Can Agile projects be predictable? What do we need to predict? Is it cost, is it time to market or is it business value? In an outsourcing context, how does a service provider provide contractual certainty in an Agile project? Are solid engineering practices enough for bringing predictability in Agile? In this talk we will see various techniques which NIIT has used in bringing predictability in Agile projects for both itself and its customers.

1. © 2015 NIIT Technologies 1© 2015 NIIT Technologies
Agile Certainty: Bringing Predictability in Agile
Agile Confluence
28th November 2015

2. © 2015 NIIT Technologies 2
NIIT Technologies – Focus industry segments
Primary Focus Industries
SpecializedServiceLines
ADM (Development, Management, Independent Testing, Enterprise Data, Digital and Mobility Services)
Business Process Outsourcing
Managed Services- Infrastructure Management, Application Support
Asset Based
System Integration & Packaged Implementations
Airlines, TD, Railways, Airports, Ground
Transportation, Cargo, Logistics
Life, P&C and Commercial
(Re-)Insurance
Banking & Investment Management

3. © 2015 NIIT Technologies 3
“Global Agile” @ NIIT Technologies
33%
% of Rev. from Agile
30%
CAGR in Agile Revenue
90% of
Application Services
88%
Offshoring Ratio
59.5%
Reduction in Per FP cost
0.3
Wt. Defects escaped / FP
25%+
Increased throughput in
Enhancements
> 80 %
Non Traditional
Commercial Models

4. © 2015 NIIT Technologies 4
Changing face of application development
 Increased spending in Digital, Customer
Experience and new business
 Complex, Ever Changing and Integrated
Platforms
 Scale, Speed
 Increased ownership

5. © 2015 NIIT Technologies 5
Certainty at 4 levels
How much will it
cost?
Will it have defects?
Will it be on time?
Will I achieve my
business objectives?
What type of predictability
are we giving in agile
engagements?
e.g. New digital channel in 1.5 MN USD
e.g. No Severity 1 or 2 defects
in first 3 months of operation
e.g. Soft Launch
by Feb 2016
e.g. Increase in
L2B ratio to 20%

6. © 2015 NIIT Technologies 6
Key contributing factors
Requirements
Velocity /
Productivity
Engineering Practices
Automation
Standard “Unit” of Size
Alignment of process
with business goals Technology

7. © 2015 NIIT Technologies 7
Alignment: Process vs Business Goals
Business
Agility
Platform
Agility
Application
Agility
Operational
Agility
Dev + Test
Agility
Project Level results in
Tactical Agile Implementation
Business View drives
Strategic Agile Adoption

8. © 2015 NIIT Technologies 8
Requirements and Technology Clarity
All 4 levels of predictability
can be ensured
Quality can
be ensured
Quality can be ensured
?

9. © 2015 NIIT Technologies 9
Standard Unit of Development Size
Problem
• Difficult to measure and track development cost
• Changes come in post project approval and cost starts to escalate
Various
Alternatives
• Industry standard options with defined method of calculation
• Function Point i.e. IFPUG or Mark II
• Non standard measuring options
• Story points
• Stories
Selection Criterion
• Type of development
• Greenfield development / Large programs
• Strategic platform with steady stream of enhancements
• Migration, small enhancements
• Team dynamics & stability
Basis for all KPIs
• Establish an internal pricing model for features against a total available budget 
using it to justify changes and new requests. Measuring @ cost / Function Point
• Basis for measuring predictability
• Throughput / Velocity
• Quality (extrinsic and intrinsic both)
• Cycle time

10. © 2015 NIIT Technologies 10
Velocity / Throughput / Productivity
Planned
Units
Committed
Units
Delivered
Units
Accepted
Units
Quality,
Continuous
Delivery
Requirements /
Technology
clarity
Impediments
Scrum Team
as a
repeatable
unit
Scope / Size Analysis = # Units
Units / Velocity = # ideal sprints
# Sprints / timeline = # scrum teams + Shared
teams

11. © 2015 NIIT Technologies 11
Automation – 4 dimensions
People
Feature Teams SDET Test Everything Automate Everything
Automate as early as
possible
Process
Visualize Flow
e-2-e
Optimize Flow
e-2-e
Automation
Champion
Automation Checkpoints
Automation KPIs at
all levels
Technology and Tools
Infrastructure
Virtualization
Ready Made
Images
Centralized Tools
Infrastructure
Development
Team Self Service
On Demand
Provisioning
Developer
Productivity
Tools
Build and
Release
Automation
Tools
Environment
Management
Tools
Unit Test Automation Tools
Functional Test Automation Tools
Service Test Automation Tools
Non Functional Test Automation Tools
Test Case Generation Tools
Pattern Based
Code
Generation
Tools
Automatic
Configuration

12. © 2015 NIIT Technologies 12
Contractual aspects
Quality
Definition of Done Technical Debt Functional Quality Non Functional Quality
• DoD is part of the
contract
• Objective and
measurable
• Preferably automated
• Various aspects of TD
like standards
compliance, coverage,
duplication, complexity
• Limits on functional
defects that can be
found
• Limits on non-
functional defects that
can be found
Cost, Time to Market
Velocity Rework
• Minimum commitment / Team every sprint • Limits on rework due to ambiguous requirements
Value
Business Outcome Cycle time reduction
• Contract linked to transactions enabled (e.g. #
Bookings, # online check-ins)
• Contracts linked to reduction in # requests,
improved efficiency leading to customer satisfaction

13. © 2015 NIIT Technologies 13© 2015 NIIT Technologies
Open Discussion
Puneet Sachdev, Chief Architect, NIIT Technologies
puneet.sachdev@niit-tech.com,