Hello, Please complete the following Enterprise Business Agility questions. Your open and honest feedback is appreciated and will help us take our organization to the next level of maturity!
Please complete the following Enterprise Business Agility questions. Your open and honest feedback is appreciated and will help us take our organization to the next level of maturity!
Understanding Our Customer:
How well do we know our customers?
Pre-Crawl (1-2): We don’t really invest in learning deeply about our customers. We’re mostly focused on our products / technology / services offered.
Crawl (3-4): We have educated and trained the right roles on customer experience and design thinking practices. We’re piloting design thinking across a few teams.
Walk (5-6): We’ve defined our key customer personas, jobs to be done, journey maps and desired experience. This information is shared and easy to find by anyone.
Run (7-8): We have integrated our customer personas and insights at the team, program and portfolio levels to influence all the work we do.
Fly (9-10): We have our teams interact with our customers and they have developed deep empathy and understanding of them. Anyone in our team can give you the 2 minute elevator pitch about each customer persona.
Customer Insights & Data:
To what extent are you using customer data (behavior, engagement, feedback, usage, etc.) to make decisions?
Pre-Crawl (1-2): Customer data exists in pockets across the organization. We don’t have a way to bring the data together to develop insights and guide decisions.
Crawl (3-4): We have started consolidating, standardizing and analyzing customer data. It still takes us a long time to generate insights and have just started using the data on a few initiatives.
Walk (5-6): We identify key customer experiences, coordinate the analysis of our customer data and integrate customer insights data into the appropriate levels for planning and decision making for large initiatives.
Run (7-8): We consistently incorporate customer insights data to guide decisions for all of the work, not just the large, strategic initiatives. We are using our customer data to build predictive models and run experiments to influence positive changes in customer behavior.
Fly (9-10): Customer insights data and predictive analysis are integrated into day-to-day operations and drive key decisions at all levels which has resulted in tangible customer outcomes.
Experiments and Learning:
How mature are we at defining experiments, testing our assumptions before investing in large solutions?
Pre-Crawl (1-2): We build larger solutions that are based on internally defined requirements/assumptions and gain customer feedback after they are released.
Crawl (3-4): We have learned and are now starting to apply the concepts around testing our ideas by identifying smaller experiments to run with customers and get their feedback. The adoption of experimenting is ad-hoc.
Walk (5-6): We’ve formalized the adoption of hypothesis statements to define each MVP and experiment we want to run and what learnings we expect to gain. Our actual measurement of the results and sharing of the learnings is ad-hoc.
Run (7-8): We’re consistently defining experiments and MVPs, testing our assumptions around value, usability and feasibility of our solutions and leveraging customer insights to improve our next increment of value.
Fly (9-10): We have successfully delivered many capabilities/features that our customers LOVE by continuously experimenting, learning and leveraging insights to guide next increments of value. This has allowed us to eliminate features and solutions that the marketplace does not value.
Problem & Solution Discovery:
How well does our product discovery process validate problems and solutions with our customers?
Pre-Crawl (1-2): We don’t follow any formal discovery process; most of our features and solutions are not validated with customers until after release.
Crawl (3-4): We’ve invested in training key roles on product discovery practices and developing a strategy for how to adopt these practices.
Walk (5-6): We have started to pilot these methods over a few quarters/PIs with good results and learning/adapting to our environment.
Run (7-8): We have matured our Discovery processes over several quarters and they have become a core part of how we work. Our teams are validating feature results and sharing their insights.
Fly (9-10): Our Discovery process has resulted in higher NPS, reduced feature backlogs, lower WIP, higher value delivered and elimination of non-value add features based on experiments and data. We are able to teach other teams how to do Discovery.
How often do we engage with our customers to hear their voices?
Pre-Crawl (1-2): We don’t engage with customers frequently and when we do it usually through focus groups or targeted market analysis efforts.
Crawl (3-4): We have started experimenting with involving customers into our discovery efforts to get feedback on problems and solution designs.
Walk (5-6): We regularly engage customers in our discovery efforts and have started experimenting with bringing customers in during development and post release to validate and refine our solutions.
Run (7-8): We have integrated customer engagement into our discovery and development processes and are seeing positive improvements in the value we deliver.
Fly (9-10): Our customer engagement efforts have helped our teams develop a deep knowledge, empathy and understanding of our customers and this has resulted in significant improvements in the quality and fit of our solutions and customer satisfaction.
How well have we integrated Customer Focus into our mindset and the ways we work?
Pre-Crawl (1-2): Our products and services are the central focus of our processes and practices and we haven’t begun shifting to a customer focus mindset.
Crawl (3-4): We are mapping out the customer touch points and beginning to organize our efforts to improve the customer experience. Most of our processes and decisions are still focused on our products and services.
Walk (5-6): Executive leaders have made improving the customer experience a top priority and we have a clear strategy with key results and measures. We are making changes to address issues in the customer’s journey and shift our central focus to the customer.
Run (7-8): Our central focus is the customer and we are making significant improvements to the customer’s experience. Decisions across the organization are made from viewpoint of how it affects the customer.
Fly (9-10): We continually evaluate and improve all customer touch points across the enterprise and involve customers when re-engineering processes to ensure we deliver outcomes that exceed customer expectations.
Add any additional thoughts about "Customer Seat at Table - Customer Seat at Table"
Strategic Intent & Themes:
To what extent is there clarity to our strategic intent (3-year ambitions) and strategic themes (yearly outcomes)?
Pre-Crawl (1-2): We don’t have clarity on our strategic intent nor clear themes/outcomes for this year.
Crawl (3-4): We don’t have clarity on our strategic intent yet but have received a list of priorities for this year from our leaders. The list is too long and mostly focused on projects/initiatives/work to be done.
Walk (5-6): We have defined our strategic intent and have reduced the list of yearly priorities to ~10 or so, however they are still very focused on projects/deliverables not outcomes.
Run (7-8): We have clarity on our 3-year strategic intent and have created defined strategic themes for this year that are outcome oriented and measurable. However, they are not communicated or visible to everyone.
Fly (9-10): Our strategic intent and themes are outcome driven, measurable and enable us to make better decisions. Everyone in the company at every level has visibility, understanding and alignment to rally behind them and make them happen!
Business Outcome Alignment:
How well do we define business outcomes and provide alignment to those outcomes down to the teams?
Pre-Crawl (1-2): We don’t define quarterly business outcomes so none of our teams are aligned to them. We’re focused on aligning around the work to be done.
Crawl (3-4): We have started to build basic knowledge around defining quarterly measurable outcomes using OKRs and some portfolio/value stream leaders, product managers and POs have started to pilot this in a few areas.
Walk (5-6): Quarterly business outcomes are collaboratively defined as OKRs between each layer. However, they are still deliverable focused, and we set them and forget them until end of quarter review.
Run (7-8): We now focus on key results that have business and organization impact and align them to team level goals. We've established processes to check-in frequently on our outcome/OKR progress within the quarter.
Fly (9-10): We've seen real focus on outcome delivery and this has become an integral part of how we plan and deliver. We've made measurable impact to our business!
Confidence in Strategic Intent:
To what extent do you have confidence in the strategic intent and themes we've defined? Please provide textual responses to support your vote.
Pre-Crawl (1-2): What strategy? I don't have visibility into our strategy and can't vote on my confidence.
Crawl (3-4): Not at all! We're moving in the wrong direction and I have real concerns.
Walk (5-6): I'm somewhat confident but see several challenges that have not been addressed and have shared these with our leaders.
Run (7-8): I'm mostly confident in our direction with a few concerns that I have shared with my leaders.
Fly (9-10): I'm very confident in our direction and inspired about what the future holds for us!
Quarterly Capacity & Demand Management:
How well do our planning process balance demand and capacity at least quarterly?
Pre-Crawl (1-2): Our portfolio planning is a yearly process focused on projects and initiatives. Demand and capacity are not measured nor aligned. We have high WIP (work in progress), high dependencies, slow decision making and our planning centers around work not outcomes.
Crawl (3-4): We are experimenting with quarterly planning and inspecting/adapting the process. We’re still defining roles, ceremonies and processes needed for maturing this.
Walk (5-6): We’re planning collaboratively every quarter and engaging the right stakeholders/leaders, we’re inspecting and adapting this process. We’re still however focusing on work/deliverables and our teams still have many dependencies and obstacles.
Run (7-8): Our quarterly planning has matured to become outcome focused with teams engaging and owning outcomes within their capacity. We’re enabling teams to swarm together to achieve outcomes and we are removing obstacles quickly.
Fly (9-10): We’re meeting 80%+ of our planned quarterly outcomes for the past quarter! We’ve maximized throughput, reduced WIP, effectively removed obstacles and have eliminated most dependencies. We got this!
Adaptive Funding Model:
How well does our funding process integrate Lean/Agile principles to be more aligned, adaptive & responsive?
Pre-Crawl (1-2): Internal organizations compete for project-oriented budgets annually. Decisions and budgets remain fixed and success is defined by meeting pre-defined goals with little or no adjustment.
Crawl (3-4): We’ve educated our finance/accounting teams on Agile funding models and gained their buy-in for experimenting with adaptive funding based on teams/capacity and not projects.
Walk (5-6): We’ve piloted with a new Agile/Lean funding model within a specific portfolio and have inspected and adapted the process. We’ve seen good results and aim to do a wider rollout across more portfolios.
Run (7-8): Finance and governance models across the enterprise are now aligned with Lean values and principles, with regular reviews and adjustments (adaptive funding). KPIs are aligned with delivery of outcomes and value delivery instead of time-cost-scope.
Fly (9-10): We’ve seen significant gains from moving to this new funding model over the past year in terms of process simplification, waste reduction, funding efficiency and higher delivery of value.
Run-Grow-Transform Allocation:How well do we balance our allocation of teams across operational work (run the business) and strategic work (grow/transform the business)?
Pre-Crawl (1-2): We have no visibility or current metrics into how our teams are allocated across run and grow/transform efforts.
Crawl (3-4): We are establishing a baseline and gathering initial data to quantify our current allocation between these buckets.
Walk (5-6): We’ve evaluated our current baseline, identified our gaps and determined new allocation and investment goals for these buckets.
Run (7-8): We are currently in the process of shifting our investment allocation across the teams to align with our strategic goals and aspirations. This improved visibility and alignment is beginning to provide measurable results.
Fly (9-10): We’ve successfully optimized and balanced our investment in run/grow/transform and seeing measurable results from the re-balancing efforts.
Add any additional thoughts about "Lean Portfolio Mgmt - Lean Portfolio Management"
Virtual Team Design:
How much have we invested in designing our teams for the new way of working?
Pre-Crawl (1-2): We still have transient project-based teams that work in silos and don't have a team design strategy around keeping teams stable. Many team members are allocated across several projects.
Crawl (3-4): Team Design - We've redesigned our teams to be stable, cross-functional and include all the roles we need to deliver value.
Walk (5-6): Team of Teams Design - We’ve invested in designing our team of teams layer (programs, trains, tribes, etc.). This group has the right roles and skills needed to succeed.
Run (7-8): Portfolio/Value Stream Design - We’ve invested in designing value streams and portfolios that align our team of teams around our strategic themes & outcomes and plan ahead.
Fly (9-10): We have seen real tangible outcomes in terms of FLOW of value as a direct result of our organizational design. We are able to define strategic outcomes and deliver on them rapidly and reliably with FLOW and minimal dependencies.
Rollout of New Way of Working:
What percentage of our teams have adopted Agile and moved into the new target design?
Pre-Crawl (1-2): 10% of less of our organization has adopted Agile and moved to the new design.
Crawl (3-4): 25% of our organization has adopted Agile and moved to the new design.
Walk (5-6): 50%+ of our organization has adopted Agile and moved to the new design.
Run (7-8): 75%+ of our organization has adopted Agile and moved to the new design.
Fly (9-10): 90% of our organization has adopted Agile and moved to the new design.
CoPs & Enablement Teams:
How much have we invested in designing and supporting communities of practice (CoPs) and enablement teams?
Pre-Crawl(1-2): We don’t have any communities of practice or enablement teams to support the growth of our delivery teams at this time.
Crawl (3-4): We’ve invested in creating a few CoPs and enablement teams for specific roles/capabilities. Some are doing well and some are struggling with getting engagement or leadership support.
Walk (5-6): We’ve designed a strategy and identifying the key CoPs (PO, Scrum Master, Managers) and enablement teams (Agile, Enterprise Agility, DevOps, Customer Experience) we need. We’ve invested in getting the right leadership, support and communication for each of them. These teams have defined their purpose, jobs to be done and value to the organization.
Run (7-8): We have a healthy mix of CoPs and enablement teams that support each portfolio/value stream and provide mature offerings to enable and support the growth of our teams.
Fly (9-10): Our CoPs and enablement teams have made a measurable difference in the growth and maturity of our value delivery teams. We have many teams and key roles that are now enabled, confident in their new skills and actually helping/mentoring others.
How much have we invested in defining new roles and redesigning existing roles to align with the new way of working?
Pre-Crawl (1-2): We have not invested yet in evaluating our roles and aligning them with the new way of working. We still have too many roles that operate in the traditional model.
Crawl (3-4): Team Level - We’ve invested in defining clear team-level Agile roles and provided the necessary training and mentorship for them to succeed.
Walk (5-6): Team-of-Teams - We’ve invested in defining clear Team of Teams (program, train, tribe) roles and provided the necessary training and mentorship for them to succeed.
Run (7-8): Portfolio & Value Streams - We’ve invested in defining clear roles and expectations of our portfolio and value stream leadership teams. We’ve provided the right training and mentorship for them to succeed.
Fly (9-10): All of the roles in our organization have been aligned, trained and re-skilled to enable the new way of working. We’re seeing tangible results because of this investment.
Add any additional thoughts about "Org Structure/Design - Virtual Teams"
Agile for Tech Teams:
How many of these practices do you feel your teams are doing well? Keep count of the number and use it to score. Example, 5 practices = 5 score.
Top 10 Agile Maturity Practices:
1 - Defined and shared our team's vision/purpose, outcomes to deliver for next quarter and measures for success.
2- Defined our work using smaller 'stories' organized in a ranked backlog with highest value items on the top.
3 - Setup basic planning, daily stand-ups, review and retrospective meetings. Use visual boards to track our work.
4 - Clarified and communicated team roles and expectations of each other. Defined team norms and working agreements.
5- Set up team collaboration (virtual or co-location) workspace and acquired all necessary tools.
6- We deliver value in smaller increments, demo our work to product owner and customers and get feedback often.
7- We plan ahead for the next several weeks or a quarter and identify dependencies across teams and capacity constraints.
8- We inspect and adapt our processes. We capture and remove team-level and organizational level obstacles.
9 - We've invested in technical Agility and DevOps practices to speed delivery (for technology teams).
10 - We've adopted product discovery, experimentation and design thinking methods.
How many of the practices above have your teams collectively adopted?
Select N/A if not sure.
Scaled Agile Planning:
How mature is our planning at scale across teams?
Pre-Crawl (1-2): We
only plan at the team level and don’t have cross-team planning, as a result
have many unmanaged dependencies, impediments and changing requirements. It’s
very hard to coordinate work across our teams.
Crawl (3-4): We are piloting
using a Scaled Agile planning method that provides formal processes for
cross-team planning, dependency management and coordination.
Walk (5-6): We have formalized how we plan
across teams and align with business outcomes and strategy. Most of our teams
operate in this way.
Run (7-8): We have matured by planning one quarter ahead
of the teams and doing discovery before we move to delivery.
Our portfolio- and team-of-team level quarterly planning cadences are aligned,
predictable and have contributed significantly towards having clarity,
alignment and focus on outcomes.
Agile for Business Teams:
To what extent have our business teams adopted Agile and the new way of working?
Pre-Crawl (1-2): Agile and Lean principles are mainly applied within technology teams. We have not invested yet in educating or enabling our business teams to adopt agility within their teams.
Crawl (3-4): We’ve engaged business members to participate in some of our planning and team ceremonies. We have product owners from the business leading the delivery teams with varying degree of engagement.
Walk (5-6): We’ve seen interest from business units in learning and applying Agile in their areas. We’ve offered some education and provided coaching to help pilot Agile practices within business teams.
Run (7-8): Several business units and teams are adopting Agile practices and have become evangelists and provided great case studies for other areas to follow.
Fly (9-10): Agile/Lean principles and practices are now part of the enterprise ‘new way of working’ and most of our business areas such as Sales, Marketing, Finance, Legal, Compliance, HR, Operations have adopted agility into their way of working.
Add any additional thoughts about "Agile Framework - Agile Framework"
Leadership Agility Maturity:
How many of these Leadership Agility practices do you feel we’ve invested in (provided education and clarity of expectations around)?
1- Provide clarity on vision and alignment with strategy and outcomes
2- Provide ‘intent’ (what and why) along with a few guardrails and enable the teams to define the ‘how’
3- Identify organizational obstacles and remove them quickly and swiftly
4- Attract talent that fits our culture and invest in coaching and growing individual contributors and leaders
5- Seek and welcome feedback in addition to give constructive and timely feedback to others
6- Make it safe to share ideas, experiment and take some risks to learn and innovate
7- Be a role model for our desired culture and new way of working
8- Shift focus from tactical daily work management to being more strategic and customer oriented
9- Embrace and lead through change, be a strong change leader who can motivate and rally others around a new direction/vision
10- Enable teams to be customer focused, outcome and results oriented and have strong business acumen.
How many of the 10 practices above have we invested in?
Manager Transition: Shift from Tactical to Strategic:
How many of your managers/leaders have shifted their value contribution from being tactical to being strategic?
Pre-Crawl (1-2): Our managers/leaders are still operating at a tactical level, solving daily issues, assigning tasks and managing daily work. They use a directive style and make most of the decisions related to the work.
Crawl (3-4): Some (25%+) of our managers/leaders have invested in learning/education on being strategic and have been applying and demonstrating these skills.
Walk (5-6): Many (50%+) of our managers/leaders have invested in learning/education on being strategic and have been applying and demonstrating these skills.
Run (7-8): Most (75%+) of our managers/leaders have invested in learning/education on being strategic and have been applying and demonstrating these skills.
Fly (9-10): Our managers are focused on growing people, attracting and developing talent, removing obstacles and ensuring we have clarity on vision and alignment with strategy and outcomes. They are engaged at the right level and frequency based on the maturity of each team.
Manager Transition Strategy & Rollout:
How much have we invested in transitioning our managers to the new way of working and clarified their role?
Pre-Crawl (1-2): We don’t have a clear strategy or definition for the new role of managers. Many are struggling right now with how they fit into the new way of working and how to lead Agile teams.
Crawl (3-4): We’ve gained consensus around the new role of managers and put together a strategy for rolling out training, education, coaching and change management to enable this transition. We’ve also identified other roles managers can transition to that best fit their skills.
Walk (5-6): We’ve trained a majority of our managers on the new roles and have provided strong change management support. We’re seeing strong engagement and energy from managers with pockets of success stories being shared.
Run (7-8): Most of our managers have matured in supporting the new way of working. We’re hearing positive feedback from teams around the value and support they are providing.
Fly (9-10): Our managers have transitioned to new roles and new ways of leading. We’re seeing measurable results in terms of obstacle removal, talent development and team satisfaction with this new role.
Culture of Collaboration:
How much cross-team and cross-organization collaboration do we have? Do we work as ‘one team’ or do we still operate in silos?
Pre-Crawl (1-2): We still work mostly in silos with hand-offs between departments/teams. Our cross-functional collaboration and communication isn’t very effective.
Crawl (3-4): We have invested in training our teams on collaboration, facilitation and soft skills. Cross-functional teams have started to embrace open communication and healthy collaboration which has resulted in improved team dynamics.
Walk (5-6): We have improved collaboration, communication and coordination between the ‘team-of-teams’ (e.g. programs, trains, tribes) layers.
Run (7-8): We have improved collaboration, communication and coordination across portfolios and lines of business. We’ve built strong relationships and moved towards ‘we and us’ thinking instead of ‘I and my’ thinking.
Fly (9-10): Collaboration, healthy team dynamics and open communication have become part of our core values and how we operate. We put aside our roles and reporting structures to work together on achieving outcomes across boundaries.
Learning & Experimenting:
To what extent have we adopted a culture of learning and experimenting? Do we still have a fear of making mistakes?
Pre-Crawl (1-2): We still have a culture that is risk averse and not tolerant of mistakes.
Crawl (3-4): We have been trained in design thinking to learn how to build experiments, metrics and hypothesis and are piloting this new practice on a few teams.
Walk (5-6): Many of our team members and business leaders are skilled in design thinking and leveraging this across a few programs. Our users/customers are at the center of what we do.
Run (7-8): Almost all of our teams and business leaders have adopted design thinking and we are achieving measurable results and valuable learning. We’re fully engaged with customers/users.
Fly (9-10): We have mastered the art of experimenting, measuring results and pivoting as needed. This has enabled innovation and higher customer value delivery.
Add any additional thoughts about "Leadership & Culture - Leadership & Culture"
Agile HR & Talent Management:
To what extent has our talent development aligned to support our new way of working?
Pre-Crawl (1-2): Our HR & talent development partners have not fully engaged with the transformation team yet or learned about their roles.
Crawl (3-4): Our HR & talent development partners have fully engaged with the transformation team and understand how they enable the transformation. They have developed a program for Agile talent development.
Walk (5-6): The new Agile talent development program has been developed and piloted successfully across a few teams.
Run (7-8): Our agile talent development program is rolled out across the majority of our teams. We are inspecting and adapting the program based on feedback and outcomes.
Fly (9-10): Our agile talent development program is fully functioning and producing measurable results in terms of attracting and acquiring new talent, providing enablement training for various roles, and aligning performance measurements to our outcomes and team goals.
How frequently do the teams measure their health & maturity and how committed are the teams and your leaders to growth and improvement?
Pre-Crawl (1-2): Our teams don’t measure or assess their maturity/health. There is some resistance and lack of understanding of the value of measurement, maybe even some fear.
Crawl (3-4): Our teams have completed one or two assessments. Some improvements were captured but without clear tracking of progress against them.
Walk (5-6): Our teams perform team health assessments every 6 months and we make some progress against growth plans.
Run (7-8): Our teams invest in assessing and improving their maturity and health each quarter. Our leaders are committed to removing organizational obstacles we identify.
Fly (9-10): Our teams measure their team health quarterly and perform shorter lightweight pulse checks in between. We've seen real growth across our teams and are committed to continuous improvement.
How effective is your growth and obstacle removal process at all levels?
Pre-Crawl (1-2): Our teams don’t track their obstacles very well nor do we have a cadence to gather these obstacles from the teams.
Crawl (3-4): Teams are regularly identifying and tracking obstacles and items for improvement but most of them come from coaches, managers and leaders. We are not consolidating and analyzing the obstacles to identify patterns and root causes.
Walk (5-6): We have established a growth leadership team at the Team-of-Teams level that is focused on removing obstacles. This team is made up of the right roles needed (management, coaches or leaders) and they are resolving some issues.
Run (7-8): Our growth leadership teams are regularly removing obstacles and providing transparency to their efforts. For issues they are not able to resolve, we have educated and engaged senior leaders & executives to remove enterprise obstacles.
Fly (9-10): We have achieved significant growth and progress as a direct result of our focus on growth and removing obstacles at all levels. Leaders and teams demo their growth progress each quarter and celebrate successes.
Build Internal Change Agents:
How well are we building internal change agents/coaches for sustainability?
Pre-Crawl (1-2): We don’t have enough internal coaches to support us as we scale over time. We have not created a sustainability plan to build our internal capacity for coaching and support.
Crawl (3-4): We have identified and trained (or hired) a couple internal people as coaches and have assigned them to specific roles or teams. We have started discussions on sustainability but don’t have a plan in place yet.
Walk (5-6): We have a sustainability plan in place and we are beginning to grow our internal coaching capacity. We have engaged key roles (such as scrum-master, manager, and RTE) to spend a percentage of their time on-boarding and coaching others on the new ways of working.
Run (7-8): We are making progress and have a proven sustainability program in place that is growing internal change agents and integrating coaching into leadership roles.
Fly (9-10): Leaders and change agents spend significant time coaching on the new ways of working and helping others to coach and mentor. Our sustainability program is self-sustaining.
Add any additional thoughts about "Make it Stick - Make it Stick"
Vision & Architecture:
To what extent do we have a clear vision and an architecture that supports the new ways of working?
Pre-Crawl (1-2): Our architecture uses little or no design patterns, has lots of code redundancy, and is not well suited for technology agility. We lack standards and practices and developers often implement very different solutions to similar problems.
Crawl (3-4): We have started to build a vision and direction for improving our architecture and built a basic framework that helps us identify capability challenges and gaps. We are beginning to use design patterns, but there is still a lack of adherence by all developers.
Walk (5-6): We have a tiered architecture that is loosely coupled through the use of dependency injection. We follow well established design patterns, and a design principle such as BDD or TDD.
Run (7-8): We have a highly modularized solution that separates concerns and is loosely coupled through dependency injection. We can easily change or swap components with affecting other areas of the application.
Fly (9-10):We have a highly modularized solution that separates concerns and is loosely coupled through dependency injection. We are able to deploy and update our application without deploying the entire solution.
How far are we towards adopting mature engineering practices across our teams?
Pre-Crawl (1-2): We haven't defined our coding practices; developers use what works for them.
Crawl (3-4): We've defined some standard coding practices but adoption of them is inconsistent. We don't have regular design sessions nor anyone accountable for this.
Walk (5-6): We've defined our core front end, service layer and database development practices. We've gained consensus on them and have a focused effort on getting all team members to adopt them.
Run (7-8): All team members have been adopting our standard practices with good results. We still have a few areas that need to be optimized and we remain focused on this.
Fly (9-10): We've seen significant positive business impact from the use of our standing engineering practices. We're constantly inspecting and improving these.
invested in maturing your teams from a DevOps perspective?
(1-2): We do not have a strategy for DevOps.
Crawl (3-4): We have done
basic training on DevOps, have a defined strategy how we will use it and some
teams (~10%) are piloting it.
Walk (5-6): Several teams within our line
of business are adopting DevOps practices and we are starting to track
Run (7-8): We have fully embraced DevOps
practices and culture; 50% of our teams are at run/fly
Fly (9-10): We have gained measurable results in terms
of flow, quality, speed to market; 75% of our teams are at run/fly maturity.
Add any additional thoughts about "Technology Agility - Technology Agility"
What metrics do we use to measure our Enterprise Business Agility success?
Speed to Market:
Are we delivering fast enough to remain competitive in our marketplace?
Pre-Crawl (1-2): We are too slow and miss many market opportunities. Customers are frustrated, and we are at risk of being disrupted.
Crawl (3-4): We have identified the gaps and have a strategy to reduce our overall time to deliver value. We're at the early stages of executing and haven't seen results yet.
Walk (5-6): We've made progress but still deliver a little later than our customers and business leaders want us to deliver. We feel we're still not responding quickly enough to the market's needs.
Run (7-8): We deliver as quickly as our customers want us to. They are very happy with our time to value.
Fly (9-10): We anticipate our customer and market needs and deliver ahead of their expectation and our competitors.
Feature Lead Time:
How long would it take us to deliver a highly ranked medium sized deliverable/feature?
Pre-Crawl (1-2): within 12 weeks
Crawl (3-4): within 8 weeks
Walk (5-6): within 6 weeks
Run (7-8): within 4 weeks
Fly (9-10): within 2 weeks
How many features/deliverables of value does a mature team release each quarter on average?
Pre-Crawl (1-2): Our mature teams can deliver 1-2 features per quarter.
Crawl (3-4): Our mature teams can deliver 2- 4 features per quarter.
Walk (5-6): Our mature teams can deliver 4 - 6 features per quarter.
Run (7-8): Our mature teams can deliver 6 - 8+ features per quarter.
Fly (9-10): Our mature teams can deliver 8 - 10+ features per quarter.
How often does your team deliver/release value to your customers?
Pre-Crawl (1-2): We deliver value/release every 3+ months.
Crawl (3-4): We deliver value/release every 1 - 3 months.
Walk (5-6): We deliver value/release every 2 weeks.
Run (7-8): We deliver value/release every week.
Fly (9-10): We deliver value/release daily and continuously.
Lead Time to Value:
How long would it take us to launch an MVP or new capability that is medium size and prioritized to the market?
Pre-Crawl (1-2): within 6+ months
Crawl (3-4): within 5 months
Walk (5-6): within 4 month
Run (7-8): within 3 months
Fly (9-10): within 8 - 10 weeks
How many teams does it take to complete a feature on average?
Pre-Crawl(1-2): We don’t track the number of teams needed to complete one feature.
Crawl(3-4): 5+ teams
Walk(5-6): 3-4 teams
Run(7-8): 2 teams
Fly(9-10): 1 team
Quality Satisfaction Rating:
How satisfied are you and your customers with the quality delivered by your organization?
10 = Extremely happy, 5 = Neither happy nor unhappy, 1 = Extremely unhappy
Escaped Defects Reduction:
By what % have you reduced the number of escaped customer defects/issues compared to your baseline?
Pre-Crawl (1-2): We don’t measure or track escaped customer defects/issues, OR we’ve reduced it by 25%+
Crawl (3-4): We have reduced escaped customer defects by 50%+
Walk (5-6): We have reduced escaped customer defects by 75%+
Run (7-8): We have reduced escaped customer defects by 90%+
Fly (9-10): We have eliminated all customer facing escaped defects
Business Outcome Delivery:
How well does your team deliver on-target outcomes? Please use real data from last quarter's performance on OKRs.
Pre-Crawl (1-2): We don’t define clear business outcomes or we deliver less than 30% of our planned outcomes.
Crawl (3-4): We deliver 50%+ of our planned outcomes.
Walk (5-6): We deliver 60%+ of our planned outcomes.
Run (7-8): We deliver 75%+ of our planned outcomes.
Fly (9-10): We deliver 95%+ of our planned outcomes.
Financial Target Achievement:
To what extent are we meeting our current business and financial targets?
Pre-Crawl (1-2): We are meeting 50% or less of our business and financial targets.
Crawl (3-4): We are meeting 60% of our business and financial targets.
Walk (5-6): We are meeting 75% of our business and financial targets.
Run (7-8): We are meeting 90% of our business and financial targets.
Fly (9-10): We are meeting 100%+ of our business and financial targets.
How much have we improved over our baseline performance?
Pre-Crawl (1-2): There are no baseline for cost metrics to use.
Crawl (3-4): We have improved 10% over our baseline performance.
Walk (5-6): We have improved 15% over our baseline performance.
Run (7-8): We have improved 20% over our baseline performance.
Fly (9-10): We have improved 30%+ over our baseline performance.
Customer Satisfaction (NPS):
From a scale of 1 to 10, what is your current customer satisfaction/NPS score?
This comes from a survey or interviews with customers (internal or external) who work with your team.
Employee Satisfaction (eNPS):
From a scale of 1 to 10, what is our current employee satisfaction/NPS score?
Select N/A if not sure.
How many total # of points (or # of work items) were delivered by all teams in your organization compared to baseline?
Pre-Crawl (1-2): We don’t measure total throughput OR We’ve increase total throughput by 15%.
Crawl (3-4): We’ve increase total throughput by 25%.
Walk (5-6): We’ve increased total throughput by 50%.
Run (7-8): We’ve doubled the total throughput (2X).
Fly (9-10): We’ve tripled the total throughput (3X).
Add any additional thoughts about "Agility Metrics - Agility Metrics"
What are the top strengths of this team? What value has this team delivered? Share this team's strengths and success stories you want to celebrate!
What are this team's growth opportunities? Think of areas that could significantly improve the overall team's performance if they were addressed.
What are the significant impediments this team has been experiencing? Some may be team related and some may be organizational.