The Microsoft Solution Delivery Lifecycle

Experience has shown that solution delivery challenges are easier to manage if a team segments them into workable pieces, starting with two parts as shown in Figure 6-2. The first part deals with challenges associated with defining and building a solution. The second part deals with challenges associated with keeping it up and running.

Figure 6-2. Decomposition of solution delivery

Rather than providing another limited-scope methodology, Microsoft offers two interrelated frameworks to address these two parts, as depicted in Figure 6-3. Both frameworks use proven practices from Microsoft, its partners, its customers, and industry expertise. Whereas the Microsoft Solutions Framework (MSF) addresses solution definition and development, the Microsoft Operations Framework (MOF) addresses solution operations and sustainment. Although very important to the successful delivery of a solution in that a team designs a solution to address the qualities of service (e.g., availability) optimally, MOF is only lightly addressed in this book. For more information on MOF, please see the sidebar titled "MSF and Microsoft Operations Framework" that follows.

Figure 6-3. The Microsoft Solution Delivery Lifecycle

MSF and Microsoft Operations Framework

Whereas MSF is focused on defining, building, and deploying solutions, Microsoft Operations Framework (MOF), a related framework, is focused on making sure a solution operates optimally (i.e., use MSF to build it right and MOF to run it right).

MOF provides operational guidance that enables organizations to achieve mission-critical system reliability, availability, supportability, and manageability of Microsoft products and technologies. MOF is based on an internationally accepted set of IT service management best practices called the IT Infrastructure Library (ITIL) from the U.K. government's Office of Government Commerce (OGC). MOF is best viewed as a superset of the ITIL standards.

MOF provides operational guidance in the form of white papers, operations guides, assessment tools, best practices, case studies, templates, support tools, courseware, and services. This guidance addresses the people, process, technology, and management issues pertaining to complex, distributed, and heterogeneous technology environments.

Microsoft created MOF by using lessons learned through the evolution of MSF, building on top of ITIL's best practice for organizational structure and process ownership, and modeling the critical success factors used by partners, customers, and Microsoft's internal Operations and Technology Group (OTG).

MSF and MOF share foundational principles and core disciplines. They differ in their application of these principles and disciplines, each using unique Team and Governance Models and proven practices that are specific to their respective domains. MSF presents team structure and activities from a solution delivery perspective, whereas MOF presents team structure and activities from a service management perspective. In MSF, the emphasis is on projects; in MOF, it is on running the production environment. MSF and MOF provide an interface between a solution development domain and a solution operations domain.

MSF and MOF are designed to be used in conjunction throughout the technology life cycle to provide business-driven technology solutions successfullyfrom inception to delivery through operations to final retirement. MSF and MOF are intended for use within the typical organizational structures that exist in businesses today; they collectively describe how diverse departments work together to achieve common business goals in a mutually supportive environment.

For more information on MOF, see http://www.microsoft.com/mof.

Foundational Principles Applied to Solution Delivery Lifecycle

The Microsoft Solution Delivery Lifecycle is grounded in MSF's foundational principles. Adherence to these principles enables the Microsoft Solution Delivery Lifecycle to provide the right guidance to the right people at the right time. An understanding of these principles enables customization of the life cycle to fit an organization and its inherent processes optimally.

Foster Open Communications

As discussed, the Microsoft Solution Delivery Lifecycle contains two symbiotic frameworks that are based on openly sharing design, development, deployment, and sustainment information. This open flow of information helps to deliver a solution that not only meets stakeholder needs but also is operationally viable, sustainable, and supportable.

Work Toward a Shared Vision

The structure of the life cycle is established to reach a shared vision incrementally through input and consensus from all advocacy groups. It is expected that initially the vision of a solution might not be complete and perfect. A shared vision is something that is initially defined and then evolves as a better understanding of a solution and how to deliver it unfolds through an iterative approach. What is important is that it is clearly and commonly understood, regardless of its completeness.

Empower Team Members

Typically, empowerment needs to be earned. Incrementally delivering a solution provides repeated opportunities to demonstrate reliability and dependabilitykey ingredients for empowerment. It also provides opportunities to learn and grow. This minimizes readiness gaps that might have hindered others from empowering specific team members.

Once team members have been empowered, the Microsoft Solution Delivery Lifecycle provides many areas of self-governance. Activities and deliverables are coordinated by using checkpoints as opposed to low-level management of team member activities.

Establish Clear Accountability, Shared Responsibility

As discussed in detail in later chapters, each aspect of the Solution Delivery Lifecycle has singular accountability supported by shared responsibility. Supporting this concept, MSF instills checkpoint-driven accountability. Although one advocacy group is accountable for the successful achievement of each checkpoint, achieving success takes a coordinated effort and shared responsibility with the other advocacy groups.

Deliver Incremental Value

The incremental approach built into the Microsoft Solution Delivery Lifecycle provides for incremental delivery of value. Each enactment track is focused on incrementally evolving a solution while maximizing business value. Further supporting this idea, each track involves multiple solution iterations to enable rapid and agile replanning should what is being delivered not meet stakeholder needs and expectations. Having a shippable solution at every iteration is an important part of helping validate a solution and its requirements and to gain support from stakeholders.

Stay Agile, Expect and Adapt to Change

The Microsoft Solution Delivery Lifecycle and subordinate MSF Governance Model are structured to provide just enough process and guidance to help teams deliver successfully. Given that no two solutions, projects, teams, subteams, and so forth are alike, the Solution Delivery Lifecycle and Governance Model were designed to allow a team to adapt them to provide the necessary level of process formality and rigor.

The integration of the MSF Governance Model with the MSF Team Model makes a formidable combination for project success if effectively instilled into an organization. Collectively, they provide flexible but defined road maps for successful project delivery that takes into account the uniqueness of an organization's culture, project types, and personnel strengths.

Invest in Quality

Although it might seem counterintuitive that an agile approach to solution delivery such as MSF should have so many checkpoints and deliverables, the Solution Delivery Lifecycle is structured to be lightweight and flexible. Should something become too overtaxing or burdensome, adapt it to be more amenable. Continue to improve portions of the life cycle that provide value and either "fix" or eliminate portions that do not. With an incremental delivery approach, many opportunities to refine project processes and solution quality exist.

Learn from All Experiences

Teams that commit time in the schedule for learning and reviews create an environment of ongoing improvement and continuing success. In addition, one of the ways Microsoft is successful in creating a culture that is willing to learn is by adding learning and knowledge sharing as part of individual review goals.

An iterative approach to solution delivery provides many opportunities to learn and experiment. It also enables team members to hone their skills to improve their readiness.

Partner with Customers

The iterative nature of the Microsoft Solutions Delivery Lifecycle provides many opportunities to collaborate with customers and solicit their feedback. Each checkpoint provides an opportunity to review progress against planned work as well as review and provide feedback on what was built thus far. It is unfortunate that sometimes project teams wait to engage with customers well into a life cycle.

An iterative approach also enables customers to refine and even change their minds as to what is required of a solution. Sometimes they might also redefine "value." Too often, project teams are not agile enough to be able to respond to these types of customer feedback.

Solution Delivery Lifecycle Fundamentals

Every project needs some means to identify, govern, and guide all project activities needed to translate business needs into a deployed solution. As a team better understands their solution delivery life cycle, they are able to identify how their project needs to be governed given organizational and project constraints. Working through project particulars, they are able to define their governance and project process activities as well as the order in which the activities are performed (i.e., a governance model). An appropriate governance model provides many benefits, including the following:

• Streamlines a project

• Guides and coordinates the flow of activity

• Helps drive a project closer to successful completion

• Accelerates orderly production of project deliverables

• Keeps solution aligned with business objectives

• Provides a means of keeping projects on track

• Increases predictability and visibility

• Provides a phased transition to operations

The following sections discuss a few key aspects of a solution delivery life cycle.

How Much Governance Is Needed? How Much Is Too Much?

To answer the questions about how much governance is required, how much is healthy, how much is helpful, and so forth, try to understand what works for each team member up through what works for the enterprise. The trick is to find a dynamic way to balance between formality and unconstrained thinking at all levels of an organization with the goal being to optimize team productivity and delivery predictability. Because each team is different, each team needs to find their optimum in concert with defining what is best for the enterprise.

Another aspect to consider in determining how much governance is needed is to think about the costs associated with the degree of governance. Consider not only the cost of implementing governance but also its impact on the costs of delivery enactment and change management. For example, light governance might enable a team to be more agile but might require more mature enactment, which typically involves more senior staff (i.e., higher labor costs). It also likely involves more change. Conversely, governance that is more rigorous might extend the schedule but might lessen the demands on enactment and minimize change.

Start Working and Delivering as Soon as Possible

Regardless of whether a team tends to be more agile-oriented or more plan-oriented, MSF espouses that stakeholders like to see progress and like solutions delivered as soon as possible with the expected features and within budget. In understanding what solution delivery life cycle and corresponding governance model is right for a team, try to understand team member capabilities, project constraints, and a realistic sense of process maturity for both an organization and a team.

Clarity Point

The goal is not to deliver a partial solution quickly. The goal is to start validating all aspects of a solution quickly through incremental delivery.

Good Implementation Is Essential

You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink.

Defining a great life cycle and governance model is nothing without successful implementation of various activities embodied within a governance model. In other words, a well-crafted life cycle is useless if a team is not able to execute. This is why it is essential to have a life cycle and governance model that fit a team's abilities and are adaptable to the changing delivery landscape. Keep in mind that it is possible to implement a solution successfully without a good governance modelthe converse is unfortunately not true (i.e., a good governance model does not ensure a successful implementation).