My session was about a process of measuring cross-project indicators that an agile company can follow once they are compliance with the baseline of measurements such as velocity, code quality. More details here.

Two collages from Southworks spoke at this event too: Martin Salias gave a high level view of practices to follow after succesfully adopting agile culture and practices, while Nicolas Paez gave a workshop around agile estimation and planning. We filmed our talks so I guess some time in the future they’ll be published.

If you follow (or intend to follow :)) agile practices and didn’t get the chance to go to any edition of Agiles, I really recommend you don’t loose the next edition (country to be defined) and in the meantime contact your local agile community for other local events.

Stay tunned for more updates!

The format for the meeting was similar to a Lightning Talk; in this case a series of time-boxed presentations and Q&A (7 +3 mins). Presentations were very interesting, but especially I always find this kind of talks formats very effective: as opposed to long open discussions, they help the audience to get quickly to the point, have a fare amount of questions and then move to the next presentation. This way the audience (customer?) gets added value after a short iteration, in this case of 10 minutes. Any similitude with agile goals?

July 14th meeting will be around estimation in agile projects and they’ll use the same Lightning Talk format.

We had good feedback from the audience, as well as lots of questions from people facing similar scenarios. Let’s summarize the case study presented…

“Your mission, if you choose to accept it…”

Apart from the goal of delivering a mission critical product implemented with emerging technologies, the case study in particular that I presented had the following constraints:

1. “Distributed²“: The whole team was divided in 2: Southworks team (1 architect + 1 lead + 2 devs) and the client’s team (3-4 devs). These teams were distributed in space, separated by 360 miles. But they were also distributed in time: their working hours differed in 2+ hours.
2. “coached to coach”: Goals included the adoption of agile methodologies by client’s development teams up to the point where they must be ready to coach other teams within the client on successfully implementing agile.
3. “Agile = 0″: The client’s team had no experience in agile methodologies or tools such as TDD, pair programming, refactoring, etc.
4. “Tech = 0″: The client’s team had no experience in the models their where going to implement such as S+S or the technologies they were going to use: MVC, Ajax, WCF, Linq

The approach

After accepting that “mission” we used the product we started to build as the real-world scenario for applying a coaching roadmap that consisted of a mix of:

1. Global (team + stakeholders) methodology understanding
2. Continuous teamwork practice
3. Ownership enforcement
4. Partial team rotation to foster the knowledge transfer

The results

As part of the results of the case study, the product was delivered on time, on budget, with “over-delivery” features. The client’s team had learnt and successfully implemented agile methodologies as well as the new technologies, which they successfully started to apply to other projects in their organization.

Have you ever worked on similar scenarios? How did you solve them?

This event in particular associated the heroes happen {here}campaign with a popular sport in Argentina: the soccer. The main event was a soccer match between professional soccer players and a team made of Microsoft developers and IT pro’s. As part of a big analogy, the software team used Windows Server 2008 on their defense, SQL Server 2008 on their middle field and Visual Studio 2008 on their offensive and that strategy allowed them to won the match.

Some pictures from the event

Soccer match between professional soccer players and a team made of Microsoft developers and IT pro’s. You can see Alejandro Ponicke as a DT in the background.

Jorge Garcia, Augusto Alvarez, Matias Woloski, Ezequiel Glinsky, Johnny Halife and me: watching the soccer match.

Augusto Alvarez, Paulo Arancibia, Miguel Saez, me and Johnny Halife

When your goal is to put the box in another place in a dark room, you can choose to concentrate in start pushing without focusing on other forces coming from the other side OR you can first use your torch to enlighten from above overseeing the whole process, getting to see things that may affect the operation (moving a box) in advance.

I guess this analogy can point out the difference between “doing something” and “take care of getting something done“.

What do you think?

I had a great time on the design sessions with people from the CSF team like Puru Amradkar, Bala Balabaskaran, Balamurugan Kuthanoor and Arun Chandrasekhar. Their collaboration on the project was really valuable.

Image 1: From left to right: me, Puru Amradkar and Eugenio Pace.

LitwareHR is a software as a Service (SaaS) reference implementation application published last February by Microsoft’s Architecture Strategy Team. As a single-instance and multi-tenant application, it covers SaaS typical aspects as the tenant provisioning, multi-tenant security, presentation configuration, datamodel configuration and business processes configuration.

So what about CSF? It helps telecommunications operators to integrate content services with their internal networks and business systems. In a SaaS hoster context, it could help with integrating their billing and order handling systems with SaaS applications developed by SaaS ISV’s.

Image 2: CSF Communication Architecture.

Some CSF Links

• MCSF website:
•  http://www.microsoft.com/serviceproviders/solutions/connectedservicesframework.mspx
• Overview demo:
•  http://www.microsoft.com/serviceproviders/flashfiles/csf/shell-csf.html
• Overview doc:
•  http://download.microsoft.com/download/7/7/5/775cb839-a749-49a7-b735-edaf05ca1501/Final_CSF%20Brochure_2.10.pdf
• Webinar on Connected Services Sandbox:
•  https://www123.livemeeting.com/cc/microsoft/view?id=FC9MQ6-5
• Connected Services Sandbox: http://www.networkmashups.com/

1. Tenant-based security applied to restaurants restrooms in downtown Seattle:

1. "Try before you buy" experience in Chinese restaurant             (in Sea-Tac airport):

Has any of you found any "SaaS hints" anywhere else?

The sessions have been organized by the Microsoft Learning team and hosted by Howard Dierking, who did a great job on helping us to discuss about the most important aspects of WF to test.

He explained the refactoring of the exam stack and how having TS exams which are specific to a single technology and then PRO exams which are more scenario oriented can help software companies on measuring their applicants skills.

From left to right, the Subject Matter Experts that worked on that design sessions are: Ariel Schapiro, Serge Luca, Alfred Myers, Brian Myers (author of "Introduction to Windows Workflow Foundation" book) and Mark Dunn.

It was really interesting to see how many points of view around the same subject help enormously in the design of an exam; good work guys!

Two more southies (Matias Woloski and Johnny Halife) participated in the WCF design sessions that took place one week before WF’s.

I’m sure this is not all of the material around, but here is a brief list of Software as a Service links that I find useful. Feel free to propose more links. Enjoy

Introduction

• SaaS on Wikipedia
• SaaS explained in less than 3 minutes: video

Guidance

• LitwareHR, a SaaS reference implementation application: community website
• MSDN’s SaaS Architecture section
• Skyscrapr’s “Architects in Action”

Papers

• Software as a Service (SaaS): An Enterprise Perspective (paper by Gianpaolo Carraro and Fred Chong)
• Architecture Strategies for Catching the Long Tail (paper by Gianpaolo Carraro and Fred Chong)

Blogs

• Gianpaolo Carraro
• Fred Chong
• Matias Woloski
• Ariel Schapiro
• Juerguen Pfeifer
• John devadoss
• Eric Nelson