Tailored Project Management Framework from SCRUM and Lean ... Tailored Project Management Framework

download Tailored Project Management Framework from SCRUM and Lean ... Tailored Project Management Framework

If you can't read please download the document

  • date post

    07-Jun-2020
  • Category

    Documents

  • view

    1
  • download

    0

Embed Size (px)

Transcript of Tailored Project Management Framework from SCRUM and Lean ... Tailored Project Management Framework

  • AALBORG UNIVERSITY

    MASTER’S THESIS

    Tailored Project Management Framework from SCRUM and Lean Practices: Case Study of Two Colombian Companies

    Author: Perttu Villehard PUONTI

    Supervisor: Kjeld NIELSEN

    Co-Supervisor: Jesper Kranker LARSEN

    A thesis submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Engineering

    in the

    Faculty of Engineering and Science Department of Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering

    June 2, 2017

    http://www.en.aau.dk/ http://www.en.engineering.aau.dk/ http://www.m-tech.aau.dk/

  • iii

    Declaration of Authorship I, Perttu Villehard PUONTI, declare that this thesis titled, “Tailored Project Manage- ment Framework from SCRUM and Lean Practices: Case Study of Two Colombian Companies” and the work presented in it are my own. I confirm that:

    • This work was done wholly or mainly while in candidature for a Master’s degree at this University.

    • Where any part of this thesis has previously been submitted for a degree or any other qualification at this University or any other institution, this has been clearly stated.

    • Where I have consulted the published work of others, this is always clearly attributed.

    • Where I have quoted from the work of others, the source is always given. With the exception of such quotations, this thesis is entirely my own work.

    • I have acknowledged all main sources of help.

    • Where the thesis is based on work done by myself jointly with others, I have made clear exactly what was done by others and what I have contributed my- self.

    Signed: Perttu Villehard Puonti

    Date: 01.06.2017

  • v

    “Don’t gain the world and lose your soul; wisdom is better than silver or gold.”

    Bob Marley

  • vii

    Aalborg University

    Abstract Faculty of Engineering and Science

    Department of Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering

    Master of Science in Engineering

    Tailored Project Management Framework from SCRUM and Lean Practices: Case Study of Two Colombian Companies

    by Perttu Villehard PUONTI

    This Thesis is an Agile project management framework tailoring study for two small Colombian companies; Canned Head Studios and Diip. The first company prac- tices software development and the other film production. Furthermore, only the post-production process from Diip is under study which resembles software devel- opment process.

    In the recent years many different project management methodologies have emerged to support the software development process. Out of all the methodologies, of which there are plenty, Scrum has been the most used by practitioners and most studied by academicians (Theocharis et al., 2015). More recently, the Scrum methodology has received opposition stating that pure Scrum only benefits the quality and require- ments of project success, leaving the project cost and time unchanged. It has been proposed that Lean Software Development methodology tailored with Scrum could solve this problem (Uikey and Suman, 2016).

    In this study a tailoring method is created based on literature and aided by the case study method to find which project management methodologies tailored to- gether are most suitable to address the project management problems faced at the two case companies. As it turns out, the two most beneficial methodologies are Scrum and Lean Software Development. This finding supports the statements found in literature but also opens some necessary research steps for the future which are discussed in the Discussion Chapter.

    Keywords: Agile Project Management, Scrum, Lean Software Development, Project Management Methodology Tailoring

    http://www.en.aau.dk/ http://www.en.engineering.aau.dk/ http://www.m-tech.aau.dk/

  • ix

    Acknowledgements I would like to give my greatest gratitudes to the thesis supervisors Jesper Kranker Larsen and Kjeld Nielsen. Jesper was flexible with his schedule and we managed to have frequent video call meetings regardless of the time difference between us – me being in Colombia and him being in Denmark. The advices given by Jesper kept the thesis moving forward fluently. Kjeld Nielsen was the main supervisor and without his influence this work would not have been possible.

    I give high praise to all the people involved with the case companies. The Colom- bian entrepreneurial atmosphere, which I was surrounded by for my time at the companies, was exhilarating and it gave me the inspiration to keep writing with a smile on my face. After only hours of my arrival to the office building I felt wel- comed and at home. I would like to give special thanks to the founders of Canned Head Studios; Sergio Rodriguez, Juan-David Florez, Julían Martínez, and to the founder of Diip; Oscar Otero. They and the employees were most helpful and coop- erative during my stay – I wish I could have stayed longer.

  • xi

    Contents

    Declaration of Authorship iii

    Abstract vii

    Acknowledgements ix

    1 Introduction 1 1.1 Background to the Problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1.2 Problem Definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1.3 Purpose of the Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1.4 Importance of the Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1.5 Proposed Solution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1.6 Scope of Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1.7 Assumptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 1.8 Limitations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 1.9 Delimitations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

    2 Literature Review 9 2.1 Agile Project Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

    2.1.1 Umbrella Term: Agile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 2.1.2 Agile Software Development Manifesto . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 2.1.3 Agile over Traditional Project Management . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

    2.2 Scrum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 2.2.1 Introduction to Scrum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 2.2.2 Scrum Functionality: Previous Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 2.2.3 Scrum Theory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 2.2.4 Scrum Culture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 2.2.5 Before Scrum Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

    2.3 Lean Project Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 2.3.1 Continuous Improvement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 2.3.2 Value Stream Mapping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 2.3.3 Pareto Chart . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 2.3.4 Cause-and-Effect Diagram . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 2.3.5 Kanban . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 2.3.6 Just-in-Time . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 2.3.7 5S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 2.3.8 Lean over Scrum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 2.3.9 Scrumban and Conclusion to Lean . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

    2.4 Tailoring Project Management Methodologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

    3 Problem Formulation 29 3.1 Problem Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 3.2 Research Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

  • xii

    4 Theoretical Framework 31 4.1 Research Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 4.2 Case Study Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 4.3 Quantitative Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 4.4 Conducting Interviews . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 4.5 Metrics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

    5 Case Studies 39 5.1 Introduction to Case Companies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

    5.1.1 Canned Head Studios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 5.1.2 Challenges faced by Canned Head . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 5.1.3 Diip . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44

    5.2 Collected Data and Analyses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 5.2.1 Interviews . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 5.2.2 Questionnaire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 5.2.3 Observations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46

    5.3 Data Analysis with R-Studio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 5.3.1 Collected Results from Data Analyses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52

    6 Tailored Framework 55 6.1 Selecting the Methodologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 6.2 Selecting the Tools and Practices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57

    7 Discussion of Findings 59 7.1 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 7.2 Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60

    7.2.1 Implementation Effort . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 7.3 Future Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61

    A Canned Head Studios Project Process Flo