Regression Analysis Findings

Our regression analysis shows strong correlations with high performance when organizations effectively:

• Prioritize the backlog
•  Have a clear definition of done created within the team
• Don’t over-emphasize development cost when prioritizing requirements

Impact of Respondents’ Perceptions

Respondents’ perceptions of product development methodologies also showed up in our data. Over 90% of survey respondents are actively involved in the product development process. Those who lack an understanding of the method in use clearly are part of organizations that underperform.  Additionally, those who believe using Agile/Scrum leads to high product profitability are more likely to be in organizations that perform well financially. Knowledge clearly makes a difference.

Top Tools and Automation

Lastly, the most highly productive teams believe their effectiveness would increase through the use of better tools and automation. Here, again, knowledge makes a difference. Teams that have implemented effective team processes are looking to expand their uptake of DevOps and Extreme Programming (XP) practices with the latest automated refactoring, test, build, and infrastructure-deployment tools.

Looking Ahead

As of this post, we conclude our exploration of the findings drawn from the latest Global Study of Product Team Performance. Starting next week, we’ll switch gears and begin a discussion of product management tools that can grease the wheel of success within your team and your organization.

Advancing the Profession of Product Management
website I consulting I training I toolkits I books I blog I twitter

The post Product Development Findings appeared first on Actuation Consulting.

This post discusses the sixth and final key finding gathered from the analysis of the latest Global Study of Product Team Performance.

#6 Key Performance Indicator

Product Teams that Believe Their Effectiveness Would Be Improved by the Use of Product Tools and Automation Are Likely to Be High Performance Teams in Companies that Achieve Their Financial Goals and Objectives.

Just over 50% of our survey respondents are members of technology development teams. For this reason, this finding is particularly meaningful to technology development organizations.

Desire to Improve Tools and Increase Automation

The sixth indicator of high performance is essentially possessing the desire for improved tools and increased automation. Organizations that have implemented effective team processes often seek out ways to further improve efficiency.

This indicator points to the rapid uptake of DevOps and the Extreme Programming (XP) practices that underpin it.

This particularly points to:

• Test automation of every kind starting from the practice of test driven development
• Refactoring (and tools that automate refactoring)
  • Continuous integration, continuous delivery, and continuous deployment (and
  the automated build tools and application release tools that support these
  practices)

The up swell of enthusiasm for test-and-build automation has driven strong tool development and rapid tool advancement. This includes having check-ins kick off build scripts that not only compile binaries, but also generate documentation, tests, and statistics. They also kick off test automation, plus generate and deploy distribution media, website pages, and program logic to servers.

In addition, on the operations side, tooling like continuous configuration automation enables automated rollout of both physical and virtual infrastructure. The result is that teams with effective team processes find themselves continuously looking with longing for the latest – and the latest is rapidly evolving.

Next Post: Wrapping It All Up

For several weeks now we have delved into the responses and analysis of the latest Global Study of Product Team Performance. Next week, we reach the conclusion when I will share a few final thoughts on this interesting survey and its outcomes.

Recap of the Six Key Performance Indicators:

1. High performing teams have a clear definition of “done”.
2. Respondents unable to associate a product development methodology with product profitability are unlikely to be on a high performing team.
3. Respondents who believe using Agile/Scrum leads to high product profitability tend to be in organizations that meet or exceed their financial goals.
4. Teams that consider development cost as a criterion for requirements prioritization are more likely to under-perform (i.e., negatively correlated).
5. There is a strong correlation between an effectively prioritized backlog and high product team performance
6. Product teams that believe their effectiveness would be improved by the use of product tools and automation are likely to be high performance teams in companies that achieve their financial goals and objectives.

Advancing the Profession of Product Management
website I consulting I training I toolkits I books I blog I twitter

The post Product Tools and Automation appeared first on Actuation Consulting.

Today we will look at the fifth of six total key findings drawn from the analysis of the latest Global Study of Product Team Performance. Next week we will wrap up the full set of analytic findings gained from the latest survey.

#5 Key Performance Indicator

There is a Strong Correlation Between an Effectively Prioritized Backlog and High Product Team Performance

A substantial 43.5% of survey respondents indicate that their team prioritizes the backlog effectively. When we submitted this question to regression analysis, the correlation was clear:

Product teams that effectively prepare and prioritize their backlog of work are more likely to perform at a high level.

Conversely, 37.9% of respondents indicate that their backlog is a jumble. Our regressive analysis shows that product teams that describe their backlog in this way are negatively correlated with high performance. That is, they are unlikely to perform well.

Grooming the Backlog

The importance of effective backlog grooming cannot be overstated. Not only does an effectively groomed backlog ensure that teams are always applying themselves to work that customers will highly value, but it also serves to motivate developers.

In fact, just by working on the top backlog item developers know they will positively impact customers more than they would by doing anything else. That motivational factor cannot be overstated.

Next Post: The Sixth and Final Key Performance Indicator

In the final summary post of this series based on findings from the Global Study of Product Team Performance, we will pull the study’s takeaways together and give you the complete scope of takeaways you can use to build a stronger, more effective product team.

Recap of the First Five Key Performance Indicators:

1. High performing teams have a clear definition of “done”.
2. Respondents unable to associate a product development methodology with product profitability are unlikely to be on a high performing team.
3. Respondents who believe using Agile/Scrum leads to high product profitability tend to be in organizations that meet or exceed their financial goals.
4. Teams that consider development cost as a criterion for requirements prioritization are more likely to under-perform (i.e., negatively correlated).
5. There is a strong correlation between an effectively prioritized backlog and high product team performance

The post Effectively Prioritized Backlog and High Performance appeared first on Actuation Consulting.

#4 Key Performance Indicator

Teams that Consider Development Cost as a Criterion for Requirements Prioritization Are More Likely to Under-Perform (i.e., negatively correlated)

54% of respondents stated that they use development cost as a factor in determining which high level requirement they pursue. Unfortunately, our data indicates that organizations doing so are likely to be poor performers.

We believe that product managers must consider development cost in calculating ROI. It should also be used in determining how to deliver the most bang for the buck to customers. However, study data shows that neither high performance teams, nor teams in organizations meeting their financial goals, take development cost into consideration at the time requirements are being prioritized.

When the backlog is effectively prioritized, there is no such negative correlation. Furthermore, there is also no standout positive correlation with any of the other requirements-prioritization criteria we asked about. These include revenue, profitability, customer importance, internal stakeholder influence, risk, and technical considerations (e.g. architecture, stability, scalability).

Break Down Work to Avoid Cost Concerns

It is critical that product managers and owners break down work into small enough chunks to ensure that high cost is not made an excuse for not delivering the highest customer value. The work breakdown can be by stories (Agile), minimum marketable features (MMFs), minimum viable products (MVPs), or experiments (lean-startup). The important point is that dividing the work, and thus the cost of the work, allows teams to deliver the highest value in the shortest time.

Next Post: #5 Key Performance Indicator

Be sure to check out my post next week when we will discuss the fifth key performance indicator drawn from the most recent Global Study of Product Team Performance.

Recap of the First Four Key Performance Indicators:

1. High performing teams have a clear definition of “done”.
2. Respondents unable to associate a product development methodology with product profitability are unlikely to be on a high performing team.
3. Respondents who believe using Agile/Scrum leads to high product profitability tend to be in organizations that meet or exceed their financial goals.
4. Teams that consider development cost as a criterion for requirements prioritization are more likely to under-perform (i.e., negatively correlated).

Advancing the Profession of Product Management
website I consulting I training I toolkits I books I blog I twitter

The post KPI #4: Development Cost and Prioritization appeared first on Actuation Consulting.

#3 Key Performance Indicator

Respondents Who Believe Using Agile Scrum Leads to Higher Product Profitability Tend to Be in Organizations That Meet or Exceed Their Financial Goals.

Only a certain group of survey respondents identified a methodology responsible for making their product more profitable. Those who named Agile Scrum as the source of their improved product profitability are, in fact, typically in companies that meet or exceed their financial goals.

Agile Scrum Delivers

This result is not surprising. Agile Scrum draws on many best practices and assembles them to deliver synergies that newbies often find eye opening. The practices and the synergies are “best practices” because they deliver higher productivity, better quality, and improved products. Each of these outcomes leads to positive financial results.

An Interesting Fact

The survey shows that over 52% of respondents believe that Agile Scrum leads to improved profitability. Yet, only 48% of organizations say they actually use Agile Scrum. The finding that more respondents associate Agile Scrum with product profitability than actually use it is consistent with results from previous years.

Since 43% of teams say they are high performing, the correlations would suggest that those teams using or at least believing in Agile Scrum make up the majority of teams that are high performing.

Next Week: #4 Key Performance Indicator

My next post will reveal the analysis behind the important fourth key performance indicator.

Recap of the First Three Key Performance Indicators:

1. High performing teams have a clear definition of “done”.
2. Respondents unable to associate a product development methodology with product profitability are unlikely to be on a high performing team.
3. Respondents who believe using Agile/Scrum leads to high product profitability tend to be in organizations that meet or exceed their financial goals.

Advancing the Profession of Product Management
website I consulting I training I toolkits I books I blog I twitter

The post Agile Scrum’s Impact: Key Performance Indicator #3 appeared first on Actuation Consulting.

#2 Key Performance Indicator (KPI)

Respondents Unable to Associate a Product Development Methodology with Product Profitability are Unlikely to be on a High Performing Team.

Analysis of the latest data illustrates an important point: Product team members who cannot project which product development methodology would make their products more profitable are more likely to be in organizations that perform poorly.

We cannot say exactly why this is. However it suggests that lack of exposure to modern methodologies may be to blame. This includes teams that have been locked into Waterfall and have not yet tried Agile. It can also include teams that are basically in chaos and don’t have any coherent methodology.

“Bad Agile”

On the other hand, there’s a lot of “bad Agile” out there. These are methodologies that are Agile in name only, not in practice or in spirit. Such a situation could lead a team to believe that nothing will help.

Regardless of its root, the second key performance indicator is a remarkable conclusion. It is highly significant to be able to identify the connection between how team members do their work and product profitability.

Next Week: #3 Key Performance Indicator

Watch for next week’s blog post when we will discuss the third of six key performance indicators of high performing teams.

Recap of First Key Performance Indicators:

1. High performing teams have a clear definition of “done”.
2. Respondents unable to associate a product development methodology with product profitability are unlikely to be on a high performing team.

Advancing the Profession of Product Management
website I consulting I training I toolkits I books I blog I twitter

The post Key Performance Indicator: Development Method & Profitability appeared first on Actuation Consulting.