A n a ly sis

A rch ite c tu ra l
D e sig n

S ta g e 1 : D e ta ile d d e s ig n , c o d e , d e b u g , te st, d e liv e ry

S ta g e 2 : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e liv e ry

S ta g e n : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e live ry

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Evolutionary Delivery
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

P re lim in a ry
R e q u ire m e n ts
A n a lys is

A rch ite ctu ra l
D e s ig n a n d
S ys te m C o re

D e liv e r F in a l
V e rsio n

D e v e lo p a V e rsio n

In c o rp o ra te
C u s to m e r
F e e d b a ck

D e liv e ry th e
V e rs io n

E licit C u sto m e r
F e e d b a ck

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Project Management
“There is nothing new
under the sun but there
are lots of old things
we don't know.”
Ambrose Bierce

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Principles (2001)













Customer satisfaction by rapid, continuous delivery of useful software
Working software is delivered frequently (weeks rather than months)
Working software is the principal measure of progress
Even late changes in requirements are welcomed
Close, daily cooperation between business people and developers
Face-to-face conversation is the best form of communication (Co-location)
Projects are built around motivated individuals, who should be trusted
Continuous attention to technical excellence and good design
Simplicity
Self-organizing teams
Regular adaptation to changing circumstances

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Characteristics


Time periods in weeks rather than months


time period as a strict timebox.

Work is performed in a highly
collaborative manner.
 If the sponsors of the project are
concerned about completing certain goals
with a defined timeline or budget, agile
may not be appropriate.


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Methodologies (Partial)


Agile Unified Process (AUP)







Simplified IBM Rational Unified Process (RUP)

Extreme programming (XP)
Feature Driven Development (FDD)
Scrum


“Pig” Roles
• Product owner (VOC - Product Manager)
• ScrumMaster (Project Manager)
• Team (Developers)



“Chicken” Roles
• Users
• Stakeholders (customers, vendors)
• Managers

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Adaptive (Agile) vs
Predictive (Plan-driven)
Strengths of each:


Adaptive










Low criticality
Senior developers
Requirements change
very often
Small number of
developers
Culture that thrives on
chaos

2008-11-11

Predictive








High criticality
Junior developers
Requirements don't
change too often
Large number of
developers
Culture that demands
order

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Model Selection Criteria













How well do my customer and we understand the requirements at the beginning of
the project? Is our understanding likely to change significantly as we move through
the project?
How well do we understand the system architecture? Are we likely to need to make
major architectural changes midway through the project?
How much reliable do we need?
How much do we need to plan ahead and design ahead during this project for future
versions?
How much risk does the project entail?
Are we constrained by a predefined schedule?
Do we need to be able to make midcourse corrections?
Do we need to provide customers with visible progress throughout the project?
Do we need to provide management with visible progress throughout the project?
How much sophistication do we need to use this lifecycle model successfully?

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Project Management Models:
Strengths and Weaknesses
M od el C apa city
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
requ ire m en ts
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
arch ite ctu re
Pr od uce s h ig h ly
rel iable sy stem
Pr od uce s sy stem wi th
la rg e g ro wth en v elop
M ana g es ri sk s
Can be c o n strain ed to
p re de te rm in ed
sc h ed u le
Ha s lo w ove rh e ad
A llo w s for m id co ur se
co rre ct ion s
Pr ovid es c u stom ers
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Pr ovid es ma n ag em en t
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Requ ir es little m ana ge r
o r d evelop er
sop h istic atio n

Pure
W ate rfall

C od e-an d F ix

Spi ral

M odi fied
W ate rfall

E vol ut io nar y
Pr o to ty pin g

S tag ed
De liv er y

E vol ut io nar y
De liv er y

De sig n -to sc h ed u le

De sig n to -too ls

C o mme rcial
Of f-th e -sh elf
so ft w are

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

F air

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r to
fai r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

2008-11-11

F air to
exc ellent
F air to
exc ellent

P oo r

N/ A

P oo r to
fai r

N/ A

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air to
exc ellent

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

N/ A

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

N/ A

P oo r

P oo r to
fai r

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Accelerating the NPD Life Cycle
Model
Ideaisation

Go:No-Go

Scoping

Go:No-Go

Planning

Go:No-Go

Development

Go:No-Go

Testing

Go:No-Go

Launch

Go:No-Go

Maintenance
Retirement

Project Lifecycle Framework
 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

EOL

Discussion

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Away
Recommendations
“For which of you,
desiring to build a
tower, doesn't first sit
down and count the
cost, to see if he has
enough to complete it?”
Jesus
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation


Ready-Aim-Fire


Haste makes waste (penny wise, pound foolish)
• Choosing the wrong models will result in unfulfilled
expectations and delays

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Ready


Recognizing the difference between








product management,
marketing, and
project management

Having a well defined NPD process
Not standardizing on only one project model
Having a positive teamwork environment,
inspirational leadership, focused vision, and
necessary skills

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Aim
Ensuring up-front homework done first
 Ensuring the resources(staff) & time to do
it right
 Verifying available resource costs (people
and time)
 Selecting the most appropriate project
model
 Taking the time to do the planning right


Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Fire
Being flexible within parameters
 Regular review of processes and methods
 Regular, frequent review of new ideas
and market information


Fini


Robert Grupe





[email protected]
+1.314.266.7321

Further reading







Forrester “Making Product Management A Strategic
Resource”
Winning at New Products, Robert G Cooper
Rapid Development, Steve McConnell
PDMA Visions magazine, Jun & Sept 2008

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.


Slide 24

7 Management Solutions

Red

Accelerating Innovation
Overview and discussion of NPD
and project management life cycle
models
Robert Grupe
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Introduction
An overview and discussion of integrated
new product development and project life
cycle models for best practice approaches
to successful innovation and accelerated
time to market.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agenda






Clarification of PM Terminology
Strategically Focused PM
NPD vs. Project Management
Models







Waterfall Models
Iterative Models
Agile Approaches

Discussion
Roundup
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Clarification of Terminology
Product Management
 Project Management
 Program Management


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Product Management



Planning and marketing of a product or products at all stages of the
product lifecycle.
Product planning (in-bound marketing)
[Product Manager (PM)]






Defining new products
Gathering market requirements (VoC)
Building product roadmaps
Product Life Cycle considerations
• Stages: introduction, growth, mature, saturation/decline





Competitive differentiation

Product marketing (outbound marketing)
[Product Marketing Manager (PMM)]





Product positioning and outbound messaging
Promotion: press, customers, and partners
Packaging and delivery
Competition messaging monitoring

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Project Management



Project Planning
[Project Manager (PjM)]
Achieve all of the goals of the project charter while
adhering to




Project constraints: scope, time, cost and quality.

Project management life cycle



5 Process Groups: Project Initiation, Project Planning, Project
Execution, Project monitoring and control, and Project closeout.
9 Knowledge Areas: integration management, scope
management, time management, cost management, quality
management, human resource management, communications
management,risk management and procurement management.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology: Program Management
[& Product Portfolio Management]













Layer above project management focusing on selecting the best group of programs [and
products,] defining them in terms of their constituent projects and providing an infrastructure
where projects can be run successfully
Governance: The structure, process, and procedure to control operations and changes to
performance objectives.
Standards: Define the performance architecture.
Alignment: The program must support higher level vision, goals and objectives.
Assurance: Verify and validate the program, ensuring adherence to standards and alignment
with the vision.
Management: Ensure there are regular reviews, there is accountability, and that management of
projects, stakeholders and suppliers is in place.
Integration: Optimize performance across the program value chain, functionally and technically.
Finances: Tracking of finances is an important part of Program management and basic costs
together with wider costs of administering the program are all tracked.
Infrastructure: Allocation of resources influences the cost and success of the program.
Infrastructure might cover offices, version control, and IT. Planning: Develop the plan bringing
together the information on projects, resources, timescales, monitoring and control.[1]
Improvement: Continuously assess performance; research and develop new capabilities; and
systemically apply learning and knowledge to the program.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Why is this important?


Without clearly defined and integrated product,
marketing, and project management, innovation
will be haphazard, chaotic, and un-scaleable
with complexity and growth.


You can’t improve or accelerate what you can’t
understand or control.
• Putting random people on a galley ship won’t ensure you
will get where you want to go or make it go faster.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Research: Most PM’s
not being used effectively


Distracting challenges
Product and
company
strategy
10%

Customers
and market
8%

Internal
process and
organization
28%

Development
process
16%

Prioritization
and Focus
16%

2008-11-11

Time and
resources
22%

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Recommendation:
PM for Strategic Advantage
Focused on inbound tasks
 PM decision-making power






Roadmap, release contents, release
acceptance

Report to CEO/GM

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

New Product Development (NPD)
& Project Life Cycle Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Code & Fix
(AKA Cowboy Coding)

S ys tem
S pe cific atio n
(m a yb e )

2008-11-11

C o de -a nd -F ix

R elea se
(m ay be )

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Traditional NPD Process
Stage-Gate Process
Discovery
QuickTim e™ and a
de co m pres sor
are n eed ed to se e this p ictu re .

Scoping

Business
Case

Stage
1

Stage
2

Development

Test /
Validation

Launch

Stage
3

Stage
4

Stage
5

Gate
1

Gate
2

Gate
3

Gate
4

Gate
5

Idea
Screen

Second
Screen

Go To
Dev

Go To
Test

Go To
Launch

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Review
Qui ckT ime™ and a
deco mpre sso r
are nee ded t o see t his p ict ure.

Traditional Project Management
Waterfall Model
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Risk Reduction
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Subprojects
Pr od u ct
C o n ce pt

R e qu ire m en ts
A n a lysis

D e ta ile d
D e sig n

A rch itec tur a l
D e s ig n

C o din g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S u b sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S ub sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g a nd
D e b u gin g

D e ta ile d
D e s ig n

S ub s yste m
T e sting

C o d in g a nd
D eb u g in g

S yste m
T e sting
S u bs yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Overlapping
Phases (Sashimi)
P rodu ct
C o nc ep t

R equ ire m e nts
A na lysis

A rchite ctura l
D esig n

D etaile d
D e sign

C o din g an d
D e bu ging

S yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Design-to-Schedule
P roduct
C oncept

R equ irem ents
An alysis

Architectural
D esign

H ig h P rio rity: D etailed design , code, d ebug, test

M edium H igh Priority: D etailed desig n, code , debug, te st

R u n ou t of tim e or
m oney h ere

M ed ium P riority: D e tailed design , code, debug , test

M ediu m Low P riority: D etailed design , co de, de bug, test

Low Priority: D etailed design, code , debug , test

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

R elease

Design-to-Tools
F u n ctio n a lity s u p p o rte d b y
th e to o ls

F u n ctio n a lity th a t w ill
n o t b e in th e p ro d u ct

Fu n c tio n a lity th a t w ill b e
b u ilt

Id e a l fu n c tio n a lity

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Iterative Project Management
Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Spiral (Boehm)

R epe at as requ ire d

1. D eter m ine
ob jective s,
alte rnatives,
constraints

2008-11-11

2 . Iden tify and
reso lve risks

3. E va lu ate
a ltern atives

4 . D evelop
ite ration
d elivera ble s a nd
verify co rrect

5 . P la n the ne xt
ite ratio n

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

6.
C om m it to an
a ppro ach for ne xt
ite ratio n

Evolutionary Prototyping
No

In itial
con ce pt

2008-11-11

D esign and
im p lem ent
initia l
proto typ e

R efin e
p ro to typ e

C usto m e r
a ccep tab le ?

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

C om p lete
a nd
relea se

Staged Delivery
(AKA Incremental Implementation)
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

R e q u ire m e nts
A n a ly sis

A rch ite c tu ra l
D e sig n

S ta g e 1 : D e ta ile d d e s ig n , c o d e , d e b u g , te st, d e liv e ry

S ta g e 2 : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e liv e ry

S ta g e n : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e live ry

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Evolutionary Delivery
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

P re lim in a ry
R e q u ire m e n ts
A n a lys is

A rch ite ctu ra l
D e s ig n a n d
S ys te m C o re

D e liv e r F in a l
V e rsio n

D e v e lo p a V e rsio n

In c o rp o ra te
C u s to m e r
F e e d b a ck

D e liv e ry th e
V e rs io n

E licit C u sto m e r
F e e d b a ck

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Project Management
“There is nothing new
under the sun but there
are lots of old things
we don't know.”
Ambrose Bierce

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Principles (2001)













Customer satisfaction by rapid, continuous delivery of useful software
Working software is delivered frequently (weeks rather than months)
Working software is the principal measure of progress
Even late changes in requirements are welcomed
Close, daily cooperation between business people and developers
Face-to-face conversation is the best form of communication (Co-location)
Projects are built around motivated individuals, who should be trusted
Continuous attention to technical excellence and good design
Simplicity
Self-organizing teams
Regular adaptation to changing circumstances

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Characteristics


Time periods in weeks rather than months


time period as a strict timebox.

Work is performed in a highly
collaborative manner.
 If the sponsors of the project are
concerned about completing certain goals
with a defined timeline or budget, agile
may not be appropriate.


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Methodologies (Partial)


Agile Unified Process (AUP)







Simplified IBM Rational Unified Process (RUP)

Extreme programming (XP)
Feature Driven Development (FDD)
Scrum


“Pig” Roles
• Product owner (VOC - Product Manager)
• ScrumMaster (Project Manager)
• Team (Developers)



“Chicken” Roles
• Users
• Stakeholders (customers, vendors)
• Managers

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Adaptive (Agile) vs
Predictive (Plan-driven)
Strengths of each:


Adaptive










Low criticality
Senior developers
Requirements change
very often
Small number of
developers
Culture that thrives on
chaos

2008-11-11

Predictive








High criticality
Junior developers
Requirements don't
change too often
Large number of
developers
Culture that demands
order

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Model Selection Criteria













How well do my customer and we understand the requirements at the beginning of
the project? Is our understanding likely to change significantly as we move through
the project?
How well do we understand the system architecture? Are we likely to need to make
major architectural changes midway through the project?
How much reliable do we need?
How much do we need to plan ahead and design ahead during this project for future
versions?
How much risk does the project entail?
Are we constrained by a predefined schedule?
Do we need to be able to make midcourse corrections?
Do we need to provide customers with visible progress throughout the project?
Do we need to provide management with visible progress throughout the project?
How much sophistication do we need to use this lifecycle model successfully?

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Project Management Models:
Strengths and Weaknesses
M od el C apa city
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
requ ire m en ts
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
arch ite ctu re
Pr od uce s h ig h ly
rel iable sy stem
Pr od uce s sy stem wi th
la rg e g ro wth en v elop
M ana g es ri sk s
Can be c o n strain ed to
p re de te rm in ed
sc h ed u le
Ha s lo w ove rh e ad
A llo w s for m id co ur se
co rre ct ion s
Pr ovid es c u stom ers
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Pr ovid es ma n ag em en t
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Requ ir es little m ana ge r
o r d evelop er
sop h istic atio n

Pure
W ate rfall

C od e-an d F ix

Spi ral

M odi fied
W ate rfall

E vol ut io nar y
Pr o to ty pin g

S tag ed
De liv er y

E vol ut io nar y
De liv er y

De sig n -to sc h ed u le

De sig n to -too ls

C o mme rcial
Of f-th e -sh elf
so ft w are

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

F air

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r to
fai r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

2008-11-11

F air to
exc ellent
F air to
exc ellent

P oo r

N/ A

P oo r to
fai r

N/ A

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air to
exc ellent

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

N/ A

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

N/ A

P oo r

P oo r to
fai r

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Accelerating the NPD Life Cycle
Model
Ideaisation

Go:No-Go

Scoping

Go:No-Go

Planning

Go:No-Go

Development

Go:No-Go

Testing

Go:No-Go

Launch

Go:No-Go

Maintenance
Retirement

Project Lifecycle Framework
 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

EOL

Discussion

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Away
Recommendations
“For which of you,
desiring to build a
tower, doesn't first sit
down and count the
cost, to see if he has
enough to complete it?”
Jesus
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation


Ready-Aim-Fire


Haste makes waste (penny wise, pound foolish)
• Choosing the wrong models will result in unfulfilled
expectations and delays

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Ready


Recognizing the difference between








product management,
marketing, and
project management

Having a well defined NPD process
Not standardizing on only one project model
Having a positive teamwork environment,
inspirational leadership, focused vision, and
necessary skills

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Aim
Ensuring up-front homework done first
 Ensuring the resources(staff) & time to do
it right
 Verifying available resource costs (people
and time)
 Selecting the most appropriate project
model
 Taking the time to do the planning right


Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Fire
Being flexible within parameters
 Regular review of processes and methods
 Regular, frequent review of new ideas
and market information


Fini


Robert Grupe





[email protected]
+1.314.266.7321

Further reading







Forrester “Making Product Management A Strategic
Resource”
Winning at New Products, Robert G Cooper
Rapid Development, Steve McConnell
PDMA Visions magazine, Jun & Sept 2008

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.


Slide 25

7 Management Solutions

Red

Accelerating Innovation
Overview and discussion of NPD
and project management life cycle
models
Robert Grupe
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Introduction
An overview and discussion of integrated
new product development and project life
cycle models for best practice approaches
to successful innovation and accelerated
time to market.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agenda






Clarification of PM Terminology
Strategically Focused PM
NPD vs. Project Management
Models







Waterfall Models
Iterative Models
Agile Approaches

Discussion
Roundup
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Clarification of Terminology
Product Management
 Project Management
 Program Management


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Product Management



Planning and marketing of a product or products at all stages of the
product lifecycle.
Product planning (in-bound marketing)
[Product Manager (PM)]






Defining new products
Gathering market requirements (VoC)
Building product roadmaps
Product Life Cycle considerations
• Stages: introduction, growth, mature, saturation/decline





Competitive differentiation

Product marketing (outbound marketing)
[Product Marketing Manager (PMM)]





Product positioning and outbound messaging
Promotion: press, customers, and partners
Packaging and delivery
Competition messaging monitoring

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Project Management



Project Planning
[Project Manager (PjM)]
Achieve all of the goals of the project charter while
adhering to




Project constraints: scope, time, cost and quality.

Project management life cycle



5 Process Groups: Project Initiation, Project Planning, Project
Execution, Project monitoring and control, and Project closeout.
9 Knowledge Areas: integration management, scope
management, time management, cost management, quality
management, human resource management, communications
management,risk management and procurement management.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology: Program Management
[& Product Portfolio Management]













Layer above project management focusing on selecting the best group of programs [and
products,] defining them in terms of their constituent projects and providing an infrastructure
where projects can be run successfully
Governance: The structure, process, and procedure to control operations and changes to
performance objectives.
Standards: Define the performance architecture.
Alignment: The program must support higher level vision, goals and objectives.
Assurance: Verify and validate the program, ensuring adherence to standards and alignment
with the vision.
Management: Ensure there are regular reviews, there is accountability, and that management of
projects, stakeholders and suppliers is in place.
Integration: Optimize performance across the program value chain, functionally and technically.
Finances: Tracking of finances is an important part of Program management and basic costs
together with wider costs of administering the program are all tracked.
Infrastructure: Allocation of resources influences the cost and success of the program.
Infrastructure might cover offices, version control, and IT. Planning: Develop the plan bringing
together the information on projects, resources, timescales, monitoring and control.[1]
Improvement: Continuously assess performance; research and develop new capabilities; and
systemically apply learning and knowledge to the program.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Why is this important?


Without clearly defined and integrated product,
marketing, and project management, innovation
will be haphazard, chaotic, and un-scaleable
with complexity and growth.


You can’t improve or accelerate what you can’t
understand or control.
• Putting random people on a galley ship won’t ensure you
will get where you want to go or make it go faster.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Research: Most PM’s
not being used effectively


Distracting challenges
Product and
company
strategy
10%

Customers
and market
8%

Internal
process and
organization
28%

Development
process
16%

Prioritization
and Focus
16%

2008-11-11

Time and
resources
22%

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Recommendation:
PM for Strategic Advantage
Focused on inbound tasks
 PM decision-making power






Roadmap, release contents, release
acceptance

Report to CEO/GM

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

New Product Development (NPD)
& Project Life Cycle Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Code & Fix
(AKA Cowboy Coding)

S ys tem
S pe cific atio n
(m a yb e )

2008-11-11

C o de -a nd -F ix

R elea se
(m ay be )

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Traditional NPD Process
Stage-Gate Process
Discovery
QuickTim e™ and a
de co m pres sor
are n eed ed to se e this p ictu re .

Scoping

Business
Case

Stage
1

Stage
2

Development

Test /
Validation

Launch

Stage
3

Stage
4

Stage
5

Gate
1

Gate
2

Gate
3

Gate
4

Gate
5

Idea
Screen

Second
Screen

Go To
Dev

Go To
Test

Go To
Launch

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Review
Qui ckT ime™ and a
deco mpre sso r
are nee ded t o see t his p ict ure.

Traditional Project Management
Waterfall Model
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Risk Reduction
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Subprojects
Pr od u ct
C o n ce pt

R e qu ire m en ts
A n a lysis

D e ta ile d
D e sig n

A rch itec tur a l
D e s ig n

C o din g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S u b sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S ub sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g a nd
D e b u gin g

D e ta ile d
D e s ig n

S ub s yste m
T e sting

C o d in g a nd
D eb u g in g

S yste m
T e sting
S u bs yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Overlapping
Phases (Sashimi)
P rodu ct
C o nc ep t

R equ ire m e nts
A na lysis

A rchite ctura l
D esig n

D etaile d
D e sign

C o din g an d
D e bu ging

S yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Design-to-Schedule
P roduct
C oncept

R equ irem ents
An alysis

Architectural
D esign

H ig h P rio rity: D etailed design , code, d ebug, test

M edium H igh Priority: D etailed desig n, code , debug, te st

R u n ou t of tim e or
m oney h ere

M ed ium P riority: D e tailed design , code, debug , test

M ediu m Low P riority: D etailed design , co de, de bug, test

Low Priority: D etailed design, code , debug , test

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

R elease

Design-to-Tools
F u n ctio n a lity s u p p o rte d b y
th e to o ls

F u n ctio n a lity th a t w ill
n o t b e in th e p ro d u ct

Fu n c tio n a lity th a t w ill b e
b u ilt

Id e a l fu n c tio n a lity

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Iterative Project Management
Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Spiral (Boehm)

R epe at as requ ire d

1. D eter m ine
ob jective s,
alte rnatives,
constraints

2008-11-11

2 . Iden tify and
reso lve risks

3. E va lu ate
a ltern atives

4 . D evelop
ite ration
d elivera ble s a nd
verify co rrect

5 . P la n the ne xt
ite ratio n

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

6.
C om m it to an
a ppro ach for ne xt
ite ratio n

Evolutionary Prototyping
No

In itial
con ce pt

2008-11-11

D esign and
im p lem ent
initia l
proto typ e

R efin e
p ro to typ e

C usto m e r
a ccep tab le ?

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

C om p lete
a nd
relea se

Staged Delivery
(AKA Incremental Implementation)
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

R e q u ire m e nts
A n a ly sis

A rch ite c tu ra l
D e sig n

S ta g e 1 : D e ta ile d d e s ig n , c o d e , d e b u g , te st, d e liv e ry

S ta g e 2 : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e liv e ry

S ta g e n : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e live ry

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Evolutionary Delivery
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

P re lim in a ry
R e q u ire m e n ts
A n a lys is

A rch ite ctu ra l
D e s ig n a n d
S ys te m C o re

D e liv e r F in a l
V e rsio n

D e v e lo p a V e rsio n

In c o rp o ra te
C u s to m e r
F e e d b a ck

D e liv e ry th e
V e rs io n

E licit C u sto m e r
F e e d b a ck

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Project Management
“There is nothing new
under the sun but there
are lots of old things
we don't know.”
Ambrose Bierce

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Principles (2001)













Customer satisfaction by rapid, continuous delivery of useful software
Working software is delivered frequently (weeks rather than months)
Working software is the principal measure of progress
Even late changes in requirements are welcomed
Close, daily cooperation between business people and developers
Face-to-face conversation is the best form of communication (Co-location)
Projects are built around motivated individuals, who should be trusted
Continuous attention to technical excellence and good design
Simplicity
Self-organizing teams
Regular adaptation to changing circumstances

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Characteristics


Time periods in weeks rather than months


time period as a strict timebox.

Work is performed in a highly
collaborative manner.
 If the sponsors of the project are
concerned about completing certain goals
with a defined timeline or budget, agile
may not be appropriate.


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Methodologies (Partial)


Agile Unified Process (AUP)







Simplified IBM Rational Unified Process (RUP)

Extreme programming (XP)
Feature Driven Development (FDD)
Scrum


“Pig” Roles
• Product owner (VOC - Product Manager)
• ScrumMaster (Project Manager)
• Team (Developers)



“Chicken” Roles
• Users
• Stakeholders (customers, vendors)
• Managers

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Adaptive (Agile) vs
Predictive (Plan-driven)
Strengths of each:


Adaptive










Low criticality
Senior developers
Requirements change
very often
Small number of
developers
Culture that thrives on
chaos

2008-11-11

Predictive








High criticality
Junior developers
Requirements don't
change too often
Large number of
developers
Culture that demands
order

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Model Selection Criteria













How well do my customer and we understand the requirements at the beginning of
the project? Is our understanding likely to change significantly as we move through
the project?
How well do we understand the system architecture? Are we likely to need to make
major architectural changes midway through the project?
How much reliable do we need?
How much do we need to plan ahead and design ahead during this project for future
versions?
How much risk does the project entail?
Are we constrained by a predefined schedule?
Do we need to be able to make midcourse corrections?
Do we need to provide customers with visible progress throughout the project?
Do we need to provide management with visible progress throughout the project?
How much sophistication do we need to use this lifecycle model successfully?

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Project Management Models:
Strengths and Weaknesses
M od el C apa city
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
requ ire m en ts
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
arch ite ctu re
Pr od uce s h ig h ly
rel iable sy stem
Pr od uce s sy stem wi th
la rg e g ro wth en v elop
M ana g es ri sk s
Can be c o n strain ed to
p re de te rm in ed
sc h ed u le
Ha s lo w ove rh e ad
A llo w s for m id co ur se
co rre ct ion s
Pr ovid es c u stom ers
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Pr ovid es ma n ag em en t
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Requ ir es little m ana ge r
o r d evelop er
sop h istic atio n

Pure
W ate rfall

C od e-an d F ix

Spi ral

M odi fied
W ate rfall

E vol ut io nar y
Pr o to ty pin g

S tag ed
De liv er y

E vol ut io nar y
De liv er y

De sig n -to sc h ed u le

De sig n to -too ls

C o mme rcial
Of f-th e -sh elf
so ft w are

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

F air

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r to
fai r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

2008-11-11

F air to
exc ellent
F air to
exc ellent

P oo r

N/ A

P oo r to
fai r

N/ A

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air to
exc ellent

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

N/ A

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

N/ A

P oo r

P oo r to
fai r

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Accelerating the NPD Life Cycle
Model
Ideaisation

Go:No-Go

Scoping

Go:No-Go

Planning

Go:No-Go

Development

Go:No-Go

Testing

Go:No-Go

Launch

Go:No-Go

Maintenance
Retirement

Project Lifecycle Framework
 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

EOL

Discussion

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Away
Recommendations
“For which of you,
desiring to build a
tower, doesn't first sit
down and count the
cost, to see if he has
enough to complete it?”
Jesus
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation


Ready-Aim-Fire


Haste makes waste (penny wise, pound foolish)
• Choosing the wrong models will result in unfulfilled
expectations and delays

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Ready


Recognizing the difference between








product management,
marketing, and
project management

Having a well defined NPD process
Not standardizing on only one project model
Having a positive teamwork environment,
inspirational leadership, focused vision, and
necessary skills

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Aim
Ensuring up-front homework done first
 Ensuring the resources(staff) & time to do
it right
 Verifying available resource costs (people
and time)
 Selecting the most appropriate project
model
 Taking the time to do the planning right


Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Fire
Being flexible within parameters
 Regular review of processes and methods
 Regular, frequent review of new ideas
and market information


Fini


Robert Grupe





[email protected]
+1.314.266.7321

Further reading







Forrester “Making Product Management A Strategic
Resource”
Winning at New Products, Robert G Cooper
Rapid Development, Steve McConnell
PDMA Visions magazine, Jun & Sept 2008

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.


Slide 26

7 Management Solutions

Red

Accelerating Innovation
Overview and discussion of NPD
and project management life cycle
models
Robert Grupe
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Introduction
An overview and discussion of integrated
new product development and project life
cycle models for best practice approaches
to successful innovation and accelerated
time to market.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agenda






Clarification of PM Terminology
Strategically Focused PM
NPD vs. Project Management
Models







Waterfall Models
Iterative Models
Agile Approaches

Discussion
Roundup
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Clarification of Terminology
Product Management
 Project Management
 Program Management


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Product Management



Planning and marketing of a product or products at all stages of the
product lifecycle.
Product planning (in-bound marketing)
[Product Manager (PM)]






Defining new products
Gathering market requirements (VoC)
Building product roadmaps
Product Life Cycle considerations
• Stages: introduction, growth, mature, saturation/decline





Competitive differentiation

Product marketing (outbound marketing)
[Product Marketing Manager (PMM)]





Product positioning and outbound messaging
Promotion: press, customers, and partners
Packaging and delivery
Competition messaging monitoring

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Project Management



Project Planning
[Project Manager (PjM)]
Achieve all of the goals of the project charter while
adhering to




Project constraints: scope, time, cost and quality.

Project management life cycle



5 Process Groups: Project Initiation, Project Planning, Project
Execution, Project monitoring and control, and Project closeout.
9 Knowledge Areas: integration management, scope
management, time management, cost management, quality
management, human resource management, communications
management,risk management and procurement management.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology: Program Management
[& Product Portfolio Management]













Layer above project management focusing on selecting the best group of programs [and
products,] defining them in terms of their constituent projects and providing an infrastructure
where projects can be run successfully
Governance: The structure, process, and procedure to control operations and changes to
performance objectives.
Standards: Define the performance architecture.
Alignment: The program must support higher level vision, goals and objectives.
Assurance: Verify and validate the program, ensuring adherence to standards and alignment
with the vision.
Management: Ensure there are regular reviews, there is accountability, and that management of
projects, stakeholders and suppliers is in place.
Integration: Optimize performance across the program value chain, functionally and technically.
Finances: Tracking of finances is an important part of Program management and basic costs
together with wider costs of administering the program are all tracked.
Infrastructure: Allocation of resources influences the cost and success of the program.
Infrastructure might cover offices, version control, and IT. Planning: Develop the plan bringing
together the information on projects, resources, timescales, monitoring and control.[1]
Improvement: Continuously assess performance; research and develop new capabilities; and
systemically apply learning and knowledge to the program.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Why is this important?


Without clearly defined and integrated product,
marketing, and project management, innovation
will be haphazard, chaotic, and un-scaleable
with complexity and growth.


You can’t improve or accelerate what you can’t
understand or control.
• Putting random people on a galley ship won’t ensure you
will get where you want to go or make it go faster.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Research: Most PM’s
not being used effectively


Distracting challenges
Product and
company
strategy
10%

Customers
and market
8%

Internal
process and
organization
28%

Development
process
16%

Prioritization
and Focus
16%

2008-11-11

Time and
resources
22%

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Recommendation:
PM for Strategic Advantage
Focused on inbound tasks
 PM decision-making power






Roadmap, release contents, release
acceptance

Report to CEO/GM

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

New Product Development (NPD)
& Project Life Cycle Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Code & Fix
(AKA Cowboy Coding)

S ys tem
S pe cific atio n
(m a yb e )

2008-11-11

C o de -a nd -F ix

R elea se
(m ay be )

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Traditional NPD Process
Stage-Gate Process
Discovery
QuickTim e™ and a
de co m pres sor
are n eed ed to se e this p ictu re .

Scoping

Business
Case

Stage
1

Stage
2

Development

Test /
Validation

Launch

Stage
3

Stage
4

Stage
5

Gate
1

Gate
2

Gate
3

Gate
4

Gate
5

Idea
Screen

Second
Screen

Go To
Dev

Go To
Test

Go To
Launch

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Review
Qui ckT ime™ and a
deco mpre sso r
are nee ded t o see t his p ict ure.

Traditional Project Management
Waterfall Model
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Risk Reduction
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Subprojects
Pr od u ct
C o n ce pt

R e qu ire m en ts
A n a lysis

D e ta ile d
D e sig n

A rch itec tur a l
D e s ig n

C o din g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S u b sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S ub sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g a nd
D e b u gin g

D e ta ile d
D e s ig n

S ub s yste m
T e sting

C o d in g a nd
D eb u g in g

S yste m
T e sting
S u bs yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Overlapping
Phases (Sashimi)
P rodu ct
C o nc ep t

R equ ire m e nts
A na lysis

A rchite ctura l
D esig n

D etaile d
D e sign

C o din g an d
D e bu ging

S yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Design-to-Schedule
P roduct
C oncept

R equ irem ents
An alysis

Architectural
D esign

H ig h P rio rity: D etailed design , code, d ebug, test

M edium H igh Priority: D etailed desig n, code , debug, te st

R u n ou t of tim e or
m oney h ere

M ed ium P riority: D e tailed design , code, debug , test

M ediu m Low P riority: D etailed design , co de, de bug, test

Low Priority: D etailed design, code , debug , test

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

R elease

Design-to-Tools
F u n ctio n a lity s u p p o rte d b y
th e to o ls

F u n ctio n a lity th a t w ill
n o t b e in th e p ro d u ct

Fu n c tio n a lity th a t w ill b e
b u ilt

Id e a l fu n c tio n a lity

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Iterative Project Management
Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Spiral (Boehm)

R epe at as requ ire d

1. D eter m ine
ob jective s,
alte rnatives,
constraints

2008-11-11

2 . Iden tify and
reso lve risks

3. E va lu ate
a ltern atives

4 . D evelop
ite ration
d elivera ble s a nd
verify co rrect

5 . P la n the ne xt
ite ratio n

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

6.
C om m it to an
a ppro ach for ne xt
ite ratio n

Evolutionary Prototyping
No

In itial
con ce pt

2008-11-11

D esign and
im p lem ent
initia l
proto typ e

R efin e
p ro to typ e

C usto m e r
a ccep tab le ?

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

C om p lete
a nd
relea se

Staged Delivery
(AKA Incremental Implementation)
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

R e q u ire m e nts
A n a ly sis

A rch ite c tu ra l
D e sig n

S ta g e 1 : D e ta ile d d e s ig n , c o d e , d e b u g , te st, d e liv e ry

S ta g e 2 : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e liv e ry

S ta g e n : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e live ry

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Evolutionary Delivery
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

P re lim in a ry
R e q u ire m e n ts
A n a lys is

A rch ite ctu ra l
D e s ig n a n d
S ys te m C o re

D e liv e r F in a l
V e rsio n

D e v e lo p a V e rsio n

In c o rp o ra te
C u s to m e r
F e e d b a ck

D e liv e ry th e
V e rs io n

E licit C u sto m e r
F e e d b a ck

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Project Management
“There is nothing new
under the sun but there
are lots of old things
we don't know.”
Ambrose Bierce

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Principles (2001)













Customer satisfaction by rapid, continuous delivery of useful software
Working software is delivered frequently (weeks rather than months)
Working software is the principal measure of progress
Even late changes in requirements are welcomed
Close, daily cooperation between business people and developers
Face-to-face conversation is the best form of communication (Co-location)
Projects are built around motivated individuals, who should be trusted
Continuous attention to technical excellence and good design
Simplicity
Self-organizing teams
Regular adaptation to changing circumstances

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Characteristics


Time periods in weeks rather than months


time period as a strict timebox.

Work is performed in a highly
collaborative manner.
 If the sponsors of the project are
concerned about completing certain goals
with a defined timeline or budget, agile
may not be appropriate.


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Methodologies (Partial)


Agile Unified Process (AUP)







Simplified IBM Rational Unified Process (RUP)

Extreme programming (XP)
Feature Driven Development (FDD)
Scrum


“Pig” Roles
• Product owner (VOC - Product Manager)
• ScrumMaster (Project Manager)
• Team (Developers)



“Chicken” Roles
• Users
• Stakeholders (customers, vendors)
• Managers

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Adaptive (Agile) vs
Predictive (Plan-driven)
Strengths of each:


Adaptive










Low criticality
Senior developers
Requirements change
very often
Small number of
developers
Culture that thrives on
chaos

2008-11-11

Predictive








High criticality
Junior developers
Requirements don't
change too often
Large number of
developers
Culture that demands
order

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Model Selection Criteria













How well do my customer and we understand the requirements at the beginning of
the project? Is our understanding likely to change significantly as we move through
the project?
How well do we understand the system architecture? Are we likely to need to make
major architectural changes midway through the project?
How much reliable do we need?
How much do we need to plan ahead and design ahead during this project for future
versions?
How much risk does the project entail?
Are we constrained by a predefined schedule?
Do we need to be able to make midcourse corrections?
Do we need to provide customers with visible progress throughout the project?
Do we need to provide management with visible progress throughout the project?
How much sophistication do we need to use this lifecycle model successfully?

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Project Management Models:
Strengths and Weaknesses
M od el C apa city
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
requ ire m en ts
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
arch ite ctu re
Pr od uce s h ig h ly
rel iable sy stem
Pr od uce s sy stem wi th
la rg e g ro wth en v elop
M ana g es ri sk s
Can be c o n strain ed to
p re de te rm in ed
sc h ed u le
Ha s lo w ove rh e ad
A llo w s for m id co ur se
co rre ct ion s
Pr ovid es c u stom ers
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Pr ovid es ma n ag em en t
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Requ ir es little m ana ge r
o r d evelop er
sop h istic atio n

Pure
W ate rfall

C od e-an d F ix

Spi ral

M odi fied
W ate rfall

E vol ut io nar y
Pr o to ty pin g

S tag ed
De liv er y

E vol ut io nar y
De liv er y

De sig n -to sc h ed u le

De sig n to -too ls

C o mme rcial
Of f-th e -sh elf
so ft w are

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

F air

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r to
fai r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

2008-11-11

F air to
exc ellent
F air to
exc ellent

P oo r

N/ A

P oo r to
fai r

N/ A

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air to
exc ellent

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

N/ A

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

N/ A

P oo r

P oo r to
fai r

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Accelerating the NPD Life Cycle
Model
Ideaisation

Go:No-Go

Scoping

Go:No-Go

Planning

Go:No-Go

Development

Go:No-Go

Testing

Go:No-Go

Launch

Go:No-Go

Maintenance
Retirement

Project Lifecycle Framework
 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

EOL

Discussion

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Away
Recommendations
“For which of you,
desiring to build a
tower, doesn't first sit
down and count the
cost, to see if he has
enough to complete it?”
Jesus
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation


Ready-Aim-Fire


Haste makes waste (penny wise, pound foolish)
• Choosing the wrong models will result in unfulfilled
expectations and delays

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Ready


Recognizing the difference between








product management,
marketing, and
project management

Having a well defined NPD process
Not standardizing on only one project model
Having a positive teamwork environment,
inspirational leadership, focused vision, and
necessary skills

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Aim
Ensuring up-front homework done first
 Ensuring the resources(staff) & time to do
it right
 Verifying available resource costs (people
and time)
 Selecting the most appropriate project
model
 Taking the time to do the planning right


Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Fire
Being flexible within parameters
 Regular review of processes and methods
 Regular, frequent review of new ideas
and market information


Fini


Robert Grupe





[email protected]
+1.314.266.7321

Further reading







Forrester “Making Product Management A Strategic
Resource”
Winning at New Products, Robert G Cooper
Rapid Development, Steve McConnell
PDMA Visions magazine, Jun & Sept 2008

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.


Slide 27

7 Management Solutions

Red

Accelerating Innovation
Overview and discussion of NPD
and project management life cycle
models
Robert Grupe
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Introduction
An overview and discussion of integrated
new product development and project life
cycle models for best practice approaches
to successful innovation and accelerated
time to market.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agenda






Clarification of PM Terminology
Strategically Focused PM
NPD vs. Project Management
Models







Waterfall Models
Iterative Models
Agile Approaches

Discussion
Roundup
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Clarification of Terminology
Product Management
 Project Management
 Program Management


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Product Management



Planning and marketing of a product or products at all stages of the
product lifecycle.
Product planning (in-bound marketing)
[Product Manager (PM)]






Defining new products
Gathering market requirements (VoC)
Building product roadmaps
Product Life Cycle considerations
• Stages: introduction, growth, mature, saturation/decline





Competitive differentiation

Product marketing (outbound marketing)
[Product Marketing Manager (PMM)]





Product positioning and outbound messaging
Promotion: press, customers, and partners
Packaging and delivery
Competition messaging monitoring

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Project Management



Project Planning
[Project Manager (PjM)]
Achieve all of the goals of the project charter while
adhering to




Project constraints: scope, time, cost and quality.

Project management life cycle



5 Process Groups: Project Initiation, Project Planning, Project
Execution, Project monitoring and control, and Project closeout.
9 Knowledge Areas: integration management, scope
management, time management, cost management, quality
management, human resource management, communications
management,risk management and procurement management.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology: Program Management
[& Product Portfolio Management]













Layer above project management focusing on selecting the best group of programs [and
products,] defining them in terms of their constituent projects and providing an infrastructure
where projects can be run successfully
Governance: The structure, process, and procedure to control operations and changes to
performance objectives.
Standards: Define the performance architecture.
Alignment: The program must support higher level vision, goals and objectives.
Assurance: Verify and validate the program, ensuring adherence to standards and alignment
with the vision.
Management: Ensure there are regular reviews, there is accountability, and that management of
projects, stakeholders and suppliers is in place.
Integration: Optimize performance across the program value chain, functionally and technically.
Finances: Tracking of finances is an important part of Program management and basic costs
together with wider costs of administering the program are all tracked.
Infrastructure: Allocation of resources influences the cost and success of the program.
Infrastructure might cover offices, version control, and IT. Planning: Develop the plan bringing
together the information on projects, resources, timescales, monitoring and control.[1]
Improvement: Continuously assess performance; research and develop new capabilities; and
systemically apply learning and knowledge to the program.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Why is this important?


Without clearly defined and integrated product,
marketing, and project management, innovation
will be haphazard, chaotic, and un-scaleable
with complexity and growth.


You can’t improve or accelerate what you can’t
understand or control.
• Putting random people on a galley ship won’t ensure you
will get where you want to go or make it go faster.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Research: Most PM’s
not being used effectively


Distracting challenges
Product and
company
strategy
10%

Customers
and market
8%

Internal
process and
organization
28%

Development
process
16%

Prioritization
and Focus
16%

2008-11-11

Time and
resources
22%

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Recommendation:
PM for Strategic Advantage
Focused on inbound tasks
 PM decision-making power






Roadmap, release contents, release
acceptance

Report to CEO/GM

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

New Product Development (NPD)
& Project Life Cycle Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Code & Fix
(AKA Cowboy Coding)

S ys tem
S pe cific atio n
(m a yb e )

2008-11-11

C o de -a nd -F ix

R elea se
(m ay be )

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Traditional NPD Process
Stage-Gate Process
Discovery
QuickTim e™ and a
de co m pres sor
are n eed ed to se e this p ictu re .

Scoping

Business
Case

Stage
1

Stage
2

Development

Test /
Validation

Launch

Stage
3

Stage
4

Stage
5

Gate
1

Gate
2

Gate
3

Gate
4

Gate
5

Idea
Screen

Second
Screen

Go To
Dev

Go To
Test

Go To
Launch

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Review
Qui ckT ime™ and a
deco mpre sso r
are nee ded t o see t his p ict ure.

Traditional Project Management
Waterfall Model
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Risk Reduction
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Subprojects
Pr od u ct
C o n ce pt

R e qu ire m en ts
A n a lysis

D e ta ile d
D e sig n

A rch itec tur a l
D e s ig n

C o din g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S u b sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S ub sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g a nd
D e b u gin g

D e ta ile d
D e s ig n

S ub s yste m
T e sting

C o d in g a nd
D eb u g in g

S yste m
T e sting
S u bs yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Overlapping
Phases (Sashimi)
P rodu ct
C o nc ep t

R equ ire m e nts
A na lysis

A rchite ctura l
D esig n

D etaile d
D e sign

C o din g an d
D e bu ging

S yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Design-to-Schedule
P roduct
C oncept

R equ irem ents
An alysis

Architectural
D esign

H ig h P rio rity: D etailed design , code, d ebug, test

M edium H igh Priority: D etailed desig n, code , debug, te st

R u n ou t of tim e or
m oney h ere

M ed ium P riority: D e tailed design , code, debug , test

M ediu m Low P riority: D etailed design , co de, de bug, test

Low Priority: D etailed design, code , debug , test

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

R elease

Design-to-Tools
F u n ctio n a lity s u p p o rte d b y
th e to o ls

F u n ctio n a lity th a t w ill
n o t b e in th e p ro d u ct

Fu n c tio n a lity th a t w ill b e
b u ilt

Id e a l fu n c tio n a lity

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Iterative Project Management
Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Spiral (Boehm)

R epe at as requ ire d

1. D eter m ine
ob jective s,
alte rnatives,
constraints

2008-11-11

2 . Iden tify and
reso lve risks

3. E va lu ate
a ltern atives

4 . D evelop
ite ration
d elivera ble s a nd
verify co rrect

5 . P la n the ne xt
ite ratio n

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

6.
C om m it to an
a ppro ach for ne xt
ite ratio n

Evolutionary Prototyping
No

In itial
con ce pt

2008-11-11

D esign and
im p lem ent
initia l
proto typ e

R efin e
p ro to typ e

C usto m e r
a ccep tab le ?

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

C om p lete
a nd
relea se

Staged Delivery
(AKA Incremental Implementation)
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

R e q u ire m e nts
A n a ly sis

A rch ite c tu ra l
D e sig n

S ta g e 1 : D e ta ile d d e s ig n , c o d e , d e b u g , te st, d e liv e ry

S ta g e 2 : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e liv e ry

S ta g e n : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e live ry

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Evolutionary Delivery
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

P re lim in a ry
R e q u ire m e n ts
A n a lys is

A rch ite ctu ra l
D e s ig n a n d
S ys te m C o re

D e liv e r F in a l
V e rsio n

D e v e lo p a V e rsio n

In c o rp o ra te
C u s to m e r
F e e d b a ck

D e liv e ry th e
V e rs io n

E licit C u sto m e r
F e e d b a ck

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Project Management
“There is nothing new
under the sun but there
are lots of old things
we don't know.”
Ambrose Bierce

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Principles (2001)













Customer satisfaction by rapid, continuous delivery of useful software
Working software is delivered frequently (weeks rather than months)
Working software is the principal measure of progress
Even late changes in requirements are welcomed
Close, daily cooperation between business people and developers
Face-to-face conversation is the best form of communication (Co-location)
Projects are built around motivated individuals, who should be trusted
Continuous attention to technical excellence and good design
Simplicity
Self-organizing teams
Regular adaptation to changing circumstances

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Characteristics


Time periods in weeks rather than months


time period as a strict timebox.

Work is performed in a highly
collaborative manner.
 If the sponsors of the project are
concerned about completing certain goals
with a defined timeline or budget, agile
may not be appropriate.


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Methodologies (Partial)


Agile Unified Process (AUP)







Simplified IBM Rational Unified Process (RUP)

Extreme programming (XP)
Feature Driven Development (FDD)
Scrum


“Pig” Roles
• Product owner (VOC - Product Manager)
• ScrumMaster (Project Manager)
• Team (Developers)



“Chicken” Roles
• Users
• Stakeholders (customers, vendors)
• Managers

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Adaptive (Agile) vs
Predictive (Plan-driven)
Strengths of each:


Adaptive










Low criticality
Senior developers
Requirements change
very often
Small number of
developers
Culture that thrives on
chaos

2008-11-11

Predictive








High criticality
Junior developers
Requirements don't
change too often
Large number of
developers
Culture that demands
order

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Model Selection Criteria













How well do my customer and we understand the requirements at the beginning of
the project? Is our understanding likely to change significantly as we move through
the project?
How well do we understand the system architecture? Are we likely to need to make
major architectural changes midway through the project?
How much reliable do we need?
How much do we need to plan ahead and design ahead during this project for future
versions?
How much risk does the project entail?
Are we constrained by a predefined schedule?
Do we need to be able to make midcourse corrections?
Do we need to provide customers with visible progress throughout the project?
Do we need to provide management with visible progress throughout the project?
How much sophistication do we need to use this lifecycle model successfully?

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Project Management Models:
Strengths and Weaknesses
M od el C apa city
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
requ ire m en ts
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
arch ite ctu re
Pr od uce s h ig h ly
rel iable sy stem
Pr od uce s sy stem wi th
la rg e g ro wth en v elop
M ana g es ri sk s
Can be c o n strain ed to
p re de te rm in ed
sc h ed u le
Ha s lo w ove rh e ad
A llo w s for m id co ur se
co rre ct ion s
Pr ovid es c u stom ers
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Pr ovid es ma n ag em en t
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Requ ir es little m ana ge r
o r d evelop er
sop h istic atio n

Pure
W ate rfall

C od e-an d F ix

Spi ral

M odi fied
W ate rfall

E vol ut io nar y
Pr o to ty pin g

S tag ed
De liv er y

E vol ut io nar y
De liv er y

De sig n -to sc h ed u le

De sig n to -too ls

C o mme rcial
Of f-th e -sh elf
so ft w are

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

F air

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r to
fai r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

2008-11-11

F air to
exc ellent
F air to
exc ellent

P oo r

N/ A

P oo r to
fai r

N/ A

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air to
exc ellent

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

N/ A

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

N/ A

P oo r

P oo r to
fai r

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Accelerating the NPD Life Cycle
Model
Ideaisation

Go:No-Go

Scoping

Go:No-Go

Planning

Go:No-Go

Development

Go:No-Go

Testing

Go:No-Go

Launch

Go:No-Go

Maintenance
Retirement

Project Lifecycle Framework
 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

EOL

Discussion

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Away
Recommendations
“For which of you,
desiring to build a
tower, doesn't first sit
down and count the
cost, to see if he has
enough to complete it?”
Jesus
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation


Ready-Aim-Fire


Haste makes waste (penny wise, pound foolish)
• Choosing the wrong models will result in unfulfilled
expectations and delays

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Ready


Recognizing the difference between








product management,
marketing, and
project management

Having a well defined NPD process
Not standardizing on only one project model
Having a positive teamwork environment,
inspirational leadership, focused vision, and
necessary skills

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Aim
Ensuring up-front homework done first
 Ensuring the resources(staff) & time to do
it right
 Verifying available resource costs (people
and time)
 Selecting the most appropriate project
model
 Taking the time to do the planning right


Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Fire
Being flexible within parameters
 Regular review of processes and methods
 Regular, frequent review of new ideas
and market information


Fini


Robert Grupe





[email protected]
+1.314.266.7321

Further reading







Forrester “Making Product Management A Strategic
Resource”
Winning at New Products, Robert G Cooper
Rapid Development, Steve McConnell
PDMA Visions magazine, Jun & Sept 2008

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.


Slide 28

7 Management Solutions

Red

Accelerating Innovation
Overview and discussion of NPD
and project management life cycle
models
Robert Grupe
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Introduction
An overview and discussion of integrated
new product development and project life
cycle models for best practice approaches
to successful innovation and accelerated
time to market.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agenda






Clarification of PM Terminology
Strategically Focused PM
NPD vs. Project Management
Models







Waterfall Models
Iterative Models
Agile Approaches

Discussion
Roundup
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Clarification of Terminology
Product Management
 Project Management
 Program Management


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Product Management



Planning and marketing of a product or products at all stages of the
product lifecycle.
Product planning (in-bound marketing)
[Product Manager (PM)]






Defining new products
Gathering market requirements (VoC)
Building product roadmaps
Product Life Cycle considerations
• Stages: introduction, growth, mature, saturation/decline





Competitive differentiation

Product marketing (outbound marketing)
[Product Marketing Manager (PMM)]





Product positioning and outbound messaging
Promotion: press, customers, and partners
Packaging and delivery
Competition messaging monitoring

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Project Management



Project Planning
[Project Manager (PjM)]
Achieve all of the goals of the project charter while
adhering to




Project constraints: scope, time, cost and quality.

Project management life cycle



5 Process Groups: Project Initiation, Project Planning, Project
Execution, Project monitoring and control, and Project closeout.
9 Knowledge Areas: integration management, scope
management, time management, cost management, quality
management, human resource management, communications
management,risk management and procurement management.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology: Program Management
[& Product Portfolio Management]













Layer above project management focusing on selecting the best group of programs [and
products,] defining them in terms of their constituent projects and providing an infrastructure
where projects can be run successfully
Governance: The structure, process, and procedure to control operations and changes to
performance objectives.
Standards: Define the performance architecture.
Alignment: The program must support higher level vision, goals and objectives.
Assurance: Verify and validate the program, ensuring adherence to standards and alignment
with the vision.
Management: Ensure there are regular reviews, there is accountability, and that management of
projects, stakeholders and suppliers is in place.
Integration: Optimize performance across the program value chain, functionally and technically.
Finances: Tracking of finances is an important part of Program management and basic costs
together with wider costs of administering the program are all tracked.
Infrastructure: Allocation of resources influences the cost and success of the program.
Infrastructure might cover offices, version control, and IT. Planning: Develop the plan bringing
together the information on projects, resources, timescales, monitoring and control.[1]
Improvement: Continuously assess performance; research and develop new capabilities; and
systemically apply learning and knowledge to the program.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Why is this important?


Without clearly defined and integrated product,
marketing, and project management, innovation
will be haphazard, chaotic, and un-scaleable
with complexity and growth.


You can’t improve or accelerate what you can’t
understand or control.
• Putting random people on a galley ship won’t ensure you
will get where you want to go or make it go faster.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Research: Most PM’s
not being used effectively


Distracting challenges
Product and
company
strategy
10%

Customers
and market
8%

Internal
process and
organization
28%

Development
process
16%

Prioritization
and Focus
16%

2008-11-11

Time and
resources
22%

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Recommendation:
PM for Strategic Advantage
Focused on inbound tasks
 PM decision-making power






Roadmap, release contents, release
acceptance

Report to CEO/GM

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

New Product Development (NPD)
& Project Life Cycle Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Code & Fix
(AKA Cowboy Coding)

S ys tem
S pe cific atio n
(m a yb e )

2008-11-11

C o de -a nd -F ix

R elea se
(m ay be )

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Traditional NPD Process
Stage-Gate Process
Discovery
QuickTim e™ and a
de co m pres sor
are n eed ed to se e this p ictu re .

Scoping

Business
Case

Stage
1

Stage
2

Development

Test /
Validation

Launch

Stage
3

Stage
4

Stage
5

Gate
1

Gate
2

Gate
3

Gate
4

Gate
5

Idea
Screen

Second
Screen

Go To
Dev

Go To
Test

Go To
Launch

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Review
Qui ckT ime™ and a
deco mpre sso r
are nee ded t o see t his p ict ure.

Traditional Project Management
Waterfall Model
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Risk Reduction
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Subprojects
Pr od u ct
C o n ce pt

R e qu ire m en ts
A n a lysis

D e ta ile d
D e sig n

A rch itec tur a l
D e s ig n

C o din g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S u b sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S ub sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g a nd
D e b u gin g

D e ta ile d
D e s ig n

S ub s yste m
T e sting

C o d in g a nd
D eb u g in g

S yste m
T e sting
S u bs yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Overlapping
Phases (Sashimi)
P rodu ct
C o nc ep t

R equ ire m e nts
A na lysis

A rchite ctura l
D esig n

D etaile d
D e sign

C o din g an d
D e bu ging

S yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Design-to-Schedule
P roduct
C oncept

R equ irem ents
An alysis

Architectural
D esign

H ig h P rio rity: D etailed design , code, d ebug, test

M edium H igh Priority: D etailed desig n, code , debug, te st

R u n ou t of tim e or
m oney h ere

M ed ium P riority: D e tailed design , code, debug , test

M ediu m Low P riority: D etailed design , co de, de bug, test

Low Priority: D etailed design, code , debug , test

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

R elease

Design-to-Tools
F u n ctio n a lity s u p p o rte d b y
th e to o ls

F u n ctio n a lity th a t w ill
n o t b e in th e p ro d u ct

Fu n c tio n a lity th a t w ill b e
b u ilt

Id e a l fu n c tio n a lity

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Iterative Project Management
Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Spiral (Boehm)

R epe at as requ ire d

1. D eter m ine
ob jective s,
alte rnatives,
constraints

2008-11-11

2 . Iden tify and
reso lve risks

3. E va lu ate
a ltern atives

4 . D evelop
ite ration
d elivera ble s a nd
verify co rrect

5 . P la n the ne xt
ite ratio n

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

6.
C om m it to an
a ppro ach for ne xt
ite ratio n

Evolutionary Prototyping
No

In itial
con ce pt

2008-11-11

D esign and
im p lem ent
initia l
proto typ e

R efin e
p ro to typ e

C usto m e r
a ccep tab le ?

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

C om p lete
a nd
relea se

Staged Delivery
(AKA Incremental Implementation)
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

R e q u ire m e nts
A n a ly sis

A rch ite c tu ra l
D e sig n

S ta g e 1 : D e ta ile d d e s ig n , c o d e , d e b u g , te st, d e liv e ry

S ta g e 2 : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e liv e ry

S ta g e n : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e live ry

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Evolutionary Delivery
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

P re lim in a ry
R e q u ire m e n ts
A n a lys is

A rch ite ctu ra l
D e s ig n a n d
S ys te m C o re

D e liv e r F in a l
V e rsio n

D e v e lo p a V e rsio n

In c o rp o ra te
C u s to m e r
F e e d b a ck

D e liv e ry th e
V e rs io n

E licit C u sto m e r
F e e d b a ck

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Project Management
“There is nothing new
under the sun but there
are lots of old things
we don't know.”
Ambrose Bierce

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Principles (2001)













Customer satisfaction by rapid, continuous delivery of useful software
Working software is delivered frequently (weeks rather than months)
Working software is the principal measure of progress
Even late changes in requirements are welcomed
Close, daily cooperation between business people and developers
Face-to-face conversation is the best form of communication (Co-location)
Projects are built around motivated individuals, who should be trusted
Continuous attention to technical excellence and good design
Simplicity
Self-organizing teams
Regular adaptation to changing circumstances

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Characteristics


Time periods in weeks rather than months


time period as a strict timebox.

Work is performed in a highly
collaborative manner.
 If the sponsors of the project are
concerned about completing certain goals
with a defined timeline or budget, agile
may not be appropriate.


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Methodologies (Partial)


Agile Unified Process (AUP)







Simplified IBM Rational Unified Process (RUP)

Extreme programming (XP)
Feature Driven Development (FDD)
Scrum


“Pig” Roles
• Product owner (VOC - Product Manager)
• ScrumMaster (Project Manager)
• Team (Developers)



“Chicken” Roles
• Users
• Stakeholders (customers, vendors)
• Managers

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Adaptive (Agile) vs
Predictive (Plan-driven)
Strengths of each:


Adaptive










Low criticality
Senior developers
Requirements change
very often
Small number of
developers
Culture that thrives on
chaos

2008-11-11

Predictive








High criticality
Junior developers
Requirements don't
change too often
Large number of
developers
Culture that demands
order

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Model Selection Criteria













How well do my customer and we understand the requirements at the beginning of
the project? Is our understanding likely to change significantly as we move through
the project?
How well do we understand the system architecture? Are we likely to need to make
major architectural changes midway through the project?
How much reliable do we need?
How much do we need to plan ahead and design ahead during this project for future
versions?
How much risk does the project entail?
Are we constrained by a predefined schedule?
Do we need to be able to make midcourse corrections?
Do we need to provide customers with visible progress throughout the project?
Do we need to provide management with visible progress throughout the project?
How much sophistication do we need to use this lifecycle model successfully?

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Project Management Models:
Strengths and Weaknesses
M od el C apa city
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
requ ire m en ts
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
arch ite ctu re
Pr od uce s h ig h ly
rel iable sy stem
Pr od uce s sy stem wi th
la rg e g ro wth en v elop
M ana g es ri sk s
Can be c o n strain ed to
p re de te rm in ed
sc h ed u le
Ha s lo w ove rh e ad
A llo w s for m id co ur se
co rre ct ion s
Pr ovid es c u stom ers
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Pr ovid es ma n ag em en t
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Requ ir es little m ana ge r
o r d evelop er
sop h istic atio n

Pure
W ate rfall

C od e-an d F ix

Spi ral

M odi fied
W ate rfall

E vol ut io nar y
Pr o to ty pin g

S tag ed
De liv er y

E vol ut io nar y
De liv er y

De sig n -to sc h ed u le

De sig n to -too ls

C o mme rcial
Of f-th e -sh elf
so ft w are

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

F air

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r to
fai r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

2008-11-11

F air to
exc ellent
F air to
exc ellent

P oo r

N/ A

P oo r to
fai r

N/ A

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air to
exc ellent

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

N/ A

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

N/ A

P oo r

P oo r to
fai r

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Accelerating the NPD Life Cycle
Model
Ideaisation

Go:No-Go

Scoping

Go:No-Go

Planning

Go:No-Go

Development

Go:No-Go

Testing

Go:No-Go

Launch

Go:No-Go

Maintenance
Retirement

Project Lifecycle Framework
 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

EOL

Discussion

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Away
Recommendations
“For which of you,
desiring to build a
tower, doesn't first sit
down and count the
cost, to see if he has
enough to complete it?”
Jesus
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation


Ready-Aim-Fire


Haste makes waste (penny wise, pound foolish)
• Choosing the wrong models will result in unfulfilled
expectations and delays

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Ready


Recognizing the difference between








product management,
marketing, and
project management

Having a well defined NPD process
Not standardizing on only one project model
Having a positive teamwork environment,
inspirational leadership, focused vision, and
necessary skills

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Aim
Ensuring up-front homework done first
 Ensuring the resources(staff) & time to do
it right
 Verifying available resource costs (people
and time)
 Selecting the most appropriate project
model
 Taking the time to do the planning right


Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Fire
Being flexible within parameters
 Regular review of processes and methods
 Regular, frequent review of new ideas
and market information


Fini


Robert Grupe





[email protected]
+1.314.266.7321

Further reading







Forrester “Making Product Management A Strategic
Resource”
Winning at New Products, Robert G Cooper
Rapid Development, Steve McConnell
PDMA Visions magazine, Jun & Sept 2008

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.


Slide 29

7 Management Solutions

Red

Accelerating Innovation
Overview and discussion of NPD
and project management life cycle
models
Robert Grupe
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Introduction
An overview and discussion of integrated
new product development and project life
cycle models for best practice approaches
to successful innovation and accelerated
time to market.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agenda






Clarification of PM Terminology
Strategically Focused PM
NPD vs. Project Management
Models







Waterfall Models
Iterative Models
Agile Approaches

Discussion
Roundup
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Clarification of Terminology
Product Management
 Project Management
 Program Management


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Product Management



Planning and marketing of a product or products at all stages of the
product lifecycle.
Product planning (in-bound marketing)
[Product Manager (PM)]






Defining new products
Gathering market requirements (VoC)
Building product roadmaps
Product Life Cycle considerations
• Stages: introduction, growth, mature, saturation/decline





Competitive differentiation

Product marketing (outbound marketing)
[Product Marketing Manager (PMM)]





Product positioning and outbound messaging
Promotion: press, customers, and partners
Packaging and delivery
Competition messaging monitoring

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Project Management



Project Planning
[Project Manager (PjM)]
Achieve all of the goals of the project charter while
adhering to




Project constraints: scope, time, cost and quality.

Project management life cycle



5 Process Groups: Project Initiation, Project Planning, Project
Execution, Project monitoring and control, and Project closeout.
9 Knowledge Areas: integration management, scope
management, time management, cost management, quality
management, human resource management, communications
management,risk management and procurement management.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology: Program Management
[& Product Portfolio Management]













Layer above project management focusing on selecting the best group of programs [and
products,] defining them in terms of their constituent projects and providing an infrastructure
where projects can be run successfully
Governance: The structure, process, and procedure to control operations and changes to
performance objectives.
Standards: Define the performance architecture.
Alignment: The program must support higher level vision, goals and objectives.
Assurance: Verify and validate the program, ensuring adherence to standards and alignment
with the vision.
Management: Ensure there are regular reviews, there is accountability, and that management of
projects, stakeholders and suppliers is in place.
Integration: Optimize performance across the program value chain, functionally and technically.
Finances: Tracking of finances is an important part of Program management and basic costs
together with wider costs of administering the program are all tracked.
Infrastructure: Allocation of resources influences the cost and success of the program.
Infrastructure might cover offices, version control, and IT. Planning: Develop the plan bringing
together the information on projects, resources, timescales, monitoring and control.[1]
Improvement: Continuously assess performance; research and develop new capabilities; and
systemically apply learning and knowledge to the program.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Why is this important?


Without clearly defined and integrated product,
marketing, and project management, innovation
will be haphazard, chaotic, and un-scaleable
with complexity and growth.


You can’t improve or accelerate what you can’t
understand or control.
• Putting random people on a galley ship won’t ensure you
will get where you want to go or make it go faster.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Research: Most PM’s
not being used effectively


Distracting challenges
Product and
company
strategy
10%

Customers
and market
8%

Internal
process and
organization
28%

Development
process
16%

Prioritization
and Focus
16%

2008-11-11

Time and
resources
22%

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Recommendation:
PM for Strategic Advantage
Focused on inbound tasks
 PM decision-making power






Roadmap, release contents, release
acceptance

Report to CEO/GM

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

New Product Development (NPD)
& Project Life Cycle Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Code & Fix
(AKA Cowboy Coding)

S ys tem
S pe cific atio n
(m a yb e )

2008-11-11

C o de -a nd -F ix

R elea se
(m ay be )

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Traditional NPD Process
Stage-Gate Process
Discovery
QuickTim e™ and a
de co m pres sor
are n eed ed to se e this p ictu re .

Scoping

Business
Case

Stage
1

Stage
2

Development

Test /
Validation

Launch

Stage
3

Stage
4

Stage
5

Gate
1

Gate
2

Gate
3

Gate
4

Gate
5

Idea
Screen

Second
Screen

Go To
Dev

Go To
Test

Go To
Launch

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Review
Qui ckT ime™ and a
deco mpre sso r
are nee ded t o see t his p ict ure.

Traditional Project Management
Waterfall Model
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Risk Reduction
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Subprojects
Pr od u ct
C o n ce pt

R e qu ire m en ts
A n a lysis

D e ta ile d
D e sig n

A rch itec tur a l
D e s ig n

C o din g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S u b sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S ub sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g a nd
D e b u gin g

D e ta ile d
D e s ig n

S ub s yste m
T e sting

C o d in g a nd
D eb u g in g

S yste m
T e sting
S u bs yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Overlapping
Phases (Sashimi)
P rodu ct
C o nc ep t

R equ ire m e nts
A na lysis

A rchite ctura l
D esig n

D etaile d
D e sign

C o din g an d
D e bu ging

S yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Design-to-Schedule
P roduct
C oncept

R equ irem ents
An alysis

Architectural
D esign

H ig h P rio rity: D etailed design , code, d ebug, test

M edium H igh Priority: D etailed desig n, code , debug, te st

R u n ou t of tim e or
m oney h ere

M ed ium P riority: D e tailed design , code, debug , test

M ediu m Low P riority: D etailed design , co de, de bug, test

Low Priority: D etailed design, code , debug , test

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

R elease

Design-to-Tools
F u n ctio n a lity s u p p o rte d b y
th e to o ls

F u n ctio n a lity th a t w ill
n o t b e in th e p ro d u ct

Fu n c tio n a lity th a t w ill b e
b u ilt

Id e a l fu n c tio n a lity

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Iterative Project Management
Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Spiral (Boehm)

R epe at as requ ire d

1. D eter m ine
ob jective s,
alte rnatives,
constraints

2008-11-11

2 . Iden tify and
reso lve risks

3. E va lu ate
a ltern atives

4 . D evelop
ite ration
d elivera ble s a nd
verify co rrect

5 . P la n the ne xt
ite ratio n

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

6.
C om m it to an
a ppro ach for ne xt
ite ratio n

Evolutionary Prototyping
No

In itial
con ce pt

2008-11-11

D esign and
im p lem ent
initia l
proto typ e

R efin e
p ro to typ e

C usto m e r
a ccep tab le ?

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

C om p lete
a nd
relea se

Staged Delivery
(AKA Incremental Implementation)
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

R e q u ire m e nts
A n a ly sis

A rch ite c tu ra l
D e sig n

S ta g e 1 : D e ta ile d d e s ig n , c o d e , d e b u g , te st, d e liv e ry

S ta g e 2 : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e liv e ry

S ta g e n : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e live ry

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Evolutionary Delivery
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

P re lim in a ry
R e q u ire m e n ts
A n a lys is

A rch ite ctu ra l
D e s ig n a n d
S ys te m C o re

D e liv e r F in a l
V e rsio n

D e v e lo p a V e rsio n

In c o rp o ra te
C u s to m e r
F e e d b a ck

D e liv e ry th e
V e rs io n

E licit C u sto m e r
F e e d b a ck

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Project Management
“There is nothing new
under the sun but there
are lots of old things
we don't know.”
Ambrose Bierce

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Principles (2001)













Customer satisfaction by rapid, continuous delivery of useful software
Working software is delivered frequently (weeks rather than months)
Working software is the principal measure of progress
Even late changes in requirements are welcomed
Close, daily cooperation between business people and developers
Face-to-face conversation is the best form of communication (Co-location)
Projects are built around motivated individuals, who should be trusted
Continuous attention to technical excellence and good design
Simplicity
Self-organizing teams
Regular adaptation to changing circumstances

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Characteristics


Time periods in weeks rather than months


time period as a strict timebox.

Work is performed in a highly
collaborative manner.
 If the sponsors of the project are
concerned about completing certain goals
with a defined timeline or budget, agile
may not be appropriate.


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Methodologies (Partial)


Agile Unified Process (AUP)







Simplified IBM Rational Unified Process (RUP)

Extreme programming (XP)
Feature Driven Development (FDD)
Scrum


“Pig” Roles
• Product owner (VOC - Product Manager)
• ScrumMaster (Project Manager)
• Team (Developers)



“Chicken” Roles
• Users
• Stakeholders (customers, vendors)
• Managers

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Adaptive (Agile) vs
Predictive (Plan-driven)
Strengths of each:


Adaptive










Low criticality
Senior developers
Requirements change
very often
Small number of
developers
Culture that thrives on
chaos

2008-11-11

Predictive








High criticality
Junior developers
Requirements don't
change too often
Large number of
developers
Culture that demands
order

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Model Selection Criteria













How well do my customer and we understand the requirements at the beginning of
the project? Is our understanding likely to change significantly as we move through
the project?
How well do we understand the system architecture? Are we likely to need to make
major architectural changes midway through the project?
How much reliable do we need?
How much do we need to plan ahead and design ahead during this project for future
versions?
How much risk does the project entail?
Are we constrained by a predefined schedule?
Do we need to be able to make midcourse corrections?
Do we need to provide customers with visible progress throughout the project?
Do we need to provide management with visible progress throughout the project?
How much sophistication do we need to use this lifecycle model successfully?

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Project Management Models:
Strengths and Weaknesses
M od el C apa city
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
requ ire m en ts
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
arch ite ctu re
Pr od uce s h ig h ly
rel iable sy stem
Pr od uce s sy stem wi th
la rg e g ro wth en v elop
M ana g es ri sk s
Can be c o n strain ed to
p re de te rm in ed
sc h ed u le
Ha s lo w ove rh e ad
A llo w s for m id co ur se
co rre ct ion s
Pr ovid es c u stom ers
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Pr ovid es ma n ag em en t
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Requ ir es little m ana ge r
o r d evelop er
sop h istic atio n

Pure
W ate rfall

C od e-an d F ix

Spi ral

M odi fied
W ate rfall

E vol ut io nar y
Pr o to ty pin g

S tag ed
De liv er y

E vol ut io nar y
De liv er y

De sig n -to sc h ed u le

De sig n to -too ls

C o mme rcial
Of f-th e -sh elf
so ft w are

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

F air

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r to
fai r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

2008-11-11

F air to
exc ellent
F air to
exc ellent

P oo r

N/ A

P oo r to
fai r

N/ A

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air to
exc ellent

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

N/ A

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

N/ A

P oo r

P oo r to
fai r

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Accelerating the NPD Life Cycle
Model
Ideaisation

Go:No-Go

Scoping

Go:No-Go

Planning

Go:No-Go

Development

Go:No-Go

Testing

Go:No-Go

Launch

Go:No-Go

Maintenance
Retirement

Project Lifecycle Framework
 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

EOL

Discussion

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Away
Recommendations
“For which of you,
desiring to build a
tower, doesn't first sit
down and count the
cost, to see if he has
enough to complete it?”
Jesus
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation


Ready-Aim-Fire


Haste makes waste (penny wise, pound foolish)
• Choosing the wrong models will result in unfulfilled
expectations and delays

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Ready


Recognizing the difference between








product management,
marketing, and
project management

Having a well defined NPD process
Not standardizing on only one project model
Having a positive teamwork environment,
inspirational leadership, focused vision, and
necessary skills

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Aim
Ensuring up-front homework done first
 Ensuring the resources(staff) & time to do
it right
 Verifying available resource costs (people
and time)
 Selecting the most appropriate project
model
 Taking the time to do the planning right


Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Fire
Being flexible within parameters
 Regular review of processes and methods
 Regular, frequent review of new ideas
and market information


Fini


Robert Grupe





[email protected]
+1.314.266.7321

Further reading







Forrester “Making Product Management A Strategic
Resource”
Winning at New Products, Robert G Cooper
Rapid Development, Steve McConnell
PDMA Visions magazine, Jun & Sept 2008

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.


Slide 30

7 Management Solutions

Red

Accelerating Innovation
Overview and discussion of NPD
and project management life cycle
models
Robert Grupe
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Introduction
An overview and discussion of integrated
new product development and project life
cycle models for best practice approaches
to successful innovation and accelerated
time to market.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agenda






Clarification of PM Terminology
Strategically Focused PM
NPD vs. Project Management
Models







Waterfall Models
Iterative Models
Agile Approaches

Discussion
Roundup
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Clarification of Terminology
Product Management
 Project Management
 Program Management


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Product Management



Planning and marketing of a product or products at all stages of the
product lifecycle.
Product planning (in-bound marketing)
[Product Manager (PM)]






Defining new products
Gathering market requirements (VoC)
Building product roadmaps
Product Life Cycle considerations
• Stages: introduction, growth, mature, saturation/decline





Competitive differentiation

Product marketing (outbound marketing)
[Product Marketing Manager (PMM)]





Product positioning and outbound messaging
Promotion: press, customers, and partners
Packaging and delivery
Competition messaging monitoring

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Project Management



Project Planning
[Project Manager (PjM)]
Achieve all of the goals of the project charter while
adhering to




Project constraints: scope, time, cost and quality.

Project management life cycle



5 Process Groups: Project Initiation, Project Planning, Project
Execution, Project monitoring and control, and Project closeout.
9 Knowledge Areas: integration management, scope
management, time management, cost management, quality
management, human resource management, communications
management,risk management and procurement management.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology: Program Management
[& Product Portfolio Management]













Layer above project management focusing on selecting the best group of programs [and
products,] defining them in terms of their constituent projects and providing an infrastructure
where projects can be run successfully
Governance: The structure, process, and procedure to control operations and changes to
performance objectives.
Standards: Define the performance architecture.
Alignment: The program must support higher level vision, goals and objectives.
Assurance: Verify and validate the program, ensuring adherence to standards and alignment
with the vision.
Management: Ensure there are regular reviews, there is accountability, and that management of
projects, stakeholders and suppliers is in place.
Integration: Optimize performance across the program value chain, functionally and technically.
Finances: Tracking of finances is an important part of Program management and basic costs
together with wider costs of administering the program are all tracked.
Infrastructure: Allocation of resources influences the cost and success of the program.
Infrastructure might cover offices, version control, and IT. Planning: Develop the plan bringing
together the information on projects, resources, timescales, monitoring and control.[1]
Improvement: Continuously assess performance; research and develop new capabilities; and
systemically apply learning and knowledge to the program.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Why is this important?


Without clearly defined and integrated product,
marketing, and project management, innovation
will be haphazard, chaotic, and un-scaleable
with complexity and growth.


You can’t improve or accelerate what you can’t
understand or control.
• Putting random people on a galley ship won’t ensure you
will get where you want to go or make it go faster.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Research: Most PM’s
not being used effectively


Distracting challenges
Product and
company
strategy
10%

Customers
and market
8%

Internal
process and
organization
28%

Development
process
16%

Prioritization
and Focus
16%

2008-11-11

Time and
resources
22%

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Recommendation:
PM for Strategic Advantage
Focused on inbound tasks
 PM decision-making power






Roadmap, release contents, release
acceptance

Report to CEO/GM

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

New Product Development (NPD)
& Project Life Cycle Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Code & Fix
(AKA Cowboy Coding)

S ys tem
S pe cific atio n
(m a yb e )

2008-11-11

C o de -a nd -F ix

R elea se
(m ay be )

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Traditional NPD Process
Stage-Gate Process
Discovery
QuickTim e™ and a
de co m pres sor
are n eed ed to se e this p ictu re .

Scoping

Business
Case

Stage
1

Stage
2

Development

Test /
Validation

Launch

Stage
3

Stage
4

Stage
5

Gate
1

Gate
2

Gate
3

Gate
4

Gate
5

Idea
Screen

Second
Screen

Go To
Dev

Go To
Test

Go To
Launch

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Review
Qui ckT ime™ and a
deco mpre sso r
are nee ded t o see t his p ict ure.

Traditional Project Management
Waterfall Model
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Risk Reduction
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Subprojects
Pr od u ct
C o n ce pt

R e qu ire m en ts
A n a lysis

D e ta ile d
D e sig n

A rch itec tur a l
D e s ig n

C o din g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S u b sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S ub sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g a nd
D e b u gin g

D e ta ile d
D e s ig n

S ub s yste m
T e sting

C o d in g a nd
D eb u g in g

S yste m
T e sting
S u bs yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Overlapping
Phases (Sashimi)
P rodu ct
C o nc ep t

R equ ire m e nts
A na lysis

A rchite ctura l
D esig n

D etaile d
D e sign

C o din g an d
D e bu ging

S yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Design-to-Schedule
P roduct
C oncept

R equ irem ents
An alysis

Architectural
D esign

H ig h P rio rity: D etailed design , code, d ebug, test

M edium H igh Priority: D etailed desig n, code , debug, te st

R u n ou t of tim e or
m oney h ere

M ed ium P riority: D e tailed design , code, debug , test

M ediu m Low P riority: D etailed design , co de, de bug, test

Low Priority: D etailed design, code , debug , test

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

R elease

Design-to-Tools
F u n ctio n a lity s u p p o rte d b y
th e to o ls

F u n ctio n a lity th a t w ill
n o t b e in th e p ro d u ct

Fu n c tio n a lity th a t w ill b e
b u ilt

Id e a l fu n c tio n a lity

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Iterative Project Management
Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Spiral (Boehm)

R epe at as requ ire d

1. D eter m ine
ob jective s,
alte rnatives,
constraints

2008-11-11

2 . Iden tify and
reso lve risks

3. E va lu ate
a ltern atives

4 . D evelop
ite ration
d elivera ble s a nd
verify co rrect

5 . P la n the ne xt
ite ratio n

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

6.
C om m it to an
a ppro ach for ne xt
ite ratio n

Evolutionary Prototyping
No

In itial
con ce pt

2008-11-11

D esign and
im p lem ent
initia l
proto typ e

R efin e
p ro to typ e

C usto m e r
a ccep tab le ?

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

C om p lete
a nd
relea se

Staged Delivery
(AKA Incremental Implementation)
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

R e q u ire m e nts
A n a ly sis

A rch ite c tu ra l
D e sig n

S ta g e 1 : D e ta ile d d e s ig n , c o d e , d e b u g , te st, d e liv e ry

S ta g e 2 : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e liv e ry

S ta g e n : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e live ry

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Evolutionary Delivery
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

P re lim in a ry
R e q u ire m e n ts
A n a lys is

A rch ite ctu ra l
D e s ig n a n d
S ys te m C o re

D e liv e r F in a l
V e rsio n

D e v e lo p a V e rsio n

In c o rp o ra te
C u s to m e r
F e e d b a ck

D e liv e ry th e
V e rs io n

E licit C u sto m e r
F e e d b a ck

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Project Management
“There is nothing new
under the sun but there
are lots of old things
we don't know.”
Ambrose Bierce

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Principles (2001)













Customer satisfaction by rapid, continuous delivery of useful software
Working software is delivered frequently (weeks rather than months)
Working software is the principal measure of progress
Even late changes in requirements are welcomed
Close, daily cooperation between business people and developers
Face-to-face conversation is the best form of communication (Co-location)
Projects are built around motivated individuals, who should be trusted
Continuous attention to technical excellence and good design
Simplicity
Self-organizing teams
Regular adaptation to changing circumstances

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Characteristics


Time periods in weeks rather than months


time period as a strict timebox.

Work is performed in a highly
collaborative manner.
 If the sponsors of the project are
concerned about completing certain goals
with a defined timeline or budget, agile
may not be appropriate.


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Methodologies (Partial)


Agile Unified Process (AUP)







Simplified IBM Rational Unified Process (RUP)

Extreme programming (XP)
Feature Driven Development (FDD)
Scrum


“Pig” Roles
• Product owner (VOC - Product Manager)
• ScrumMaster (Project Manager)
• Team (Developers)



“Chicken” Roles
• Users
• Stakeholders (customers, vendors)
• Managers

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Adaptive (Agile) vs
Predictive (Plan-driven)
Strengths of each:


Adaptive










Low criticality
Senior developers
Requirements change
very often
Small number of
developers
Culture that thrives on
chaos

2008-11-11

Predictive








High criticality
Junior developers
Requirements don't
change too often
Large number of
developers
Culture that demands
order

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Model Selection Criteria













How well do my customer and we understand the requirements at the beginning of
the project? Is our understanding likely to change significantly as we move through
the project?
How well do we understand the system architecture? Are we likely to need to make
major architectural changes midway through the project?
How much reliable do we need?
How much do we need to plan ahead and design ahead during this project for future
versions?
How much risk does the project entail?
Are we constrained by a predefined schedule?
Do we need to be able to make midcourse corrections?
Do we need to provide customers with visible progress throughout the project?
Do we need to provide management with visible progress throughout the project?
How much sophistication do we need to use this lifecycle model successfully?

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Project Management Models:
Strengths and Weaknesses
M od el C apa city
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
requ ire m en ts
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
arch ite ctu re
Pr od uce s h ig h ly
rel iable sy stem
Pr od uce s sy stem wi th
la rg e g ro wth en v elop
M ana g es ri sk s
Can be c o n strain ed to
p re de te rm in ed
sc h ed u le
Ha s lo w ove rh e ad
A llo w s for m id co ur se
co rre ct ion s
Pr ovid es c u stom ers
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Pr ovid es ma n ag em en t
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Requ ir es little m ana ge r
o r d evelop er
sop h istic atio n

Pure
W ate rfall

C od e-an d F ix

Spi ral

M odi fied
W ate rfall

E vol ut io nar y
Pr o to ty pin g

S tag ed
De liv er y

E vol ut io nar y
De liv er y

De sig n -to sc h ed u le

De sig n to -too ls

C o mme rcial
Of f-th e -sh elf
so ft w are

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

F air

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r to
fai r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

2008-11-11

F air to
exc ellent
F air to
exc ellent

P oo r

N/ A

P oo r to
fai r

N/ A

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air to
exc ellent

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

N/ A

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

N/ A

P oo r

P oo r to
fai r

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Accelerating the NPD Life Cycle
Model
Ideaisation

Go:No-Go

Scoping

Go:No-Go

Planning

Go:No-Go

Development

Go:No-Go

Testing

Go:No-Go

Launch

Go:No-Go

Maintenance
Retirement

Project Lifecycle Framework
 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

EOL

Discussion

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Away
Recommendations
“For which of you,
desiring to build a
tower, doesn't first sit
down and count the
cost, to see if he has
enough to complete it?”
Jesus
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation


Ready-Aim-Fire


Haste makes waste (penny wise, pound foolish)
• Choosing the wrong models will result in unfulfilled
expectations and delays

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Ready


Recognizing the difference between








product management,
marketing, and
project management

Having a well defined NPD process
Not standardizing on only one project model
Having a positive teamwork environment,
inspirational leadership, focused vision, and
necessary skills

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Aim
Ensuring up-front homework done first
 Ensuring the resources(staff) & time to do
it right
 Verifying available resource costs (people
and time)
 Selecting the most appropriate project
model
 Taking the time to do the planning right


Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Fire
Being flexible within parameters
 Regular review of processes and methods
 Regular, frequent review of new ideas
and market information


Fini


Robert Grupe





[email protected]
+1.314.266.7321

Further reading







Forrester “Making Product Management A Strategic
Resource”
Winning at New Products, Robert G Cooper
Rapid Development, Steve McConnell
PDMA Visions magazine, Jun & Sept 2008

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.


Slide 31

7 Management Solutions

Red

Accelerating Innovation
Overview and discussion of NPD
and project management life cycle
models
Robert Grupe
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Introduction
An overview and discussion of integrated
new product development and project life
cycle models for best practice approaches
to successful innovation and accelerated
time to market.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agenda






Clarification of PM Terminology
Strategically Focused PM
NPD vs. Project Management
Models







Waterfall Models
Iterative Models
Agile Approaches

Discussion
Roundup
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Clarification of Terminology
Product Management
 Project Management
 Program Management


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Product Management



Planning and marketing of a product or products at all stages of the
product lifecycle.
Product planning (in-bound marketing)
[Product Manager (PM)]






Defining new products
Gathering market requirements (VoC)
Building product roadmaps
Product Life Cycle considerations
• Stages: introduction, growth, mature, saturation/decline





Competitive differentiation

Product marketing (outbound marketing)
[Product Marketing Manager (PMM)]





Product positioning and outbound messaging
Promotion: press, customers, and partners
Packaging and delivery
Competition messaging monitoring

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Project Management



Project Planning
[Project Manager (PjM)]
Achieve all of the goals of the project charter while
adhering to




Project constraints: scope, time, cost and quality.

Project management life cycle



5 Process Groups: Project Initiation, Project Planning, Project
Execution, Project monitoring and control, and Project closeout.
9 Knowledge Areas: integration management, scope
management, time management, cost management, quality
management, human resource management, communications
management,risk management and procurement management.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology: Program Management
[& Product Portfolio Management]













Layer above project management focusing on selecting the best group of programs [and
products,] defining them in terms of their constituent projects and providing an infrastructure
where projects can be run successfully
Governance: The structure, process, and procedure to control operations and changes to
performance objectives.
Standards: Define the performance architecture.
Alignment: The program must support higher level vision, goals and objectives.
Assurance: Verify and validate the program, ensuring adherence to standards and alignment
with the vision.
Management: Ensure there are regular reviews, there is accountability, and that management of
projects, stakeholders and suppliers is in place.
Integration: Optimize performance across the program value chain, functionally and technically.
Finances: Tracking of finances is an important part of Program management and basic costs
together with wider costs of administering the program are all tracked.
Infrastructure: Allocation of resources influences the cost and success of the program.
Infrastructure might cover offices, version control, and IT. Planning: Develop the plan bringing
together the information on projects, resources, timescales, monitoring and control.[1]
Improvement: Continuously assess performance; research and develop new capabilities; and
systemically apply learning and knowledge to the program.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Why is this important?


Without clearly defined and integrated product,
marketing, and project management, innovation
will be haphazard, chaotic, and un-scaleable
with complexity and growth.


You can’t improve or accelerate what you can’t
understand or control.
• Putting random people on a galley ship won’t ensure you
will get where you want to go or make it go faster.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Research: Most PM’s
not being used effectively


Distracting challenges
Product and
company
strategy
10%

Customers
and market
8%

Internal
process and
organization
28%

Development
process
16%

Prioritization
and Focus
16%

2008-11-11

Time and
resources
22%

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Recommendation:
PM for Strategic Advantage
Focused on inbound tasks
 PM decision-making power






Roadmap, release contents, release
acceptance

Report to CEO/GM

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

New Product Development (NPD)
& Project Life Cycle Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Code & Fix
(AKA Cowboy Coding)

S ys tem
S pe cific atio n
(m a yb e )

2008-11-11

C o de -a nd -F ix

R elea se
(m ay be )

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Traditional NPD Process
Stage-Gate Process
Discovery
QuickTim e™ and a
de co m pres sor
are n eed ed to se e this p ictu re .

Scoping

Business
Case

Stage
1

Stage
2

Development

Test /
Validation

Launch

Stage
3

Stage
4

Stage
5

Gate
1

Gate
2

Gate
3

Gate
4

Gate
5

Idea
Screen

Second
Screen

Go To
Dev

Go To
Test

Go To
Launch

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Review
Qui ckT ime™ and a
deco mpre sso r
are nee ded t o see t his p ict ure.

Traditional Project Management
Waterfall Model
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Risk Reduction
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Subprojects
Pr od u ct
C o n ce pt

R e qu ire m en ts
A n a lysis

D e ta ile d
D e sig n

A rch itec tur a l
D e s ig n

C o din g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S u b sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S ub sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g a nd
D e b u gin g

D e ta ile d
D e s ig n

S ub s yste m
T e sting

C o d in g a nd
D eb u g in g

S yste m
T e sting
S u bs yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Overlapping
Phases (Sashimi)
P rodu ct
C o nc ep t

R equ ire m e nts
A na lysis

A rchite ctura l
D esig n

D etaile d
D e sign

C o din g an d
D e bu ging

S yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Design-to-Schedule
P roduct
C oncept

R equ irem ents
An alysis

Architectural
D esign

H ig h P rio rity: D etailed design , code, d ebug, test

M edium H igh Priority: D etailed desig n, code , debug, te st

R u n ou t of tim e or
m oney h ere

M ed ium P riority: D e tailed design , code, debug , test

M ediu m Low P riority: D etailed design , co de, de bug, test

Low Priority: D etailed design, code , debug , test

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

R elease

Design-to-Tools
F u n ctio n a lity s u p p o rte d b y
th e to o ls

F u n ctio n a lity th a t w ill
n o t b e in th e p ro d u ct

Fu n c tio n a lity th a t w ill b e
b u ilt

Id e a l fu n c tio n a lity

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Iterative Project Management
Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Spiral (Boehm)

R epe at as requ ire d

1. D eter m ine
ob jective s,
alte rnatives,
constraints

2008-11-11

2 . Iden tify and
reso lve risks

3. E va lu ate
a ltern atives

4 . D evelop
ite ration
d elivera ble s a nd
verify co rrect

5 . P la n the ne xt
ite ratio n

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

6.
C om m it to an
a ppro ach for ne xt
ite ratio n

Evolutionary Prototyping
No

In itial
con ce pt

2008-11-11

D esign and
im p lem ent
initia l
proto typ e

R efin e
p ro to typ e

C usto m e r
a ccep tab le ?

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

C om p lete
a nd
relea se

Staged Delivery
(AKA Incremental Implementation)
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

R e q u ire m e nts
A n a ly sis

A rch ite c tu ra l
D e sig n

S ta g e 1 : D e ta ile d d e s ig n , c o d e , d e b u g , te st, d e liv e ry

S ta g e 2 : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e liv e ry

S ta g e n : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e live ry

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Evolutionary Delivery
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

P re lim in a ry
R e q u ire m e n ts
A n a lys is

A rch ite ctu ra l
D e s ig n a n d
S ys te m C o re

D e liv e r F in a l
V e rsio n

D e v e lo p a V e rsio n

In c o rp o ra te
C u s to m e r
F e e d b a ck

D e liv e ry th e
V e rs io n

E licit C u sto m e r
F e e d b a ck

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Project Management
“There is nothing new
under the sun but there
are lots of old things
we don't know.”
Ambrose Bierce

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Principles (2001)













Customer satisfaction by rapid, continuous delivery of useful software
Working software is delivered frequently (weeks rather than months)
Working software is the principal measure of progress
Even late changes in requirements are welcomed
Close, daily cooperation between business people and developers
Face-to-face conversation is the best form of communication (Co-location)
Projects are built around motivated individuals, who should be trusted
Continuous attention to technical excellence and good design
Simplicity
Self-organizing teams
Regular adaptation to changing circumstances

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Characteristics


Time periods in weeks rather than months


time period as a strict timebox.

Work is performed in a highly
collaborative manner.
 If the sponsors of the project are
concerned about completing certain goals
with a defined timeline or budget, agile
may not be appropriate.


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Methodologies (Partial)


Agile Unified Process (AUP)







Simplified IBM Rational Unified Process (RUP)

Extreme programming (XP)
Feature Driven Development (FDD)
Scrum


“Pig” Roles
• Product owner (VOC - Product Manager)
• ScrumMaster (Project Manager)
• Team (Developers)



“Chicken” Roles
• Users
• Stakeholders (customers, vendors)
• Managers

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Adaptive (Agile) vs
Predictive (Plan-driven)
Strengths of each:


Adaptive










Low criticality
Senior developers
Requirements change
very often
Small number of
developers
Culture that thrives on
chaos

2008-11-11

Predictive








High criticality
Junior developers
Requirements don't
change too often
Large number of
developers
Culture that demands
order

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Model Selection Criteria













How well do my customer and we understand the requirements at the beginning of
the project? Is our understanding likely to change significantly as we move through
the project?
How well do we understand the system architecture? Are we likely to need to make
major architectural changes midway through the project?
How much reliable do we need?
How much do we need to plan ahead and design ahead during this project for future
versions?
How much risk does the project entail?
Are we constrained by a predefined schedule?
Do we need to be able to make midcourse corrections?
Do we need to provide customers with visible progress throughout the project?
Do we need to provide management with visible progress throughout the project?
How much sophistication do we need to use this lifecycle model successfully?

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Project Management Models:
Strengths and Weaknesses
M od el C apa city
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
requ ire m en ts
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
arch ite ctu re
Pr od uce s h ig h ly
rel iable sy stem
Pr od uce s sy stem wi th
la rg e g ro wth en v elop
M ana g es ri sk s
Can be c o n strain ed to
p re de te rm in ed
sc h ed u le
Ha s lo w ove rh e ad
A llo w s for m id co ur se
co rre ct ion s
Pr ovid es c u stom ers
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Pr ovid es ma n ag em en t
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Requ ir es little m ana ge r
o r d evelop er
sop h istic atio n

Pure
W ate rfall

C od e-an d F ix

Spi ral

M odi fied
W ate rfall

E vol ut io nar y
Pr o to ty pin g

S tag ed
De liv er y

E vol ut io nar y
De liv er y

De sig n -to sc h ed u le

De sig n to -too ls

C o mme rcial
Of f-th e -sh elf
so ft w are

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

F air

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r to
fai r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

2008-11-11

F air to
exc ellent
F air to
exc ellent

P oo r

N/ A

P oo r to
fai r

N/ A

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air to
exc ellent

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

N/ A

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

N/ A

P oo r

P oo r to
fai r

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Accelerating the NPD Life Cycle
Model
Ideaisation

Go:No-Go

Scoping

Go:No-Go

Planning

Go:No-Go

Development

Go:No-Go

Testing

Go:No-Go

Launch

Go:No-Go

Maintenance
Retirement

Project Lifecycle Framework
 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

EOL

Discussion

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Away
Recommendations
“For which of you,
desiring to build a
tower, doesn't first sit
down and count the
cost, to see if he has
enough to complete it?”
Jesus
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation


Ready-Aim-Fire


Haste makes waste (penny wise, pound foolish)
• Choosing the wrong models will result in unfulfilled
expectations and delays

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Ready


Recognizing the difference between








product management,
marketing, and
project management

Having a well defined NPD process
Not standardizing on only one project model
Having a positive teamwork environment,
inspirational leadership, focused vision, and
necessary skills

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Aim
Ensuring up-front homework done first
 Ensuring the resources(staff) & time to do
it right
 Verifying available resource costs (people
and time)
 Selecting the most appropriate project
model
 Taking the time to do the planning right


Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Fire
Being flexible within parameters
 Regular review of processes and methods
 Regular, frequent review of new ideas
and market information


Fini


Robert Grupe





[email protected]
+1.314.266.7321

Further reading







Forrester “Making Product Management A Strategic
Resource”
Winning at New Products, Robert G Cooper
Rapid Development, Steve McConnell
PDMA Visions magazine, Jun & Sept 2008

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.


Slide 32

7 Management Solutions

Red

Accelerating Innovation
Overview and discussion of NPD
and project management life cycle
models
Robert Grupe
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Introduction
An overview and discussion of integrated
new product development and project life
cycle models for best practice approaches
to successful innovation and accelerated
time to market.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agenda






Clarification of PM Terminology
Strategically Focused PM
NPD vs. Project Management
Models







Waterfall Models
Iterative Models
Agile Approaches

Discussion
Roundup
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Clarification of Terminology
Product Management
 Project Management
 Program Management


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Product Management



Planning and marketing of a product or products at all stages of the
product lifecycle.
Product planning (in-bound marketing)
[Product Manager (PM)]






Defining new products
Gathering market requirements (VoC)
Building product roadmaps
Product Life Cycle considerations
• Stages: introduction, growth, mature, saturation/decline





Competitive differentiation

Product marketing (outbound marketing)
[Product Marketing Manager (PMM)]





Product positioning and outbound messaging
Promotion: press, customers, and partners
Packaging and delivery
Competition messaging monitoring

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Project Management



Project Planning
[Project Manager (PjM)]
Achieve all of the goals of the project charter while
adhering to




Project constraints: scope, time, cost and quality.

Project management life cycle



5 Process Groups: Project Initiation, Project Planning, Project
Execution, Project monitoring and control, and Project closeout.
9 Knowledge Areas: integration management, scope
management, time management, cost management, quality
management, human resource management, communications
management,risk management and procurement management.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology: Program Management
[& Product Portfolio Management]













Layer above project management focusing on selecting the best group of programs [and
products,] defining them in terms of their constituent projects and providing an infrastructure
where projects can be run successfully
Governance: The structure, process, and procedure to control operations and changes to
performance objectives.
Standards: Define the performance architecture.
Alignment: The program must support higher level vision, goals and objectives.
Assurance: Verify and validate the program, ensuring adherence to standards and alignment
with the vision.
Management: Ensure there are regular reviews, there is accountability, and that management of
projects, stakeholders and suppliers is in place.
Integration: Optimize performance across the program value chain, functionally and technically.
Finances: Tracking of finances is an important part of Program management and basic costs
together with wider costs of administering the program are all tracked.
Infrastructure: Allocation of resources influences the cost and success of the program.
Infrastructure might cover offices, version control, and IT. Planning: Develop the plan bringing
together the information on projects, resources, timescales, monitoring and control.[1]
Improvement: Continuously assess performance; research and develop new capabilities; and
systemically apply learning and knowledge to the program.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Why is this important?


Without clearly defined and integrated product,
marketing, and project management, innovation
will be haphazard, chaotic, and un-scaleable
with complexity and growth.


You can’t improve or accelerate what you can’t
understand or control.
• Putting random people on a galley ship won’t ensure you
will get where you want to go or make it go faster.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Research: Most PM’s
not being used effectively


Distracting challenges
Product and
company
strategy
10%

Customers
and market
8%

Internal
process and
organization
28%

Development
process
16%

Prioritization
and Focus
16%

2008-11-11

Time and
resources
22%

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Recommendation:
PM for Strategic Advantage
Focused on inbound tasks
 PM decision-making power






Roadmap, release contents, release
acceptance

Report to CEO/GM

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

New Product Development (NPD)
& Project Life Cycle Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Code & Fix
(AKA Cowboy Coding)

S ys tem
S pe cific atio n
(m a yb e )

2008-11-11

C o de -a nd -F ix

R elea se
(m ay be )

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Traditional NPD Process
Stage-Gate Process
Discovery
QuickTim e™ and a
de co m pres sor
are n eed ed to se e this p ictu re .

Scoping

Business
Case

Stage
1

Stage
2

Development

Test /
Validation

Launch

Stage
3

Stage
4

Stage
5

Gate
1

Gate
2

Gate
3

Gate
4

Gate
5

Idea
Screen

Second
Screen

Go To
Dev

Go To
Test

Go To
Launch

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Review
Qui ckT ime™ and a
deco mpre sso r
are nee ded t o see t his p ict ure.

Traditional Project Management
Waterfall Model
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Risk Reduction
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Subprojects
Pr od u ct
C o n ce pt

R e qu ire m en ts
A n a lysis

D e ta ile d
D e sig n

A rch itec tur a l
D e s ig n

C o din g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S u b sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S ub sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g a nd
D e b u gin g

D e ta ile d
D e s ig n

S ub s yste m
T e sting

C o d in g a nd
D eb u g in g

S yste m
T e sting
S u bs yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Overlapping
Phases (Sashimi)
P rodu ct
C o nc ep t

R equ ire m e nts
A na lysis

A rchite ctura l
D esig n

D etaile d
D e sign

C o din g an d
D e bu ging

S yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Design-to-Schedule
P roduct
C oncept

R equ irem ents
An alysis

Architectural
D esign

H ig h P rio rity: D etailed design , code, d ebug, test

M edium H igh Priority: D etailed desig n, code , debug, te st

R u n ou t of tim e or
m oney h ere

M ed ium P riority: D e tailed design , code, debug , test

M ediu m Low P riority: D etailed design , co de, de bug, test

Low Priority: D etailed design, code , debug , test

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

R elease

Design-to-Tools
F u n ctio n a lity s u p p o rte d b y
th e to o ls

F u n ctio n a lity th a t w ill
n o t b e in th e p ro d u ct

Fu n c tio n a lity th a t w ill b e
b u ilt

Id e a l fu n c tio n a lity

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Iterative Project Management
Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Spiral (Boehm)

R epe at as requ ire d

1. D eter m ine
ob jective s,
alte rnatives,
constraints

2008-11-11

2 . Iden tify and
reso lve risks

3. E va lu ate
a ltern atives

4 . D evelop
ite ration
d elivera ble s a nd
verify co rrect

5 . P la n the ne xt
ite ratio n

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

6.
C om m it to an
a ppro ach for ne xt
ite ratio n

Evolutionary Prototyping
No

In itial
con ce pt

2008-11-11

D esign and
im p lem ent
initia l
proto typ e

R efin e
p ro to typ e

C usto m e r
a ccep tab le ?

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

C om p lete
a nd
relea se

Staged Delivery
(AKA Incremental Implementation)
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

R e q u ire m e nts
A n a ly sis

A rch ite c tu ra l
D e sig n

S ta g e 1 : D e ta ile d d e s ig n , c o d e , d e b u g , te st, d e liv e ry

S ta g e 2 : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e liv e ry

S ta g e n : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e live ry

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Evolutionary Delivery
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

P re lim in a ry
R e q u ire m e n ts
A n a lys is

A rch ite ctu ra l
D e s ig n a n d
S ys te m C o re

D e liv e r F in a l
V e rsio n

D e v e lo p a V e rsio n

In c o rp o ra te
C u s to m e r
F e e d b a ck

D e liv e ry th e
V e rs io n

E licit C u sto m e r
F e e d b a ck

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Project Management
“There is nothing new
under the sun but there
are lots of old things
we don't know.”
Ambrose Bierce

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Principles (2001)













Customer satisfaction by rapid, continuous delivery of useful software
Working software is delivered frequently (weeks rather than months)
Working software is the principal measure of progress
Even late changes in requirements are welcomed
Close, daily cooperation between business people and developers
Face-to-face conversation is the best form of communication (Co-location)
Projects are built around motivated individuals, who should be trusted
Continuous attention to technical excellence and good design
Simplicity
Self-organizing teams
Regular adaptation to changing circumstances

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Characteristics


Time periods in weeks rather than months


time period as a strict timebox.

Work is performed in a highly
collaborative manner.
 If the sponsors of the project are
concerned about completing certain goals
with a defined timeline or budget, agile
may not be appropriate.


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Methodologies (Partial)


Agile Unified Process (AUP)







Simplified IBM Rational Unified Process (RUP)

Extreme programming (XP)
Feature Driven Development (FDD)
Scrum


“Pig” Roles
• Product owner (VOC - Product Manager)
• ScrumMaster (Project Manager)
• Team (Developers)



“Chicken” Roles
• Users
• Stakeholders (customers, vendors)
• Managers

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Adaptive (Agile) vs
Predictive (Plan-driven)
Strengths of each:


Adaptive










Low criticality
Senior developers
Requirements change
very often
Small number of
developers
Culture that thrives on
chaos

2008-11-11

Predictive








High criticality
Junior developers
Requirements don't
change too often
Large number of
developers
Culture that demands
order

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Model Selection Criteria













How well do my customer and we understand the requirements at the beginning of
the project? Is our understanding likely to change significantly as we move through
the project?
How well do we understand the system architecture? Are we likely to need to make
major architectural changes midway through the project?
How much reliable do we need?
How much do we need to plan ahead and design ahead during this project for future
versions?
How much risk does the project entail?
Are we constrained by a predefined schedule?
Do we need to be able to make midcourse corrections?
Do we need to provide customers with visible progress throughout the project?
Do we need to provide management with visible progress throughout the project?
How much sophistication do we need to use this lifecycle model successfully?

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Project Management Models:
Strengths and Weaknesses
M od el C apa city
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
requ ire m en ts
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
arch ite ctu re
Pr od uce s h ig h ly
rel iable sy stem
Pr od uce s sy stem wi th
la rg e g ro wth en v elop
M ana g es ri sk s
Can be c o n strain ed to
p re de te rm in ed
sc h ed u le
Ha s lo w ove rh e ad
A llo w s for m id co ur se
co rre ct ion s
Pr ovid es c u stom ers
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Pr ovid es ma n ag em en t
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Requ ir es little m ana ge r
o r d evelop er
sop h istic atio n

Pure
W ate rfall

C od e-an d F ix

Spi ral

M odi fied
W ate rfall

E vol ut io nar y
Pr o to ty pin g

S tag ed
De liv er y

E vol ut io nar y
De liv er y

De sig n -to sc h ed u le

De sig n to -too ls

C o mme rcial
Of f-th e -sh elf
so ft w are

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

F air

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r to
fai r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

2008-11-11

F air to
exc ellent
F air to
exc ellent

P oo r

N/ A

P oo r to
fai r

N/ A

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air to
exc ellent

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

N/ A

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

N/ A

P oo r

P oo r to
fai r

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Accelerating the NPD Life Cycle
Model
Ideaisation

Go:No-Go

Scoping

Go:No-Go

Planning

Go:No-Go

Development

Go:No-Go

Testing

Go:No-Go

Launch

Go:No-Go

Maintenance
Retirement

Project Lifecycle Framework
 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

EOL

Discussion

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Away
Recommendations
“For which of you,
desiring to build a
tower, doesn't first sit
down and count the
cost, to see if he has
enough to complete it?”
Jesus
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation


Ready-Aim-Fire


Haste makes waste (penny wise, pound foolish)
• Choosing the wrong models will result in unfulfilled
expectations and delays

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Ready


Recognizing the difference between








product management,
marketing, and
project management

Having a well defined NPD process
Not standardizing on only one project model
Having a positive teamwork environment,
inspirational leadership, focused vision, and
necessary skills

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Aim
Ensuring up-front homework done first
 Ensuring the resources(staff) & time to do
it right
 Verifying available resource costs (people
and time)
 Selecting the most appropriate project
model
 Taking the time to do the planning right


Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Fire
Being flexible within parameters
 Regular review of processes and methods
 Regular, frequent review of new ideas
and market information


Fini


Robert Grupe





[email protected]
+1.314.266.7321

Further reading







Forrester “Making Product Management A Strategic
Resource”
Winning at New Products, Robert G Cooper
Rapid Development, Steve McConnell
PDMA Visions magazine, Jun & Sept 2008

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.


Slide 33

7 Management Solutions

Red

Accelerating Innovation
Overview and discussion of NPD
and project management life cycle
models
Robert Grupe
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Introduction
An overview and discussion of integrated
new product development and project life
cycle models for best practice approaches
to successful innovation and accelerated
time to market.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agenda






Clarification of PM Terminology
Strategically Focused PM
NPD vs. Project Management
Models







Waterfall Models
Iterative Models
Agile Approaches

Discussion
Roundup
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Clarification of Terminology
Product Management
 Project Management
 Program Management


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Product Management



Planning and marketing of a product or products at all stages of the
product lifecycle.
Product planning (in-bound marketing)
[Product Manager (PM)]






Defining new products
Gathering market requirements (VoC)
Building product roadmaps
Product Life Cycle considerations
• Stages: introduction, growth, mature, saturation/decline





Competitive differentiation

Product marketing (outbound marketing)
[Product Marketing Manager (PMM)]





Product positioning and outbound messaging
Promotion: press, customers, and partners
Packaging and delivery
Competition messaging monitoring

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Project Management



Project Planning
[Project Manager (PjM)]
Achieve all of the goals of the project charter while
adhering to




Project constraints: scope, time, cost and quality.

Project management life cycle



5 Process Groups: Project Initiation, Project Planning, Project
Execution, Project monitoring and control, and Project closeout.
9 Knowledge Areas: integration management, scope
management, time management, cost management, quality
management, human resource management, communications
management,risk management and procurement management.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology: Program Management
[& Product Portfolio Management]













Layer above project management focusing on selecting the best group of programs [and
products,] defining them in terms of their constituent projects and providing an infrastructure
where projects can be run successfully
Governance: The structure, process, and procedure to control operations and changes to
performance objectives.
Standards: Define the performance architecture.
Alignment: The program must support higher level vision, goals and objectives.
Assurance: Verify and validate the program, ensuring adherence to standards and alignment
with the vision.
Management: Ensure there are regular reviews, there is accountability, and that management of
projects, stakeholders and suppliers is in place.
Integration: Optimize performance across the program value chain, functionally and technically.
Finances: Tracking of finances is an important part of Program management and basic costs
together with wider costs of administering the program are all tracked.
Infrastructure: Allocation of resources influences the cost and success of the program.
Infrastructure might cover offices, version control, and IT. Planning: Develop the plan bringing
together the information on projects, resources, timescales, monitoring and control.[1]
Improvement: Continuously assess performance; research and develop new capabilities; and
systemically apply learning and knowledge to the program.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Why is this important?


Without clearly defined and integrated product,
marketing, and project management, innovation
will be haphazard, chaotic, and un-scaleable
with complexity and growth.


You can’t improve or accelerate what you can’t
understand or control.
• Putting random people on a galley ship won’t ensure you
will get where you want to go or make it go faster.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Research: Most PM’s
not being used effectively


Distracting challenges
Product and
company
strategy
10%

Customers
and market
8%

Internal
process and
organization
28%

Development
process
16%

Prioritization
and Focus
16%

2008-11-11

Time and
resources
22%

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Recommendation:
PM for Strategic Advantage
Focused on inbound tasks
 PM decision-making power






Roadmap, release contents, release
acceptance

Report to CEO/GM

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

New Product Development (NPD)
& Project Life Cycle Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Code & Fix
(AKA Cowboy Coding)

S ys tem
S pe cific atio n
(m a yb e )

2008-11-11

C o de -a nd -F ix

R elea se
(m ay be )

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Traditional NPD Process
Stage-Gate Process
Discovery
QuickTim e™ and a
de co m pres sor
are n eed ed to se e this p ictu re .

Scoping

Business
Case

Stage
1

Stage
2

Development

Test /
Validation

Launch

Stage
3

Stage
4

Stage
5

Gate
1

Gate
2

Gate
3

Gate
4

Gate
5

Idea
Screen

Second
Screen

Go To
Dev

Go To
Test

Go To
Launch

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Review
Qui ckT ime™ and a
deco mpre sso r
are nee ded t o see t his p ict ure.

Traditional Project Management
Waterfall Model
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Risk Reduction
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Subprojects
Pr od u ct
C o n ce pt

R e qu ire m en ts
A n a lysis

D e ta ile d
D e sig n

A rch itec tur a l
D e s ig n

C o din g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S u b sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S ub sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g a nd
D e b u gin g

D e ta ile d
D e s ig n

S ub s yste m
T e sting

C o d in g a nd
D eb u g in g

S yste m
T e sting
S u bs yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Overlapping
Phases (Sashimi)
P rodu ct
C o nc ep t

R equ ire m e nts
A na lysis

A rchite ctura l
D esig n

D etaile d
D e sign

C o din g an d
D e bu ging

S yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Design-to-Schedule
P roduct
C oncept

R equ irem ents
An alysis

Architectural
D esign

H ig h P rio rity: D etailed design , code, d ebug, test

M edium H igh Priority: D etailed desig n, code , debug, te st

R u n ou t of tim e or
m oney h ere

M ed ium P riority: D e tailed design , code, debug , test

M ediu m Low P riority: D etailed design , co de, de bug, test

Low Priority: D etailed design, code , debug , test

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

R elease

Design-to-Tools
F u n ctio n a lity s u p p o rte d b y
th e to o ls

F u n ctio n a lity th a t w ill
n o t b e in th e p ro d u ct

Fu n c tio n a lity th a t w ill b e
b u ilt

Id e a l fu n c tio n a lity

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Iterative Project Management
Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Spiral (Boehm)

R epe at as requ ire d

1. D eter m ine
ob jective s,
alte rnatives,
constraints

2008-11-11

2 . Iden tify and
reso lve risks

3. E va lu ate
a ltern atives

4 . D evelop
ite ration
d elivera ble s a nd
verify co rrect

5 . P la n the ne xt
ite ratio n

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

6.
C om m it to an
a ppro ach for ne xt
ite ratio n

Evolutionary Prototyping
No

In itial
con ce pt

2008-11-11

D esign and
im p lem ent
initia l
proto typ e

R efin e
p ro to typ e

C usto m e r
a ccep tab le ?

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

C om p lete
a nd
relea se

Staged Delivery
(AKA Incremental Implementation)
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

R e q u ire m e nts
A n a ly sis

A rch ite c tu ra l
D e sig n

S ta g e 1 : D e ta ile d d e s ig n , c o d e , d e b u g , te st, d e liv e ry

S ta g e 2 : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e liv e ry

S ta g e n : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e live ry

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Evolutionary Delivery
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

P re lim in a ry
R e q u ire m e n ts
A n a lys is

A rch ite ctu ra l
D e s ig n a n d
S ys te m C o re

D e liv e r F in a l
V e rsio n

D e v e lo p a V e rsio n

In c o rp o ra te
C u s to m e r
F e e d b a ck

D e liv e ry th e
V e rs io n

E licit C u sto m e r
F e e d b a ck

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Project Management
“There is nothing new
under the sun but there
are lots of old things
we don't know.”
Ambrose Bierce

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Principles (2001)













Customer satisfaction by rapid, continuous delivery of useful software
Working software is delivered frequently (weeks rather than months)
Working software is the principal measure of progress
Even late changes in requirements are welcomed
Close, daily cooperation between business people and developers
Face-to-face conversation is the best form of communication (Co-location)
Projects are built around motivated individuals, who should be trusted
Continuous attention to technical excellence and good design
Simplicity
Self-organizing teams
Regular adaptation to changing circumstances

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Characteristics


Time periods in weeks rather than months


time period as a strict timebox.

Work is performed in a highly
collaborative manner.
 If the sponsors of the project are
concerned about completing certain goals
with a defined timeline or budget, agile
may not be appropriate.


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Methodologies (Partial)


Agile Unified Process (AUP)







Simplified IBM Rational Unified Process (RUP)

Extreme programming (XP)
Feature Driven Development (FDD)
Scrum


“Pig” Roles
• Product owner (VOC - Product Manager)
• ScrumMaster (Project Manager)
• Team (Developers)



“Chicken” Roles
• Users
• Stakeholders (customers, vendors)
• Managers

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Adaptive (Agile) vs
Predictive (Plan-driven)
Strengths of each:


Adaptive










Low criticality
Senior developers
Requirements change
very often
Small number of
developers
Culture that thrives on
chaos

2008-11-11

Predictive








High criticality
Junior developers
Requirements don't
change too often
Large number of
developers
Culture that demands
order

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Model Selection Criteria













How well do my customer and we understand the requirements at the beginning of
the project? Is our understanding likely to change significantly as we move through
the project?
How well do we understand the system architecture? Are we likely to need to make
major architectural changes midway through the project?
How much reliable do we need?
How much do we need to plan ahead and design ahead during this project for future
versions?
How much risk does the project entail?
Are we constrained by a predefined schedule?
Do we need to be able to make midcourse corrections?
Do we need to provide customers with visible progress throughout the project?
Do we need to provide management with visible progress throughout the project?
How much sophistication do we need to use this lifecycle model successfully?

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Project Management Models:
Strengths and Weaknesses
M od el C apa city
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
requ ire m en ts
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
arch ite ctu re
Pr od uce s h ig h ly
rel iable sy stem
Pr od uce s sy stem wi th
la rg e g ro wth en v elop
M ana g es ri sk s
Can be c o n strain ed to
p re de te rm in ed
sc h ed u le
Ha s lo w ove rh e ad
A llo w s for m id co ur se
co rre ct ion s
Pr ovid es c u stom ers
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Pr ovid es ma n ag em en t
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Requ ir es little m ana ge r
o r d evelop er
sop h istic atio n

Pure
W ate rfall

C od e-an d F ix

Spi ral

M odi fied
W ate rfall

E vol ut io nar y
Pr o to ty pin g

S tag ed
De liv er y

E vol ut io nar y
De liv er y

De sig n -to sc h ed u le

De sig n to -too ls

C o mme rcial
Of f-th e -sh elf
so ft w are

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

F air

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r to
fai r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

2008-11-11

F air to
exc ellent
F air to
exc ellent

P oo r

N/ A

P oo r to
fai r

N/ A

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air to
exc ellent

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

N/ A

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

N/ A

P oo r

P oo r to
fai r

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Accelerating the NPD Life Cycle
Model
Ideaisation

Go:No-Go

Scoping

Go:No-Go

Planning

Go:No-Go

Development

Go:No-Go

Testing

Go:No-Go

Launch

Go:No-Go

Maintenance
Retirement

Project Lifecycle Framework
 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

EOL

Discussion

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Away
Recommendations
“For which of you,
desiring to build a
tower, doesn't first sit
down and count the
cost, to see if he has
enough to complete it?”
Jesus
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation


Ready-Aim-Fire


Haste makes waste (penny wise, pound foolish)
• Choosing the wrong models will result in unfulfilled
expectations and delays

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Ready


Recognizing the difference between








product management,
marketing, and
project management

Having a well defined NPD process
Not standardizing on only one project model
Having a positive teamwork environment,
inspirational leadership, focused vision, and
necessary skills

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Aim
Ensuring up-front homework done first
 Ensuring the resources(staff) & time to do
it right
 Verifying available resource costs (people
and time)
 Selecting the most appropriate project
model
 Taking the time to do the planning right


Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Fire
Being flexible within parameters
 Regular review of processes and methods
 Regular, frequent review of new ideas
and market information


Fini


Robert Grupe





[email protected]
+1.314.266.7321

Further reading







Forrester “Making Product Management A Strategic
Resource”
Winning at New Products, Robert G Cooper
Rapid Development, Steve McConnell
PDMA Visions magazine, Jun & Sept 2008

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.


Slide 34

7 Management Solutions

Red

Accelerating Innovation
Overview and discussion of NPD
and project management life cycle
models
Robert Grupe
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Introduction
An overview and discussion of integrated
new product development and project life
cycle models for best practice approaches
to successful innovation and accelerated
time to market.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agenda






Clarification of PM Terminology
Strategically Focused PM
NPD vs. Project Management
Models







Waterfall Models
Iterative Models
Agile Approaches

Discussion
Roundup
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Clarification of Terminology
Product Management
 Project Management
 Program Management


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Product Management



Planning and marketing of a product or products at all stages of the
product lifecycle.
Product planning (in-bound marketing)
[Product Manager (PM)]






Defining new products
Gathering market requirements (VoC)
Building product roadmaps
Product Life Cycle considerations
• Stages: introduction, growth, mature, saturation/decline





Competitive differentiation

Product marketing (outbound marketing)
[Product Marketing Manager (PMM)]





Product positioning and outbound messaging
Promotion: press, customers, and partners
Packaging and delivery
Competition messaging monitoring

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Project Management



Project Planning
[Project Manager (PjM)]
Achieve all of the goals of the project charter while
adhering to




Project constraints: scope, time, cost and quality.

Project management life cycle



5 Process Groups: Project Initiation, Project Planning, Project
Execution, Project monitoring and control, and Project closeout.
9 Knowledge Areas: integration management, scope
management, time management, cost management, quality
management, human resource management, communications
management,risk management and procurement management.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology: Program Management
[& Product Portfolio Management]













Layer above project management focusing on selecting the best group of programs [and
products,] defining them in terms of their constituent projects and providing an infrastructure
where projects can be run successfully
Governance: The structure, process, and procedure to control operations and changes to
performance objectives.
Standards: Define the performance architecture.
Alignment: The program must support higher level vision, goals and objectives.
Assurance: Verify and validate the program, ensuring adherence to standards and alignment
with the vision.
Management: Ensure there are regular reviews, there is accountability, and that management of
projects, stakeholders and suppliers is in place.
Integration: Optimize performance across the program value chain, functionally and technically.
Finances: Tracking of finances is an important part of Program management and basic costs
together with wider costs of administering the program are all tracked.
Infrastructure: Allocation of resources influences the cost and success of the program.
Infrastructure might cover offices, version control, and IT. Planning: Develop the plan bringing
together the information on projects, resources, timescales, monitoring and control.[1]
Improvement: Continuously assess performance; research and develop new capabilities; and
systemically apply learning and knowledge to the program.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Why is this important?


Without clearly defined and integrated product,
marketing, and project management, innovation
will be haphazard, chaotic, and un-scaleable
with complexity and growth.


You can’t improve or accelerate what you can’t
understand or control.
• Putting random people on a galley ship won’t ensure you
will get where you want to go or make it go faster.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Research: Most PM’s
not being used effectively


Distracting challenges
Product and
company
strategy
10%

Customers
and market
8%

Internal
process and
organization
28%

Development
process
16%

Prioritization
and Focus
16%

2008-11-11

Time and
resources
22%

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Recommendation:
PM for Strategic Advantage
Focused on inbound tasks
 PM decision-making power






Roadmap, release contents, release
acceptance

Report to CEO/GM

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

New Product Development (NPD)
& Project Life Cycle Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Code & Fix
(AKA Cowboy Coding)

S ys tem
S pe cific atio n
(m a yb e )

2008-11-11

C o de -a nd -F ix

R elea se
(m ay be )

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Traditional NPD Process
Stage-Gate Process
Discovery
QuickTim e™ and a
de co m pres sor
are n eed ed to se e this p ictu re .

Scoping

Business
Case

Stage
1

Stage
2

Development

Test /
Validation

Launch

Stage
3

Stage
4

Stage
5

Gate
1

Gate
2

Gate
3

Gate
4

Gate
5

Idea
Screen

Second
Screen

Go To
Dev

Go To
Test

Go To
Launch

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Review
Qui ckT ime™ and a
deco mpre sso r
are nee ded t o see t his p ict ure.

Traditional Project Management
Waterfall Model
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Risk Reduction
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Subprojects
Pr od u ct
C o n ce pt

R e qu ire m en ts
A n a lysis

D e ta ile d
D e sig n

A rch itec tur a l
D e s ig n

C o din g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S u b sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S ub sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g a nd
D e b u gin g

D e ta ile d
D e s ig n

S ub s yste m
T e sting

C o d in g a nd
D eb u g in g

S yste m
T e sting
S u bs yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Overlapping
Phases (Sashimi)
P rodu ct
C o nc ep t

R equ ire m e nts
A na lysis

A rchite ctura l
D esig n

D etaile d
D e sign

C o din g an d
D e bu ging

S yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Design-to-Schedule
P roduct
C oncept

R equ irem ents
An alysis

Architectural
D esign

H ig h P rio rity: D etailed design , code, d ebug, test

M edium H igh Priority: D etailed desig n, code , debug, te st

R u n ou t of tim e or
m oney h ere

M ed ium P riority: D e tailed design , code, debug , test

M ediu m Low P riority: D etailed design , co de, de bug, test

Low Priority: D etailed design, code , debug , test

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

R elease

Design-to-Tools
F u n ctio n a lity s u p p o rte d b y
th e to o ls

F u n ctio n a lity th a t w ill
n o t b e in th e p ro d u ct

Fu n c tio n a lity th a t w ill b e
b u ilt

Id e a l fu n c tio n a lity

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Iterative Project Management
Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Spiral (Boehm)

R epe at as requ ire d

1. D eter m ine
ob jective s,
alte rnatives,
constraints

2008-11-11

2 . Iden tify and
reso lve risks

3. E va lu ate
a ltern atives

4 . D evelop
ite ration
d elivera ble s a nd
verify co rrect

5 . P la n the ne xt
ite ratio n

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

6.
C om m it to an
a ppro ach for ne xt
ite ratio n

Evolutionary Prototyping
No

In itial
con ce pt

2008-11-11

D esign and
im p lem ent
initia l
proto typ e

R efin e
p ro to typ e

C usto m e r
a ccep tab le ?

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

C om p lete
a nd
relea se

Staged Delivery
(AKA Incremental Implementation)
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

R e q u ire m e nts
A n a ly sis

A rch ite c tu ra l
D e sig n

S ta g e 1 : D e ta ile d d e s ig n , c o d e , d e b u g , te st, d e liv e ry

S ta g e 2 : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e liv e ry

S ta g e n : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e live ry

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Evolutionary Delivery
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

P re lim in a ry
R e q u ire m e n ts
A n a lys is

A rch ite ctu ra l
D e s ig n a n d
S ys te m C o re

D e liv e r F in a l
V e rsio n

D e v e lo p a V e rsio n

In c o rp o ra te
C u s to m e r
F e e d b a ck

D e liv e ry th e
V e rs io n

E licit C u sto m e r
F e e d b a ck

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Project Management
“There is nothing new
under the sun but there
are lots of old things
we don't know.”
Ambrose Bierce

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Principles (2001)













Customer satisfaction by rapid, continuous delivery of useful software
Working software is delivered frequently (weeks rather than months)
Working software is the principal measure of progress
Even late changes in requirements are welcomed
Close, daily cooperation between business people and developers
Face-to-face conversation is the best form of communication (Co-location)
Projects are built around motivated individuals, who should be trusted
Continuous attention to technical excellence and good design
Simplicity
Self-organizing teams
Regular adaptation to changing circumstances

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Characteristics


Time periods in weeks rather than months


time period as a strict timebox.

Work is performed in a highly
collaborative manner.
 If the sponsors of the project are
concerned about completing certain goals
with a defined timeline or budget, agile
may not be appropriate.


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Methodologies (Partial)


Agile Unified Process (AUP)







Simplified IBM Rational Unified Process (RUP)

Extreme programming (XP)
Feature Driven Development (FDD)
Scrum


“Pig” Roles
• Product owner (VOC - Product Manager)
• ScrumMaster (Project Manager)
• Team (Developers)



“Chicken” Roles
• Users
• Stakeholders (customers, vendors)
• Managers

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Adaptive (Agile) vs
Predictive (Plan-driven)
Strengths of each:


Adaptive










Low criticality
Senior developers
Requirements change
very often
Small number of
developers
Culture that thrives on
chaos

2008-11-11

Predictive








High criticality
Junior developers
Requirements don't
change too often
Large number of
developers
Culture that demands
order

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Model Selection Criteria













How well do my customer and we understand the requirements at the beginning of
the project? Is our understanding likely to change significantly as we move through
the project?
How well do we understand the system architecture? Are we likely to need to make
major architectural changes midway through the project?
How much reliable do we need?
How much do we need to plan ahead and design ahead during this project for future
versions?
How much risk does the project entail?
Are we constrained by a predefined schedule?
Do we need to be able to make midcourse corrections?
Do we need to provide customers with visible progress throughout the project?
Do we need to provide management with visible progress throughout the project?
How much sophistication do we need to use this lifecycle model successfully?

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Project Management Models:
Strengths and Weaknesses
M od el C apa city
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
requ ire m en ts
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
arch ite ctu re
Pr od uce s h ig h ly
rel iable sy stem
Pr od uce s sy stem wi th
la rg e g ro wth en v elop
M ana g es ri sk s
Can be c o n strain ed to
p re de te rm in ed
sc h ed u le
Ha s lo w ove rh e ad
A llo w s for m id co ur se
co rre ct ion s
Pr ovid es c u stom ers
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Pr ovid es ma n ag em en t
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Requ ir es little m ana ge r
o r d evelop er
sop h istic atio n

Pure
W ate rfall

C od e-an d F ix

Spi ral

M odi fied
W ate rfall

E vol ut io nar y
Pr o to ty pin g

S tag ed
De liv er y

E vol ut io nar y
De liv er y

De sig n -to sc h ed u le

De sig n to -too ls

C o mme rcial
Of f-th e -sh elf
so ft w are

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

F air

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r to
fai r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

2008-11-11

F air to
exc ellent
F air to
exc ellent

P oo r

N/ A

P oo r to
fai r

N/ A

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air to
exc ellent

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

N/ A

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

N/ A

P oo r

P oo r to
fai r

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Accelerating the NPD Life Cycle
Model
Ideaisation

Go:No-Go

Scoping

Go:No-Go

Planning

Go:No-Go

Development

Go:No-Go

Testing

Go:No-Go

Launch

Go:No-Go

Maintenance
Retirement

Project Lifecycle Framework
 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

EOL

Discussion

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Away
Recommendations
“For which of you,
desiring to build a
tower, doesn't first sit
down and count the
cost, to see if he has
enough to complete it?”
Jesus
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation


Ready-Aim-Fire


Haste makes waste (penny wise, pound foolish)
• Choosing the wrong models will result in unfulfilled
expectations and delays

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Ready


Recognizing the difference between








product management,
marketing, and
project management

Having a well defined NPD process
Not standardizing on only one project model
Having a positive teamwork environment,
inspirational leadership, focused vision, and
necessary skills

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Aim
Ensuring up-front homework done first
 Ensuring the resources(staff) & time to do
it right
 Verifying available resource costs (people
and time)
 Selecting the most appropriate project
model
 Taking the time to do the planning right


Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Fire
Being flexible within parameters
 Regular review of processes and methods
 Regular, frequent review of new ideas
and market information


Fini


Robert Grupe





[email protected]
+1.314.266.7321

Further reading







Forrester “Making Product Management A Strategic
Resource”
Winning at New Products, Robert G Cooper
Rapid Development, Steve McConnell
PDMA Visions magazine, Jun & Sept 2008

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.


Slide 35

7 Management Solutions

Red

Accelerating Innovation
Overview and discussion of NPD
and project management life cycle
models
Robert Grupe
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Introduction
An overview and discussion of integrated
new product development and project life
cycle models for best practice approaches
to successful innovation and accelerated
time to market.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agenda






Clarification of PM Terminology
Strategically Focused PM
NPD vs. Project Management
Models







Waterfall Models
Iterative Models
Agile Approaches

Discussion
Roundup
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Clarification of Terminology
Product Management
 Project Management
 Program Management


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Product Management



Planning and marketing of a product or products at all stages of the
product lifecycle.
Product planning (in-bound marketing)
[Product Manager (PM)]






Defining new products
Gathering market requirements (VoC)
Building product roadmaps
Product Life Cycle considerations
• Stages: introduction, growth, mature, saturation/decline





Competitive differentiation

Product marketing (outbound marketing)
[Product Marketing Manager (PMM)]





Product positioning and outbound messaging
Promotion: press, customers, and partners
Packaging and delivery
Competition messaging monitoring

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Project Management



Project Planning
[Project Manager (PjM)]
Achieve all of the goals of the project charter while
adhering to




Project constraints: scope, time, cost and quality.

Project management life cycle



5 Process Groups: Project Initiation, Project Planning, Project
Execution, Project monitoring and control, and Project closeout.
9 Knowledge Areas: integration management, scope
management, time management, cost management, quality
management, human resource management, communications
management,risk management and procurement management.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology: Program Management
[& Product Portfolio Management]













Layer above project management focusing on selecting the best group of programs [and
products,] defining them in terms of their constituent projects and providing an infrastructure
where projects can be run successfully
Governance: The structure, process, and procedure to control operations and changes to
performance objectives.
Standards: Define the performance architecture.
Alignment: The program must support higher level vision, goals and objectives.
Assurance: Verify and validate the program, ensuring adherence to standards and alignment
with the vision.
Management: Ensure there are regular reviews, there is accountability, and that management of
projects, stakeholders and suppliers is in place.
Integration: Optimize performance across the program value chain, functionally and technically.
Finances: Tracking of finances is an important part of Program management and basic costs
together with wider costs of administering the program are all tracked.
Infrastructure: Allocation of resources influences the cost and success of the program.
Infrastructure might cover offices, version control, and IT. Planning: Develop the plan bringing
together the information on projects, resources, timescales, monitoring and control.[1]
Improvement: Continuously assess performance; research and develop new capabilities; and
systemically apply learning and knowledge to the program.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Why is this important?


Without clearly defined and integrated product,
marketing, and project management, innovation
will be haphazard, chaotic, and un-scaleable
with complexity and growth.


You can’t improve or accelerate what you can’t
understand or control.
• Putting random people on a galley ship won’t ensure you
will get where you want to go or make it go faster.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Research: Most PM’s
not being used effectively


Distracting challenges
Product and
company
strategy
10%

Customers
and market
8%

Internal
process and
organization
28%

Development
process
16%

Prioritization
and Focus
16%

2008-11-11

Time and
resources
22%

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Recommendation:
PM for Strategic Advantage
Focused on inbound tasks
 PM decision-making power






Roadmap, release contents, release
acceptance

Report to CEO/GM

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

New Product Development (NPD)
& Project Life Cycle Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Code & Fix
(AKA Cowboy Coding)

S ys tem
S pe cific atio n
(m a yb e )

2008-11-11

C o de -a nd -F ix

R elea se
(m ay be )

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Traditional NPD Process
Stage-Gate Process
Discovery
QuickTim e™ and a
de co m pres sor
are n eed ed to se e this p ictu re .

Scoping

Business
Case

Stage
1

Stage
2

Development

Test /
Validation

Launch

Stage
3

Stage
4

Stage
5

Gate
1

Gate
2

Gate
3

Gate
4

Gate
5

Idea
Screen

Second
Screen

Go To
Dev

Go To
Test

Go To
Launch

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Review
Qui ckT ime™ and a
deco mpre sso r
are nee ded t o see t his p ict ure.

Traditional Project Management
Waterfall Model
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Risk Reduction
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Subprojects
Pr od u ct
C o n ce pt

R e qu ire m en ts
A n a lysis

D e ta ile d
D e sig n

A rch itec tur a l
D e s ig n

C o din g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S u b sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S ub sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g a nd
D e b u gin g

D e ta ile d
D e s ig n

S ub s yste m
T e sting

C o d in g a nd
D eb u g in g

S yste m
T e sting
S u bs yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Overlapping
Phases (Sashimi)
P rodu ct
C o nc ep t

R equ ire m e nts
A na lysis

A rchite ctura l
D esig n

D etaile d
D e sign

C o din g an d
D e bu ging

S yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Design-to-Schedule
P roduct
C oncept

R equ irem ents
An alysis

Architectural
D esign

H ig h P rio rity: D etailed design , code, d ebug, test

M edium H igh Priority: D etailed desig n, code , debug, te st

R u n ou t of tim e or
m oney h ere

M ed ium P riority: D e tailed design , code, debug , test

M ediu m Low P riority: D etailed design , co de, de bug, test

Low Priority: D etailed design, code , debug , test

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

R elease

Design-to-Tools
F u n ctio n a lity s u p p o rte d b y
th e to o ls

F u n ctio n a lity th a t w ill
n o t b e in th e p ro d u ct

Fu n c tio n a lity th a t w ill b e
b u ilt

Id e a l fu n c tio n a lity

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Iterative Project Management
Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Spiral (Boehm)

R epe at as requ ire d

1. D eter m ine
ob jective s,
alte rnatives,
constraints

2008-11-11

2 . Iden tify and
reso lve risks

3. E va lu ate
a ltern atives

4 . D evelop
ite ration
d elivera ble s a nd
verify co rrect

5 . P la n the ne xt
ite ratio n

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

6.
C om m it to an
a ppro ach for ne xt
ite ratio n

Evolutionary Prototyping
No

In itial
con ce pt

2008-11-11

D esign and
im p lem ent
initia l
proto typ e

R efin e
p ro to typ e

C usto m e r
a ccep tab le ?

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

C om p lete
a nd
relea se

Staged Delivery
(AKA Incremental Implementation)
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

R e q u ire m e nts
A n a ly sis

A rch ite c tu ra l
D e sig n

S ta g e 1 : D e ta ile d d e s ig n , c o d e , d e b u g , te st, d e liv e ry

S ta g e 2 : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e liv e ry

S ta g e n : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e live ry

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Evolutionary Delivery
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

P re lim in a ry
R e q u ire m e n ts
A n a lys is

A rch ite ctu ra l
D e s ig n a n d
S ys te m C o re

D e liv e r F in a l
V e rsio n

D e v e lo p a V e rsio n

In c o rp o ra te
C u s to m e r
F e e d b a ck

D e liv e ry th e
V e rs io n

E licit C u sto m e r
F e e d b a ck

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Project Management
“There is nothing new
under the sun but there
are lots of old things
we don't know.”
Ambrose Bierce

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Principles (2001)













Customer satisfaction by rapid, continuous delivery of useful software
Working software is delivered frequently (weeks rather than months)
Working software is the principal measure of progress
Even late changes in requirements are welcomed
Close, daily cooperation between business people and developers
Face-to-face conversation is the best form of communication (Co-location)
Projects are built around motivated individuals, who should be trusted
Continuous attention to technical excellence and good design
Simplicity
Self-organizing teams
Regular adaptation to changing circumstances

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Characteristics


Time periods in weeks rather than months


time period as a strict timebox.

Work is performed in a highly
collaborative manner.
 If the sponsors of the project are
concerned about completing certain goals
with a defined timeline or budget, agile
may not be appropriate.


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Methodologies (Partial)


Agile Unified Process (AUP)







Simplified IBM Rational Unified Process (RUP)

Extreme programming (XP)
Feature Driven Development (FDD)
Scrum


“Pig” Roles
• Product owner (VOC - Product Manager)
• ScrumMaster (Project Manager)
• Team (Developers)



“Chicken” Roles
• Users
• Stakeholders (customers, vendors)
• Managers

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Adaptive (Agile) vs
Predictive (Plan-driven)
Strengths of each:


Adaptive










Low criticality
Senior developers
Requirements change
very often
Small number of
developers
Culture that thrives on
chaos

2008-11-11

Predictive








High criticality
Junior developers
Requirements don't
change too often
Large number of
developers
Culture that demands
order

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Model Selection Criteria













How well do my customer and we understand the requirements at the beginning of
the project? Is our understanding likely to change significantly as we move through
the project?
How well do we understand the system architecture? Are we likely to need to make
major architectural changes midway through the project?
How much reliable do we need?
How much do we need to plan ahead and design ahead during this project for future
versions?
How much risk does the project entail?
Are we constrained by a predefined schedule?
Do we need to be able to make midcourse corrections?
Do we need to provide customers with visible progress throughout the project?
Do we need to provide management with visible progress throughout the project?
How much sophistication do we need to use this lifecycle model successfully?

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Project Management Models:
Strengths and Weaknesses
M od el C apa city
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
requ ire m en ts
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
arch ite ctu re
Pr od uce s h ig h ly
rel iable sy stem
Pr od uce s sy stem wi th
la rg e g ro wth en v elop
M ana g es ri sk s
Can be c o n strain ed to
p re de te rm in ed
sc h ed u le
Ha s lo w ove rh e ad
A llo w s for m id co ur se
co rre ct ion s
Pr ovid es c u stom ers
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Pr ovid es ma n ag em en t
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Requ ir es little m ana ge r
o r d evelop er
sop h istic atio n

Pure
W ate rfall

C od e-an d F ix

Spi ral

M odi fied
W ate rfall

E vol ut io nar y
Pr o to ty pin g

S tag ed
De liv er y

E vol ut io nar y
De liv er y

De sig n -to sc h ed u le

De sig n to -too ls

C o mme rcial
Of f-th e -sh elf
so ft w are

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

F air

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r to
fai r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

2008-11-11

F air to
exc ellent
F air to
exc ellent

P oo r

N/ A

P oo r to
fai r

N/ A

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air to
exc ellent

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

N/ A

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

N/ A

P oo r

P oo r to
fai r

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Accelerating the NPD Life Cycle
Model
Ideaisation

Go:No-Go

Scoping

Go:No-Go

Planning

Go:No-Go

Development

Go:No-Go

Testing

Go:No-Go

Launch

Go:No-Go

Maintenance
Retirement

Project Lifecycle Framework
 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

EOL

Discussion

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Away
Recommendations
“For which of you,
desiring to build a
tower, doesn't first sit
down and count the
cost, to see if he has
enough to complete it?”
Jesus
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation


Ready-Aim-Fire


Haste makes waste (penny wise, pound foolish)
• Choosing the wrong models will result in unfulfilled
expectations and delays

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Ready


Recognizing the difference between








product management,
marketing, and
project management

Having a well defined NPD process
Not standardizing on only one project model
Having a positive teamwork environment,
inspirational leadership, focused vision, and
necessary skills

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Aim
Ensuring up-front homework done first
 Ensuring the resources(staff) & time to do
it right
 Verifying available resource costs (people
and time)
 Selecting the most appropriate project
model
 Taking the time to do the planning right


Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Fire
Being flexible within parameters
 Regular review of processes and methods
 Regular, frequent review of new ideas
and market information


Fini


Robert Grupe





[email protected]
+1.314.266.7321

Further reading







Forrester “Making Product Management A Strategic
Resource”
Winning at New Products, Robert G Cooper
Rapid Development, Steve McConnell
PDMA Visions magazine, Jun & Sept 2008

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.


Slide 36

7 Management Solutions

Red

Accelerating Innovation
Overview and discussion of NPD
and project management life cycle
models
Robert Grupe
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Introduction
An overview and discussion of integrated
new product development and project life
cycle models for best practice approaches
to successful innovation and accelerated
time to market.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agenda






Clarification of PM Terminology
Strategically Focused PM
NPD vs. Project Management
Models







Waterfall Models
Iterative Models
Agile Approaches

Discussion
Roundup
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Clarification of Terminology
Product Management
 Project Management
 Program Management


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Product Management



Planning and marketing of a product or products at all stages of the
product lifecycle.
Product planning (in-bound marketing)
[Product Manager (PM)]






Defining new products
Gathering market requirements (VoC)
Building product roadmaps
Product Life Cycle considerations
• Stages: introduction, growth, mature, saturation/decline





Competitive differentiation

Product marketing (outbound marketing)
[Product Marketing Manager (PMM)]





Product positioning and outbound messaging
Promotion: press, customers, and partners
Packaging and delivery
Competition messaging monitoring

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Project Management



Project Planning
[Project Manager (PjM)]
Achieve all of the goals of the project charter while
adhering to




Project constraints: scope, time, cost and quality.

Project management life cycle



5 Process Groups: Project Initiation, Project Planning, Project
Execution, Project monitoring and control, and Project closeout.
9 Knowledge Areas: integration management, scope
management, time management, cost management, quality
management, human resource management, communications
management,risk management and procurement management.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology: Program Management
[& Product Portfolio Management]













Layer above project management focusing on selecting the best group of programs [and
products,] defining them in terms of their constituent projects and providing an infrastructure
where projects can be run successfully
Governance: The structure, process, and procedure to control operations and changes to
performance objectives.
Standards: Define the performance architecture.
Alignment: The program must support higher level vision, goals and objectives.
Assurance: Verify and validate the program, ensuring adherence to standards and alignment
with the vision.
Management: Ensure there are regular reviews, there is accountability, and that management of
projects, stakeholders and suppliers is in place.
Integration: Optimize performance across the program value chain, functionally and technically.
Finances: Tracking of finances is an important part of Program management and basic costs
together with wider costs of administering the program are all tracked.
Infrastructure: Allocation of resources influences the cost and success of the program.
Infrastructure might cover offices, version control, and IT. Planning: Develop the plan bringing
together the information on projects, resources, timescales, monitoring and control.[1]
Improvement: Continuously assess performance; research and develop new capabilities; and
systemically apply learning and knowledge to the program.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Why is this important?


Without clearly defined and integrated product,
marketing, and project management, innovation
will be haphazard, chaotic, and un-scaleable
with complexity and growth.


You can’t improve or accelerate what you can’t
understand or control.
• Putting random people on a galley ship won’t ensure you
will get where you want to go or make it go faster.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Research: Most PM’s
not being used effectively


Distracting challenges
Product and
company
strategy
10%

Customers
and market
8%

Internal
process and
organization
28%

Development
process
16%

Prioritization
and Focus
16%

2008-11-11

Time and
resources
22%

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Recommendation:
PM for Strategic Advantage
Focused on inbound tasks
 PM decision-making power






Roadmap, release contents, release
acceptance

Report to CEO/GM

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

New Product Development (NPD)
& Project Life Cycle Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Code & Fix
(AKA Cowboy Coding)

S ys tem
S pe cific atio n
(m a yb e )

2008-11-11

C o de -a nd -F ix

R elea se
(m ay be )

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Traditional NPD Process
Stage-Gate Process
Discovery
QuickTim e™ and a
de co m pres sor
are n eed ed to se e this p ictu re .

Scoping

Business
Case

Stage
1

Stage
2

Development

Test /
Validation

Launch

Stage
3

Stage
4

Stage
5

Gate
1

Gate
2

Gate
3

Gate
4

Gate
5

Idea
Screen

Second
Screen

Go To
Dev

Go To
Test

Go To
Launch

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Review
Qui ckT ime™ and a
deco mpre sso r
are nee ded t o see t his p ict ure.

Traditional Project Management
Waterfall Model
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Risk Reduction
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Subprojects
Pr od u ct
C o n ce pt

R e qu ire m en ts
A n a lysis

D e ta ile d
D e sig n

A rch itec tur a l
D e s ig n

C o din g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S u b sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S ub sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g a nd
D e b u gin g

D e ta ile d
D e s ig n

S ub s yste m
T e sting

C o d in g a nd
D eb u g in g

S yste m
T e sting
S u bs yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Overlapping
Phases (Sashimi)
P rodu ct
C o nc ep t

R equ ire m e nts
A na lysis

A rchite ctura l
D esig n

D etaile d
D e sign

C o din g an d
D e bu ging

S yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Design-to-Schedule
P roduct
C oncept

R equ irem ents
An alysis

Architectural
D esign

H ig h P rio rity: D etailed design , code, d ebug, test

M edium H igh Priority: D etailed desig n, code , debug, te st

R u n ou t of tim e or
m oney h ere

M ed ium P riority: D e tailed design , code, debug , test

M ediu m Low P riority: D etailed design , co de, de bug, test

Low Priority: D etailed design, code , debug , test

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

R elease

Design-to-Tools
F u n ctio n a lity s u p p o rte d b y
th e to o ls

F u n ctio n a lity th a t w ill
n o t b e in th e p ro d u ct

Fu n c tio n a lity th a t w ill b e
b u ilt

Id e a l fu n c tio n a lity

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Iterative Project Management
Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Spiral (Boehm)

R epe at as requ ire d

1. D eter m ine
ob jective s,
alte rnatives,
constraints

2008-11-11

2 . Iden tify and
reso lve risks

3. E va lu ate
a ltern atives

4 . D evelop
ite ration
d elivera ble s a nd
verify co rrect

5 . P la n the ne xt
ite ratio n

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

6.
C om m it to an
a ppro ach for ne xt
ite ratio n

Evolutionary Prototyping
No

In itial
con ce pt

2008-11-11

D esign and
im p lem ent
initia l
proto typ e

R efin e
p ro to typ e

C usto m e r
a ccep tab le ?

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

C om p lete
a nd
relea se

Staged Delivery
(AKA Incremental Implementation)
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

R e q u ire m e nts
A n a ly sis

A rch ite c tu ra l
D e sig n

S ta g e 1 : D e ta ile d d e s ig n , c o d e , d e b u g , te st, d e liv e ry

S ta g e 2 : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e liv e ry

S ta g e n : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e live ry

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Evolutionary Delivery
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

P re lim in a ry
R e q u ire m e n ts
A n a lys is

A rch ite ctu ra l
D e s ig n a n d
S ys te m C o re

D e liv e r F in a l
V e rsio n

D e v e lo p a V e rsio n

In c o rp o ra te
C u s to m e r
F e e d b a ck

D e liv e ry th e
V e rs io n

E licit C u sto m e r
F e e d b a ck

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Project Management
“There is nothing new
under the sun but there
are lots of old things
we don't know.”
Ambrose Bierce

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Principles (2001)













Customer satisfaction by rapid, continuous delivery of useful software
Working software is delivered frequently (weeks rather than months)
Working software is the principal measure of progress
Even late changes in requirements are welcomed
Close, daily cooperation between business people and developers
Face-to-face conversation is the best form of communication (Co-location)
Projects are built around motivated individuals, who should be trusted
Continuous attention to technical excellence and good design
Simplicity
Self-organizing teams
Regular adaptation to changing circumstances

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Characteristics


Time periods in weeks rather than months


time period as a strict timebox.

Work is performed in a highly
collaborative manner.
 If the sponsors of the project are
concerned about completing certain goals
with a defined timeline or budget, agile
may not be appropriate.


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Methodologies (Partial)


Agile Unified Process (AUP)







Simplified IBM Rational Unified Process (RUP)

Extreme programming (XP)
Feature Driven Development (FDD)
Scrum


“Pig” Roles
• Product owner (VOC - Product Manager)
• ScrumMaster (Project Manager)
• Team (Developers)



“Chicken” Roles
• Users
• Stakeholders (customers, vendors)
• Managers

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Adaptive (Agile) vs
Predictive (Plan-driven)
Strengths of each:


Adaptive










Low criticality
Senior developers
Requirements change
very often
Small number of
developers
Culture that thrives on
chaos

2008-11-11

Predictive








High criticality
Junior developers
Requirements don't
change too often
Large number of
developers
Culture that demands
order

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Model Selection Criteria













How well do my customer and we understand the requirements at the beginning of
the project? Is our understanding likely to change significantly as we move through
the project?
How well do we understand the system architecture? Are we likely to need to make
major architectural changes midway through the project?
How much reliable do we need?
How much do we need to plan ahead and design ahead during this project for future
versions?
How much risk does the project entail?
Are we constrained by a predefined schedule?
Do we need to be able to make midcourse corrections?
Do we need to provide customers with visible progress throughout the project?
Do we need to provide management with visible progress throughout the project?
How much sophistication do we need to use this lifecycle model successfully?

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Project Management Models:
Strengths and Weaknesses
M od el C apa city
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
requ ire m en ts
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
arch ite ctu re
Pr od uce s h ig h ly
rel iable sy stem
Pr od uce s sy stem wi th
la rg e g ro wth en v elop
M ana g es ri sk s
Can be c o n strain ed to
p re de te rm in ed
sc h ed u le
Ha s lo w ove rh e ad
A llo w s for m id co ur se
co rre ct ion s
Pr ovid es c u stom ers
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Pr ovid es ma n ag em en t
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Requ ir es little m ana ge r
o r d evelop er
sop h istic atio n

Pure
W ate rfall

C od e-an d F ix

Spi ral

M odi fied
W ate rfall

E vol ut io nar y
Pr o to ty pin g

S tag ed
De liv er y

E vol ut io nar y
De liv er y

De sig n -to sc h ed u le

De sig n to -too ls

C o mme rcial
Of f-th e -sh elf
so ft w are

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

F air

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r to
fai r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

2008-11-11

F air to
exc ellent
F air to
exc ellent

P oo r

N/ A

P oo r to
fai r

N/ A

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air to
exc ellent

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

N/ A

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

N/ A

P oo r

P oo r to
fai r

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Accelerating the NPD Life Cycle
Model
Ideaisation

Go:No-Go

Scoping

Go:No-Go

Planning

Go:No-Go

Development

Go:No-Go

Testing

Go:No-Go

Launch

Go:No-Go

Maintenance
Retirement

Project Lifecycle Framework
 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

EOL

Discussion

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Away
Recommendations
“For which of you,
desiring to build a
tower, doesn't first sit
down and count the
cost, to see if he has
enough to complete it?”
Jesus
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation


Ready-Aim-Fire


Haste makes waste (penny wise, pound foolish)
• Choosing the wrong models will result in unfulfilled
expectations and delays

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Ready


Recognizing the difference between








product management,
marketing, and
project management

Having a well defined NPD process
Not standardizing on only one project model
Having a positive teamwork environment,
inspirational leadership, focused vision, and
necessary skills

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Aim
Ensuring up-front homework done first
 Ensuring the resources(staff) & time to do
it right
 Verifying available resource costs (people
and time)
 Selecting the most appropriate project
model
 Taking the time to do the planning right


Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Fire
Being flexible within parameters
 Regular review of processes and methods
 Regular, frequent review of new ideas
and market information


Fini


Robert Grupe





[email protected]
+1.314.266.7321

Further reading







Forrester “Making Product Management A Strategic
Resource”
Winning at New Products, Robert G Cooper
Rapid Development, Steve McConnell
PDMA Visions magazine, Jun & Sept 2008

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.


Slide 37

7 Management Solutions

Red

Accelerating Innovation
Overview and discussion of NPD
and project management life cycle
models
Robert Grupe
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Introduction
An overview and discussion of integrated
new product development and project life
cycle models for best practice approaches
to successful innovation and accelerated
time to market.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agenda






Clarification of PM Terminology
Strategically Focused PM
NPD vs. Project Management
Models







Waterfall Models
Iterative Models
Agile Approaches

Discussion
Roundup
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Clarification of Terminology
Product Management
 Project Management
 Program Management


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Product Management



Planning and marketing of a product or products at all stages of the
product lifecycle.
Product planning (in-bound marketing)
[Product Manager (PM)]






Defining new products
Gathering market requirements (VoC)
Building product roadmaps
Product Life Cycle considerations
• Stages: introduction, growth, mature, saturation/decline





Competitive differentiation

Product marketing (outbound marketing)
[Product Marketing Manager (PMM)]





Product positioning and outbound messaging
Promotion: press, customers, and partners
Packaging and delivery
Competition messaging monitoring

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Project Management



Project Planning
[Project Manager (PjM)]
Achieve all of the goals of the project charter while
adhering to




Project constraints: scope, time, cost and quality.

Project management life cycle



5 Process Groups: Project Initiation, Project Planning, Project
Execution, Project monitoring and control, and Project closeout.
9 Knowledge Areas: integration management, scope
management, time management, cost management, quality
management, human resource management, communications
management,risk management and procurement management.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology: Program Management
[& Product Portfolio Management]













Layer above project management focusing on selecting the best group of programs [and
products,] defining them in terms of their constituent projects and providing an infrastructure
where projects can be run successfully
Governance: The structure, process, and procedure to control operations and changes to
performance objectives.
Standards: Define the performance architecture.
Alignment: The program must support higher level vision, goals and objectives.
Assurance: Verify and validate the program, ensuring adherence to standards and alignment
with the vision.
Management: Ensure there are regular reviews, there is accountability, and that management of
projects, stakeholders and suppliers is in place.
Integration: Optimize performance across the program value chain, functionally and technically.
Finances: Tracking of finances is an important part of Program management and basic costs
together with wider costs of administering the program are all tracked.
Infrastructure: Allocation of resources influences the cost and success of the program.
Infrastructure might cover offices, version control, and IT. Planning: Develop the plan bringing
together the information on projects, resources, timescales, monitoring and control.[1]
Improvement: Continuously assess performance; research and develop new capabilities; and
systemically apply learning and knowledge to the program.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Why is this important?


Without clearly defined and integrated product,
marketing, and project management, innovation
will be haphazard, chaotic, and un-scaleable
with complexity and growth.


You can’t improve or accelerate what you can’t
understand or control.
• Putting random people on a galley ship won’t ensure you
will get where you want to go or make it go faster.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Research: Most PM’s
not being used effectively


Distracting challenges
Product and
company
strategy
10%

Customers
and market
8%

Internal
process and
organization
28%

Development
process
16%

Prioritization
and Focus
16%

2008-11-11

Time and
resources
22%

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Recommendation:
PM for Strategic Advantage
Focused on inbound tasks
 PM decision-making power






Roadmap, release contents, release
acceptance

Report to CEO/GM

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

New Product Development (NPD)
& Project Life Cycle Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Code & Fix
(AKA Cowboy Coding)

S ys tem
S pe cific atio n
(m a yb e )

2008-11-11

C o de -a nd -F ix

R elea se
(m ay be )

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Traditional NPD Process
Stage-Gate Process
Discovery
QuickTim e™ and a
de co m pres sor
are n eed ed to se e this p ictu re .

Scoping

Business
Case

Stage
1

Stage
2

Development

Test /
Validation

Launch

Stage
3

Stage
4

Stage
5

Gate
1

Gate
2

Gate
3

Gate
4

Gate
5

Idea
Screen

Second
Screen

Go To
Dev

Go To
Test

Go To
Launch

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Review
Qui ckT ime™ and a
deco mpre sso r
are nee ded t o see t his p ict ure.

Traditional Project Management
Waterfall Model
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Risk Reduction
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Subprojects
Pr od u ct
C o n ce pt

R e qu ire m en ts
A n a lysis

D e ta ile d
D e sig n

A rch itec tur a l
D e s ig n

C o din g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S u b sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S ub sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g a nd
D e b u gin g

D e ta ile d
D e s ig n

S ub s yste m
T e sting

C o d in g a nd
D eb u g in g

S yste m
T e sting
S u bs yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Overlapping
Phases (Sashimi)
P rodu ct
C o nc ep t

R equ ire m e nts
A na lysis

A rchite ctura l
D esig n

D etaile d
D e sign

C o din g an d
D e bu ging

S yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Design-to-Schedule
P roduct
C oncept

R equ irem ents
An alysis

Architectural
D esign

H ig h P rio rity: D etailed design , code, d ebug, test

M edium H igh Priority: D etailed desig n, code , debug, te st

R u n ou t of tim e or
m oney h ere

M ed ium P riority: D e tailed design , code, debug , test

M ediu m Low P riority: D etailed design , co de, de bug, test

Low Priority: D etailed design, code , debug , test

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

R elease

Design-to-Tools
F u n ctio n a lity s u p p o rte d b y
th e to o ls

F u n ctio n a lity th a t w ill
n o t b e in th e p ro d u ct

Fu n c tio n a lity th a t w ill b e
b u ilt

Id e a l fu n c tio n a lity

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Iterative Project Management
Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Spiral (Boehm)

R epe at as requ ire d

1. D eter m ine
ob jective s,
alte rnatives,
constraints

2008-11-11

2 . Iden tify and
reso lve risks

3. E va lu ate
a ltern atives

4 . D evelop
ite ration
d elivera ble s a nd
verify co rrect

5 . P la n the ne xt
ite ratio n

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

6.
C om m it to an
a ppro ach for ne xt
ite ratio n

Evolutionary Prototyping
No

In itial
con ce pt

2008-11-11

D esign and
im p lem ent
initia l
proto typ e

R efin e
p ro to typ e

C usto m e r
a ccep tab le ?

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

C om p lete
a nd
relea se

Staged Delivery
(AKA Incremental Implementation)
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

R e q u ire m e nts
A n a ly sis

A rch ite c tu ra l
D e sig n

S ta g e 1 : D e ta ile d d e s ig n , c o d e , d e b u g , te st, d e liv e ry

S ta g e 2 : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e liv e ry

S ta g e n : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e live ry

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Evolutionary Delivery
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

P re lim in a ry
R e q u ire m e n ts
A n a lys is

A rch ite ctu ra l
D e s ig n a n d
S ys te m C o re

D e liv e r F in a l
V e rsio n

D e v e lo p a V e rsio n

In c o rp o ra te
C u s to m e r
F e e d b a ck

D e liv e ry th e
V e rs io n

E licit C u sto m e r
F e e d b a ck

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Project Management
“There is nothing new
under the sun but there
are lots of old things
we don't know.”
Ambrose Bierce

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Principles (2001)













Customer satisfaction by rapid, continuous delivery of useful software
Working software is delivered frequently (weeks rather than months)
Working software is the principal measure of progress
Even late changes in requirements are welcomed
Close, daily cooperation between business people and developers
Face-to-face conversation is the best form of communication (Co-location)
Projects are built around motivated individuals, who should be trusted
Continuous attention to technical excellence and good design
Simplicity
Self-organizing teams
Regular adaptation to changing circumstances

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Characteristics


Time periods in weeks rather than months


time period as a strict timebox.

Work is performed in a highly
collaborative manner.
 If the sponsors of the project are
concerned about completing certain goals
with a defined timeline or budget, agile
may not be appropriate.


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Methodologies (Partial)


Agile Unified Process (AUP)







Simplified IBM Rational Unified Process (RUP)

Extreme programming (XP)
Feature Driven Development (FDD)
Scrum


“Pig” Roles
• Product owner (VOC - Product Manager)
• ScrumMaster (Project Manager)
• Team (Developers)



“Chicken” Roles
• Users
• Stakeholders (customers, vendors)
• Managers

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Adaptive (Agile) vs
Predictive (Plan-driven)
Strengths of each:


Adaptive










Low criticality
Senior developers
Requirements change
very often
Small number of
developers
Culture that thrives on
chaos

2008-11-11

Predictive








High criticality
Junior developers
Requirements don't
change too often
Large number of
developers
Culture that demands
order

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Model Selection Criteria













How well do my customer and we understand the requirements at the beginning of
the project? Is our understanding likely to change significantly as we move through
the project?
How well do we understand the system architecture? Are we likely to need to make
major architectural changes midway through the project?
How much reliable do we need?
How much do we need to plan ahead and design ahead during this project for future
versions?
How much risk does the project entail?
Are we constrained by a predefined schedule?
Do we need to be able to make midcourse corrections?
Do we need to provide customers with visible progress throughout the project?
Do we need to provide management with visible progress throughout the project?
How much sophistication do we need to use this lifecycle model successfully?

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Project Management Models:
Strengths and Weaknesses
M od el C apa city
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
requ ire m en ts
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
arch ite ctu re
Pr od uce s h ig h ly
rel iable sy stem
Pr od uce s sy stem wi th
la rg e g ro wth en v elop
M ana g es ri sk s
Can be c o n strain ed to
p re de te rm in ed
sc h ed u le
Ha s lo w ove rh e ad
A llo w s for m id co ur se
co rre ct ion s
Pr ovid es c u stom ers
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Pr ovid es ma n ag em en t
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Requ ir es little m ana ge r
o r d evelop er
sop h istic atio n

Pure
W ate rfall

C od e-an d F ix

Spi ral

M odi fied
W ate rfall

E vol ut io nar y
Pr o to ty pin g

S tag ed
De liv er y

E vol ut io nar y
De liv er y

De sig n -to sc h ed u le

De sig n to -too ls

C o mme rcial
Of f-th e -sh elf
so ft w are

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

F air

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r to
fai r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

2008-11-11

F air to
exc ellent
F air to
exc ellent

P oo r

N/ A

P oo r to
fai r

N/ A

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air to
exc ellent

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

N/ A

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

N/ A

P oo r

P oo r to
fai r

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Accelerating the NPD Life Cycle
Model
Ideaisation

Go:No-Go

Scoping

Go:No-Go

Planning

Go:No-Go

Development

Go:No-Go

Testing

Go:No-Go

Launch

Go:No-Go

Maintenance
Retirement

Project Lifecycle Framework
 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

EOL

Discussion

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Away
Recommendations
“For which of you,
desiring to build a
tower, doesn't first sit
down and count the
cost, to see if he has
enough to complete it?”
Jesus
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation


Ready-Aim-Fire


Haste makes waste (penny wise, pound foolish)
• Choosing the wrong models will result in unfulfilled
expectations and delays

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Ready


Recognizing the difference between








product management,
marketing, and
project management

Having a well defined NPD process
Not standardizing on only one project model
Having a positive teamwork environment,
inspirational leadership, focused vision, and
necessary skills

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Aim
Ensuring up-front homework done first
 Ensuring the resources(staff) & time to do
it right
 Verifying available resource costs (people
and time)
 Selecting the most appropriate project
model
 Taking the time to do the planning right


Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Fire
Being flexible within parameters
 Regular review of processes and methods
 Regular, frequent review of new ideas
and market information


Fini


Robert Grupe





[email protected]
+1.314.266.7321

Further reading







Forrester “Making Product Management A Strategic
Resource”
Winning at New Products, Robert G Cooper
Rapid Development, Steve McConnell
PDMA Visions magazine, Jun & Sept 2008

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.


Slide 38

7 Management Solutions

Red

Accelerating Innovation
Overview and discussion of NPD
and project management life cycle
models
Robert Grupe
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Introduction
An overview and discussion of integrated
new product development and project life
cycle models for best practice approaches
to successful innovation and accelerated
time to market.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agenda






Clarification of PM Terminology
Strategically Focused PM
NPD vs. Project Management
Models







Waterfall Models
Iterative Models
Agile Approaches

Discussion
Roundup
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Clarification of Terminology
Product Management
 Project Management
 Program Management


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Product Management



Planning and marketing of a product or products at all stages of the
product lifecycle.
Product planning (in-bound marketing)
[Product Manager (PM)]






Defining new products
Gathering market requirements (VoC)
Building product roadmaps
Product Life Cycle considerations
• Stages: introduction, growth, mature, saturation/decline





Competitive differentiation

Product marketing (outbound marketing)
[Product Marketing Manager (PMM)]





Product positioning and outbound messaging
Promotion: press, customers, and partners
Packaging and delivery
Competition messaging monitoring

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Project Management



Project Planning
[Project Manager (PjM)]
Achieve all of the goals of the project charter while
adhering to




Project constraints: scope, time, cost and quality.

Project management life cycle



5 Process Groups: Project Initiation, Project Planning, Project
Execution, Project monitoring and control, and Project closeout.
9 Knowledge Areas: integration management, scope
management, time management, cost management, quality
management, human resource management, communications
management,risk management and procurement management.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology: Program Management
[& Product Portfolio Management]













Layer above project management focusing on selecting the best group of programs [and
products,] defining them in terms of their constituent projects and providing an infrastructure
where projects can be run successfully
Governance: The structure, process, and procedure to control operations and changes to
performance objectives.
Standards: Define the performance architecture.
Alignment: The program must support higher level vision, goals and objectives.
Assurance: Verify and validate the program, ensuring adherence to standards and alignment
with the vision.
Management: Ensure there are regular reviews, there is accountability, and that management of
projects, stakeholders and suppliers is in place.
Integration: Optimize performance across the program value chain, functionally and technically.
Finances: Tracking of finances is an important part of Program management and basic costs
together with wider costs of administering the program are all tracked.
Infrastructure: Allocation of resources influences the cost and success of the program.
Infrastructure might cover offices, version control, and IT. Planning: Develop the plan bringing
together the information on projects, resources, timescales, monitoring and control.[1]
Improvement: Continuously assess performance; research and develop new capabilities; and
systemically apply learning and knowledge to the program.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Why is this important?


Without clearly defined and integrated product,
marketing, and project management, innovation
will be haphazard, chaotic, and un-scaleable
with complexity and growth.


You can’t improve or accelerate what you can’t
understand or control.
• Putting random people on a galley ship won’t ensure you
will get where you want to go or make it go faster.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Research: Most PM’s
not being used effectively


Distracting challenges
Product and
company
strategy
10%

Customers
and market
8%

Internal
process and
organization
28%

Development
process
16%

Prioritization
and Focus
16%

2008-11-11

Time and
resources
22%

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Recommendation:
PM for Strategic Advantage
Focused on inbound tasks
 PM decision-making power






Roadmap, release contents, release
acceptance

Report to CEO/GM

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

New Product Development (NPD)
& Project Life Cycle Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Code & Fix
(AKA Cowboy Coding)

S ys tem
S pe cific atio n
(m a yb e )

2008-11-11

C o de -a nd -F ix

R elea se
(m ay be )

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Traditional NPD Process
Stage-Gate Process
Discovery
QuickTim e™ and a
de co m pres sor
are n eed ed to se e this p ictu re .

Scoping

Business
Case

Stage
1

Stage
2

Development

Test /
Validation

Launch

Stage
3

Stage
4

Stage
5

Gate
1

Gate
2

Gate
3

Gate
4

Gate
5

Idea
Screen

Second
Screen

Go To
Dev

Go To
Test

Go To
Launch

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Review
Qui ckT ime™ and a
deco mpre sso r
are nee ded t o see t his p ict ure.

Traditional Project Management
Waterfall Model
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Risk Reduction
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Subprojects
Pr od u ct
C o n ce pt

R e qu ire m en ts
A n a lysis

D e ta ile d
D e sig n

A rch itec tur a l
D e s ig n

C o din g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S u b sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S ub sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g a nd
D e b u gin g

D e ta ile d
D e s ig n

S ub s yste m
T e sting

C o d in g a nd
D eb u g in g

S yste m
T e sting
S u bs yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Overlapping
Phases (Sashimi)
P rodu ct
C o nc ep t

R equ ire m e nts
A na lysis

A rchite ctura l
D esig n

D etaile d
D e sign

C o din g an d
D e bu ging

S yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Design-to-Schedule
P roduct
C oncept

R equ irem ents
An alysis

Architectural
D esign

H ig h P rio rity: D etailed design , code, d ebug, test

M edium H igh Priority: D etailed desig n, code , debug, te st

R u n ou t of tim e or
m oney h ere

M ed ium P riority: D e tailed design , code, debug , test

M ediu m Low P riority: D etailed design , co de, de bug, test

Low Priority: D etailed design, code , debug , test

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

R elease

Design-to-Tools
F u n ctio n a lity s u p p o rte d b y
th e to o ls

F u n ctio n a lity th a t w ill
n o t b e in th e p ro d u ct

Fu n c tio n a lity th a t w ill b e
b u ilt

Id e a l fu n c tio n a lity

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Iterative Project Management
Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Spiral (Boehm)

R epe at as requ ire d

1. D eter m ine
ob jective s,
alte rnatives,
constraints

2008-11-11

2 . Iden tify and
reso lve risks

3. E va lu ate
a ltern atives

4 . D evelop
ite ration
d elivera ble s a nd
verify co rrect

5 . P la n the ne xt
ite ratio n

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

6.
C om m it to an
a ppro ach for ne xt
ite ratio n

Evolutionary Prototyping
No

In itial
con ce pt

2008-11-11

D esign and
im p lem ent
initia l
proto typ e

R efin e
p ro to typ e

C usto m e r
a ccep tab le ?

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

C om p lete
a nd
relea se

Staged Delivery
(AKA Incremental Implementation)
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

R e q u ire m e nts
A n a ly sis

A rch ite c tu ra l
D e sig n

S ta g e 1 : D e ta ile d d e s ig n , c o d e , d e b u g , te st, d e liv e ry

S ta g e 2 : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e liv e ry

S ta g e n : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e live ry

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Evolutionary Delivery
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

P re lim in a ry
R e q u ire m e n ts
A n a lys is

A rch ite ctu ra l
D e s ig n a n d
S ys te m C o re

D e liv e r F in a l
V e rsio n

D e v e lo p a V e rsio n

In c o rp o ra te
C u s to m e r
F e e d b a ck

D e liv e ry th e
V e rs io n

E licit C u sto m e r
F e e d b a ck

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Project Management
“There is nothing new
under the sun but there
are lots of old things
we don't know.”
Ambrose Bierce

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Principles (2001)













Customer satisfaction by rapid, continuous delivery of useful software
Working software is delivered frequently (weeks rather than months)
Working software is the principal measure of progress
Even late changes in requirements are welcomed
Close, daily cooperation between business people and developers
Face-to-face conversation is the best form of communication (Co-location)
Projects are built around motivated individuals, who should be trusted
Continuous attention to technical excellence and good design
Simplicity
Self-organizing teams
Regular adaptation to changing circumstances

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Characteristics


Time periods in weeks rather than months


time period as a strict timebox.

Work is performed in a highly
collaborative manner.
 If the sponsors of the project are
concerned about completing certain goals
with a defined timeline or budget, agile
may not be appropriate.


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Methodologies (Partial)


Agile Unified Process (AUP)







Simplified IBM Rational Unified Process (RUP)

Extreme programming (XP)
Feature Driven Development (FDD)
Scrum


“Pig” Roles
• Product owner (VOC - Product Manager)
• ScrumMaster (Project Manager)
• Team (Developers)



“Chicken” Roles
• Users
• Stakeholders (customers, vendors)
• Managers

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Adaptive (Agile) vs
Predictive (Plan-driven)
Strengths of each:


Adaptive










Low criticality
Senior developers
Requirements change
very often
Small number of
developers
Culture that thrives on
chaos

2008-11-11

Predictive








High criticality
Junior developers
Requirements don't
change too often
Large number of
developers
Culture that demands
order

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Model Selection Criteria













How well do my customer and we understand the requirements at the beginning of
the project? Is our understanding likely to change significantly as we move through
the project?
How well do we understand the system architecture? Are we likely to need to make
major architectural changes midway through the project?
How much reliable do we need?
How much do we need to plan ahead and design ahead during this project for future
versions?
How much risk does the project entail?
Are we constrained by a predefined schedule?
Do we need to be able to make midcourse corrections?
Do we need to provide customers with visible progress throughout the project?
Do we need to provide management with visible progress throughout the project?
How much sophistication do we need to use this lifecycle model successfully?

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Project Management Models:
Strengths and Weaknesses
M od el C apa city
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
requ ire m en ts
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
arch ite ctu re
Pr od uce s h ig h ly
rel iable sy stem
Pr od uce s sy stem wi th
la rg e g ro wth en v elop
M ana g es ri sk s
Can be c o n strain ed to
p re de te rm in ed
sc h ed u le
Ha s lo w ove rh e ad
A llo w s for m id co ur se
co rre ct ion s
Pr ovid es c u stom ers
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Pr ovid es ma n ag em en t
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Requ ir es little m ana ge r
o r d evelop er
sop h istic atio n

Pure
W ate rfall

C od e-an d F ix

Spi ral

M odi fied
W ate rfall

E vol ut io nar y
Pr o to ty pin g

S tag ed
De liv er y

E vol ut io nar y
De liv er y

De sig n -to sc h ed u le

De sig n to -too ls

C o mme rcial
Of f-th e -sh elf
so ft w are

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

F air

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r to
fai r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

2008-11-11

F air to
exc ellent
F air to
exc ellent

P oo r

N/ A

P oo r to
fai r

N/ A

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air to
exc ellent

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

N/ A

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

N/ A

P oo r

P oo r to
fai r

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Accelerating the NPD Life Cycle
Model
Ideaisation

Go:No-Go

Scoping

Go:No-Go

Planning

Go:No-Go

Development

Go:No-Go

Testing

Go:No-Go

Launch

Go:No-Go

Maintenance
Retirement

Project Lifecycle Framework
 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

EOL

Discussion

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Away
Recommendations
“For which of you,
desiring to build a
tower, doesn't first sit
down and count the
cost, to see if he has
enough to complete it?”
Jesus
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation


Ready-Aim-Fire


Haste makes waste (penny wise, pound foolish)
• Choosing the wrong models will result in unfulfilled
expectations and delays

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Ready


Recognizing the difference between








product management,
marketing, and
project management

Having a well defined NPD process
Not standardizing on only one project model
Having a positive teamwork environment,
inspirational leadership, focused vision, and
necessary skills

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Aim
Ensuring up-front homework done first
 Ensuring the resources(staff) & time to do
it right
 Verifying available resource costs (people
and time)
 Selecting the most appropriate project
model
 Taking the time to do the planning right


Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Fire
Being flexible within parameters
 Regular review of processes and methods
 Regular, frequent review of new ideas
and market information


Fini


Robert Grupe





[email protected]
+1.314.266.7321

Further reading







Forrester “Making Product Management A Strategic
Resource”
Winning at New Products, Robert G Cooper
Rapid Development, Steve McConnell
PDMA Visions magazine, Jun & Sept 2008

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.


Slide 39

7 Management Solutions

Red

Accelerating Innovation
Overview and discussion of NPD
and project management life cycle
models
Robert Grupe
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Introduction
An overview and discussion of integrated
new product development and project life
cycle models for best practice approaches
to successful innovation and accelerated
time to market.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agenda






Clarification of PM Terminology
Strategically Focused PM
NPD vs. Project Management
Models







Waterfall Models
Iterative Models
Agile Approaches

Discussion
Roundup
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Clarification of Terminology
Product Management
 Project Management
 Program Management


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Product Management



Planning and marketing of a product or products at all stages of the
product lifecycle.
Product planning (in-bound marketing)
[Product Manager (PM)]






Defining new products
Gathering market requirements (VoC)
Building product roadmaps
Product Life Cycle considerations
• Stages: introduction, growth, mature, saturation/decline





Competitive differentiation

Product marketing (outbound marketing)
[Product Marketing Manager (PMM)]





Product positioning and outbound messaging
Promotion: press, customers, and partners
Packaging and delivery
Competition messaging monitoring

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology:
Project Management



Project Planning
[Project Manager (PjM)]
Achieve all of the goals of the project charter while
adhering to




Project constraints: scope, time, cost and quality.

Project management life cycle



5 Process Groups: Project Initiation, Project Planning, Project
Execution, Project monitoring and control, and Project closeout.
9 Knowledge Areas: integration management, scope
management, time management, cost management, quality
management, human resource management, communications
management,risk management and procurement management.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Terminology: Program Management
[& Product Portfolio Management]













Layer above project management focusing on selecting the best group of programs [and
products,] defining them in terms of their constituent projects and providing an infrastructure
where projects can be run successfully
Governance: The structure, process, and procedure to control operations and changes to
performance objectives.
Standards: Define the performance architecture.
Alignment: The program must support higher level vision, goals and objectives.
Assurance: Verify and validate the program, ensuring adherence to standards and alignment
with the vision.
Management: Ensure there are regular reviews, there is accountability, and that management of
projects, stakeholders and suppliers is in place.
Integration: Optimize performance across the program value chain, functionally and technically.
Finances: Tracking of finances is an important part of Program management and basic costs
together with wider costs of administering the program are all tracked.
Infrastructure: Allocation of resources influences the cost and success of the program.
Infrastructure might cover offices, version control, and IT. Planning: Develop the plan bringing
together the information on projects, resources, timescales, monitoring and control.[1]
Improvement: Continuously assess performance; research and develop new capabilities; and
systemically apply learning and knowledge to the program.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Why is this important?


Without clearly defined and integrated product,
marketing, and project management, innovation
will be haphazard, chaotic, and un-scaleable
with complexity and growth.


You can’t improve or accelerate what you can’t
understand or control.
• Putting random people on a galley ship won’t ensure you
will get where you want to go or make it go faster.

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Research: Most PM’s
not being used effectively


Distracting challenges
Product and
company
strategy
10%

Customers
and market
8%

Internal
process and
organization
28%

Development
process
16%

Prioritization
and Focus
16%

2008-11-11

Time and
resources
22%

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Forrester Recommendation:
PM for Strategic Advantage
Focused on inbound tasks
 PM decision-making power






Roadmap, release contents, release
acceptance

Report to CEO/GM

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

New Product Development (NPD)
& Project Life Cycle Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Code & Fix
(AKA Cowboy Coding)

S ys tem
S pe cific atio n
(m a yb e )

2008-11-11

C o de -a nd -F ix

R elea se
(m ay be )

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Traditional NPD Process
Stage-Gate Process
Discovery
QuickTim e™ and a
de co m pres sor
are n eed ed to se e this p ictu re .

Scoping

Business
Case

Stage
1

Stage
2

Development

Test /
Validation

Launch

Stage
3

Stage
4

Stage
5

Gate
1

Gate
2

Gate
3

Gate
4

Gate
5

Idea
Screen

Second
Screen

Go To
Dev

Go To
Test

Go To
Launch

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Review
Qui ckT ime™ and a
deco mpre sso r
are nee ded t o see t his p ict ure.

Traditional Project Management
Waterfall Model
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Risk Reduction
Product
Concept

Requirements
Analysis

Architectural
Design

Detailed
Design

Coding and
Debuging

System
Testing

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Subprojects
Pr od u ct
C o n ce pt

R e qu ire m en ts
A n a lysis

D e ta ile d
D e sig n

A rch itec tur a l
D e s ig n

C o din g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S u b sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g an d
D e b u gin g
D e ta ile d
D e sig n
S ub sy ste m
T e sting
C o d in g a nd
D e b u gin g

D e ta ile d
D e s ig n

S ub s yste m
T e sting

C o d in g a nd
D eb u g in g

S yste m
T e sting
S u bs yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Waterfall with Overlapping
Phases (Sashimi)
P rodu ct
C o nc ep t

R equ ire m e nts
A na lysis

A rchite ctura l
D esig n

D etaile d
D e sign

C o din g an d
D e bu ging

S yste m
T e stin g

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Design-to-Schedule
P roduct
C oncept

R equ irem ents
An alysis

Architectural
D esign

H ig h P rio rity: D etailed design , code, d ebug, test

M edium H igh Priority: D etailed desig n, code , debug, te st

R u n ou t of tim e or
m oney h ere

M ed ium P riority: D e tailed design , code, debug , test

M ediu m Low P riority: D etailed design , co de, de bug, test

Low Priority: D etailed design, code , debug , test

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

R elease

Design-to-Tools
F u n ctio n a lity s u p p o rte d b y
th e to o ls

F u n ctio n a lity th a t w ill
n o t b e in th e p ro d u ct

Fu n c tio n a lity th a t w ill b e
b u ilt

Id e a l fu n c tio n a lity

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Iterative Project Management
Models

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Spiral (Boehm)

R epe at as requ ire d

1. D eter m ine
ob jective s,
alte rnatives,
constraints

2008-11-11

2 . Iden tify and
reso lve risks

3. E va lu ate
a ltern atives

4 . D evelop
ite ration
d elivera ble s a nd
verify co rrect

5 . P la n the ne xt
ite ratio n

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

6.
C om m it to an
a ppro ach for ne xt
ite ratio n

Evolutionary Prototyping
No

In itial
con ce pt

2008-11-11

D esign and
im p lem ent
initia l
proto typ e

R efin e
p ro to typ e

C usto m e r
a ccep tab le ?

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

C om p lete
a nd
relea se

Staged Delivery
(AKA Incremental Implementation)
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

R e q u ire m e nts
A n a ly sis

A rch ite c tu ra l
D e sig n

S ta g e 1 : D e ta ile d d e s ig n , c o d e , d e b u g , te st, d e liv e ry

S ta g e 2 : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e liv e ry

S ta g e n : D e ta ile d d e sig n , co d e , d e b u g , te s t, d e live ry

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Evolutionary Delivery
P ro d u c t
C o n ce p t

P re lim in a ry
R e q u ire m e n ts
A n a lys is

A rch ite ctu ra l
D e s ig n a n d
S ys te m C o re

D e liv e r F in a l
V e rsio n

D e v e lo p a V e rsio n

In c o rp o ra te
C u s to m e r
F e e d b a ck

D e liv e ry th e
V e rs io n

E licit C u sto m e r
F e e d b a ck

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Project Management
“There is nothing new
under the sun but there
are lots of old things
we don't know.”
Ambrose Bierce

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Principles (2001)













Customer satisfaction by rapid, continuous delivery of useful software
Working software is delivered frequently (weeks rather than months)
Working software is the principal measure of progress
Even late changes in requirements are welcomed
Close, daily cooperation between business people and developers
Face-to-face conversation is the best form of communication (Co-location)
Projects are built around motivated individuals, who should be trusted
Continuous attention to technical excellence and good design
Simplicity
Self-organizing teams
Regular adaptation to changing circumstances

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Characteristics


Time periods in weeks rather than months


time period as a strict timebox.

Work is performed in a highly
collaborative manner.
 If the sponsors of the project are
concerned about completing certain goals
with a defined timeline or budget, agile
may not be appropriate.


2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Agile Methodologies (Partial)


Agile Unified Process (AUP)







Simplified IBM Rational Unified Process (RUP)

Extreme programming (XP)
Feature Driven Development (FDD)
Scrum


“Pig” Roles
• Product owner (VOC - Product Manager)
• ScrumMaster (Project Manager)
• Team (Developers)



“Chicken” Roles
• Users
• Stakeholders (customers, vendors)
• Managers

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Adaptive (Agile) vs
Predictive (Plan-driven)
Strengths of each:


Adaptive










Low criticality
Senior developers
Requirements change
very often
Small number of
developers
Culture that thrives on
chaos

2008-11-11

Predictive








High criticality
Junior developers
Requirements don't
change too often
Large number of
developers
Culture that demands
order

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Model Selection Criteria













How well do my customer and we understand the requirements at the beginning of
the project? Is our understanding likely to change significantly as we move through
the project?
How well do we understand the system architecture? Are we likely to need to make
major architectural changes midway through the project?
How much reliable do we need?
How much do we need to plan ahead and design ahead during this project for future
versions?
How much risk does the project entail?
Are we constrained by a predefined schedule?
Do we need to be able to make midcourse corrections?
Do we need to provide customers with visible progress throughout the project?
Do we need to provide management with visible progress throughout the project?
How much sophistication do we need to use this lifecycle model successfully?

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Project Management Models:
Strengths and Weaknesses
M od el C apa city
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
requ ire m en ts
Wo rk s wi th poorl y
un d erst ood
arch ite ctu re
Pr od uce s h ig h ly
rel iable sy stem
Pr od uce s sy stem wi th
la rg e g ro wth en v elop
M ana g es ri sk s
Can be c o n strain ed to
p re de te rm in ed
sc h ed u le
Ha s lo w ove rh e ad
A llo w s for m id co ur se
co rre ct ion s
Pr ovid es c u stom ers
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Pr ovid es ma n ag em en t
w ith p rogr ess v isibi lity
Requ ir es little m ana ge r
o r d evelop er
sop h istic atio n

Pure
W ate rfall

C od e-an d F ix

Spi ral

M odi fied
W ate rfall

E vol ut io nar y
Pr o to ty pin g

S tag ed
De liv er y

E vol ut io nar y
De liv er y

De sig n -to sc h ed u le

De sig n to -too ls

C o mme rcial
Of f-th e -sh elf
so ft w are

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

F air

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

P oo r to
exc ellent

P oo r to e x cel lent

E x ce llen t

P oo r to
fai r

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

P oo r

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

P oo r to
exc ellent

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

2008-11-11

F air to
exc ellent
F air to
exc ellent

P oo r

N/ A

P oo r to
fai r

N/ A

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

F air

F air

F air

F air to
exc ellent

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air to
exc ellent

P oo r to fair

E x ce llen t

P oo r

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

F air

E x ce llen t

N/ A

E x ce llen t

F air to
exc ellent

F air

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

E x ce llen t

N/ A

P oo r

P oo r to
fai r

P oo r

F air

F air

P oo r

F air

F air

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Accelerating the NPD Life Cycle
Model
Ideaisation

Go:No-Go

Scoping

Go:No-Go

Planning

Go:No-Go

Development

Go:No-Go

Testing

Go:No-Go

Launch

Go:No-Go

Maintenance
Retirement

Project Lifecycle Framework
 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

EOL

Discussion

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Away
Recommendations
“For which of you,
desiring to build a
tower, doesn't first sit
down and count the
cost, to see if he has
enough to complete it?”
Jesus
2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation


Ready-Aim-Fire


Haste makes waste (penny wise, pound foolish)
• Choosing the wrong models will result in unfulfilled
expectations and delays

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Ready


Recognizing the difference between








product management,
marketing, and
project management

Having a well defined NPD process
Not standardizing on only one project model
Having a positive teamwork environment,
inspirational leadership, focused vision, and
necessary skills

Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Aim
Ensuring up-front homework done first
 Ensuring the resources(staff) & time to do
it right
 Verifying available resource costs (people
and time)
 Selecting the most appropriate project
model
 Taking the time to do the planning right


Take Aways for
Accelerating Innovation: Fire
Being flexible within parameters
 Regular review of processes and methods
 Regular, frequent review of new ideas
and market information


Fini


Robert Grupe





[email protected]
+1.314.266.7321

Further reading







Forrester “Making Product Management A Strategic
Resource”
Winning at New Products, Robert G Cooper
Rapid Development, Steve McConnell
PDMA Visions magazine, Jun & Sept 2008

2008-11-11

 2008 Robert Grupe. All rights reserved.