agile alm tool comparison
Post on 15-Jan-2015
9.592 Views
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
Vendor Landscape: Agile ALM
Info-Tech Research Group 1
Vendor Landscape: Agile ALM
ALMs for the poor, and for the rich.
As development platforms, coding methodologies, and devices increase in number, Agile Application Life Management (ALM) tools support integrations with an ever-increasing range of systems.
Introduction
� Enterprises seeking to select a solution for Agile Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) technology
This Research Is Designed For: This Research Will Help You:
�Understand what’s new in the Agile ALM market.
� Evaluate Agile ALM vendors and products for your
Info-Tech Research Group 2
� Their Agile ALM use case may include:
• Providing testing support for a quality-centric development environment.
• Supporting Agile development.
• Integrating lifecycle management with Integrated Development Environments.
� Evaluate Agile ALM vendors and products for your enterprise needs.
�Determine which products are most appropriate for particular use cases and scenarios.
Executive Summary
Info-Tech evaluated eight competitors in the Agile ALM market, including the following notable performers:
Champions:
• CollabNet TeamForge, a comprehensive, full-featured ALM tool at a reasonable price. Despite its impressive range of offerings, CollabNet supports the SMB.
• Micro Focus Borland ALM, a long-standing leader in the market with a broad feature offering and strong product support.
• Serena Suite, a robust offering backed by strong customer support and a broad reseller network.
1. ALM and BPM start to intermingle:
Premium offerings give the ability to customize process. Evaluate your need for, and the cost of, process customization before you make your purchase.
2. The range of platforms is growing:
Premium products support development
Info-Tech Insight
Info-Tech Research Group 3
support and a broad reseller network.
Value Award:
• TechExcel DevSuite, a comprehensive offering with a price tag far below its comparable competitors.
Premium products support development across the growing range of platforms and development methodologies, including mobile, web, and infrastructure.
3. New entrants offer attractive options:
Niche offerings can serve your needs at a fraction of the cost of a premium tool. For example, consider specialized tools for Agile and testing integration.
Market Overview
• Long-standing vendors in the ALM space can trace their roots to the 1980s, or even earlier.
• Since the 1990s, ALM tools have played a key part in the project manager’s arsenal, allowing him or her to track project status and progress towards objectives.
• Managers have paid top dollar for ALM suites that could track project data and provide meaningful reporting.
• Agile ALM has moved into the Cloud. Major vendors of cloud collaboration software have moved into the ALM space and new SaaS-only ALM tools have appeared.
• Process flexibility has become key. Instead of a strict adherence to Agile or waterfall development, most firms have pursued a middle path and customized their methodology to meet their own needs. Some Agile ALM tools cater to the need for flexibility.
How it got here Where it’s going
Info-Tech Research Group 4
track project data and provide meaningful reporting.
• As development environments have evolved, the tools and components being used to manage this process have grown to become integrated and convenient, covering all phases of the development lifecycle including architecture, testing, and deployment with a single common interface.
Agile ALM tools cater to the need for flexibility.
• Quality control has become a core part of ALM. Several major ALM tools are built around testing tools and process maturity.
• Going forward, expect stronger integration between ALM tools and the ecosystem of products supporting development, such as testing, PLM tools, and IDEs.
As the market evolves, capabilities that were once cutting edge become default, and new functionality becomes differentiating. Traceability has become a table stakes capability and should no longer be used to differentiate solutions. Instead, focus on workflow and reporting to get the best fit for your requirements.
Agile ALM Vendor Landscape selection / knock-out criteria:Market share, mind share, and market consolidation
• CollabNet TeamForge. A relatively recent entrant with a strong offering and a reasonable price tag.
• Micro Focus Borland ALM. A large, ALM-focused vendor that provides strong support for its product.
Included in the Vendor Landscape:
• The Agile ALM space continues to see new entrants, new products, and new features. Ongoing demand for development on mobile and web platforms creates new opportunities for vendors focused on a particular market niche.
• For this Vendor Landscape, Info-Tech focused on those vendors that have a strong market presence and/or reputational presence among small to mid-sized enterprises.
Info-Tech Research Group 5
• PTC Integrity. A strong ALM offering tightly integrated into a PLM platform.
• Parasoft Concerto. A product targeted towards development shops with a high level of process maturity.
• Serena Suite. The complete ALM package controlled by a complete business process engine.
• SmarteSoft SmartSuite. ALM tools built around a quality-control platform.
• TechExcel DevSuite. A flexible tool that supports development on a variety of platforms.
• ThoughtWorks Suite (Mingle, Twist, Go). A strong, Agile-focused product offering that provides some flexibility
within the Agile framework.
Agile ALM Criteria & Weighting Factors
30%
20%20%
30%Features Usability
AffordabilityArchitecture
50%
Product
Product Evaluation
The five year TCO of the solution is economical.
Affordability
The delivery method of the solution aligns with what is expected within the space.
Architecture
The solution’s dashboard and reporting tools are intuitive and easy to use.
Usability
The solution provides basic and advanced feature/functionality.
Features
Info-Tech Research Group 6
50%
Vendor
Vendor Evaluation
Vendor is committed to the space and has a future product and portfolio roadmap.
Strategy
Vendor offers global coverage and is able to sell and provide post-sales support.
Reach
Vendor is profitable, knowledgeable, and will be around for the long term.
Viability
Vendor channel strategy is appropriate and the channels themselves are strong.
Channel
what is expected within the space.Architecture
30%
30%
15%
25%Viability Strategy
ReachChannel
The Info-Tech Agile ALM Vendor Landscape
Champions receive high scores for most evaluation criteria and offer excellent value. They have a strong market presence and are usually the trend setters for the industry.
Innovators have demonstrated innovative product strengths that act as their competitive advantage in appealing to niche segments of the market.
Market Pillars are established players with very strong vendor credentials, but with
Info-Tech Research Group 7
very strong vendor credentials, but with more average product scores.
Emerging players are newer vendors who are starting to gain a foothold in the marketplace. They balance product and vendor attributes, though score lower relative to market Champions.
For an explanation of how the Info-Tech Vendor Landscape is created please see the slide entitled “Vendor Evaluation Methodology” in the appendix.
Every vendor has its strengths & weaknesses;Pick the one that works best for you
Product Vendor
Features UsabilityAfford-ability
Viability Strategy Channel
Micro Focus
PTC
CollabNet
ReachArchi-tecture
Overall Overall
Info-Tech Research Group 8
SmarteSoft
Parasoft
Serena
TechExcel
ThoughtWorks
For an explanation of how the Info-Tech Harvey Balls are calculated please see the slide entitled “Vendor Evaluation Methodology” in the appendix.
Legend =Exemplary =Good =Adequate =Inadequate =Poor
What is a Value Score?
TechExcel captures the highest value score with a comprehensive, affordable offering
The Value Score indexes each vendor’s product offering and business strength relative to their price point. It does not indicate vendor ranking.
Vendors that score high offer more bang for the buck (e.g. features, usability, stability, etc.) than the average vendor, while the inverse is true for those that score lower.
On a relative basis, TechExcel maintained the highest Info-Tech Value ScoreTM of the vendor group. Vendors were indexed against TechExcel’s performance to provide a complete, relative view of their product offerings.
Champion
Info-Tech Research Group 9
*Thought-Works
0
*Parasoft
0
*PTC
0
Micro Focus
13
SmarteSoft
22
Serena
55
CollabNet
64
TechExcel
100
Average Score: 31.5
Price-conscious enterprises may wish to give the Value Score more consideration than those who are more focused on specific vendor/product attributes.
For an explanation of how the Info-Tech Value Index is calculated please see the slide entitled “Value Index Ranking Methodology” in the appendix.
For an explanation of how normalized pricing is determined please see the slide entitled “Product Pricing Scenario & Methodology” in the appendix.
*Vendor declined to provide pricing.
Table Stakes represent the minimum standard; without these a product doesn’t even get reviewed
The products assessed in this Vendor LandscapeTM meet, at the very least, the requirements outlined as Table Stakes.
Many of the vendors go above and beyond the outlined Table Stakes, some even do so in multiple categories. This section aims to highlight the products capabilities in excess of the criteria
The Table Stakes What Does This Mean?
Feature Description
Basic task management
The product allows the user to createtasks, assign resources to those tasks, and view project status reporting.
Graphical displays The product displays tasks and other objects as editable, graphical objects.
Info-Tech Research Group 10
If Table Stakes are all you need from your Agile ALM solution, the only true differentiator for the organization is price. Otherwise, dig deeper to find the best price to value for your needs.
the products capabilities in excess of the criteria listed here. Traceability The product ties together objects created
at various stages of the lifecycle, showing how tasks relate to requirements, etc.
Links to external documents
The product allows the user to link to external documents for requirements and other content.
Central data store The product stores data in a centralized repository, not on local disk.
Advanced Features are the market differentiators that make or break a product
Feature What We Looked For
Requirements Management
Users can enter requirements in a hierarchical structure.
Change Management The product packages and traces changes.
Workflow The product provides automated workflow.
Source Code Management
The product manages source code or integrates with SCM solutions.
Advanced Features
Info-Tech scored each vendor’s features offering as a summation of their individual scores across the listed advanced features. Vendors were given one point for each feature the product inherently provided. Some categories were scored on a more granular scale with vendors receiving half points.
Scoring Methodology
Info-Tech Research Group 11
Management integrates with SCM solutions.
Task Management The product manages timelines and tasks.
Testing The product provides test management.
Defect/Bug Tracking The product manages and traces defects.
Resource Management
The product permissions users to edit objects and evaluates resource capacity.
Reporting & Analytics The product analyzes project progress and provides meaningful reporting.
Release Management The product helps with release planning.
Content Management The product organizes documents.
Each vendor offers a different feature set; concentrate on what you need
Collab-Net
PTC
MicroFocus
Req. Mgmt
Work-flow
Task Mgmt
TestingRes. Mgmt
Defect Track
SCMReport-
ingRel.
MgmtContent Mgmt
Evaluated FeaturesChangeMgmt
Info-Tech Research Group 12
Parasoft
Serena
Smarte-Soft
Tech-Excel
Thought-Works
=Feature absent=Feature partially present/pending=Feature fully presentLegend
Product:Employees:
Headquarters:Website:
Founded:Presence:
TeamForgeUnavailableBrisbane, CACollab.net1999Private company
CollabNet offers a strong product with a broad range of features and a reasonable price tag
Champion• A recent entrant to the ALM space (but in SCM since 1999),
CollabNet offers the range of functionality normally expected by large organizations, but targets the SMB market with a relatively affordable price tag.
Overview
• TeamForge provides all of the functionality associated with full-featured ALM, from requirements through to release.
• Despite its robust offering and some well-known clients, CollabNet has a large number of SMB clients as well.
• CollabNet has strong support offerings, both for its clients and
Strengths
Info-Tech Research Group 13
$1
Info-Tech Recommends:
CollabNet offers a very strong product at a reasonable price, supported by a recognized vendor in the source code management space.
• CollabNet has strong support offerings, both for its clients and its channel partners.
• CollabNet’s limited revenue and emphasis on North America sales restricts its global reach. However, the company has experienced strong revenue growth.
• TeamForge’s native resource management solution lacks functionality, although it offers basic capacity management.
Challenges
3 Year TCO: Tier 8; between $250K and $500K
$1M+
Product:Employees:
Headquarters:Website:
Founded:Presence:
Borland ALM1,200Newbury, UKmicrofocus.com1976LON: MCROFY11 Revenue: $436M
Micro Focus provides full-featured ALM with strong customer and reseller support
Champion• With 30 years of experience in application management, Micro
Focus continues to lead the market with a strong offering.
Overview
• The Borland ALM suite benefits from Micro Focus’s strong global reach and extensive experience in ALM.
• Micro Focus combines large size with a focus on ALM.• Micro Focus offers strong support for its products, including
multi-language, 24x7 support.
Strengths
Info-Tech Research Group 14
Info-Tech Recommends:
Organizations seeking a premium product and willing to pay a substantial amount should consider Micro Focus.
multi-language, 24x7 support.• Micro Focus’s reseller networks stretch across four continents.
• The Borland ALM suite excludes some key functionality such as resource utilization management, assuming that the user will integrate with a project management tool.
• Borland ALM does not have burn-down reports or agile task management reporting.
Challenges
$1
3 Year TCO: Tier 8; between $250K and $500K
$1M+
Product:Employees:
Headquarters:Website:
Founded:Presence:
Serena Suite700Redwood City, CAserena.com1980Private company
Serena provides all the ALM tools, packaged within a powerful process orchestration engine
Champion• Serena continues to achieve competitive differentiation
through its Serena Business Manager, a full-fledged process management solution that orchestrates development.
Overview
• Serena includes all of the functionality associated with full-featured ALM, from requirements to release management.
• Serena has proven longevity in the ALM space, having entered the market over 30 years ago.
• Serena’s support offices and reseller network stretch across
Strengths
Info-Tech Research Group 15
Info-Tech Recommends:
Serena will make sense for organizations needing a high level of process customizability and workflow, and willing to make a substantial investment.
• Serena’s support offices and reseller network stretch across four continents. Support is available in ten languages.
• Serena support centers provide only callback service on weekends.
Challenges
$1
3 Year TCO: Tier 8; between $250K and $500K
$1M+
Product:Employees:
Headquarters:Website:
Founded:Presence:
DevSuite155Lafayette, CAtechexcel.com1999Private company
TechExcel offers flexibility and a range of ALM features; support offering is weak
Innovator• Despite being a long-standing player in the ALM business,
TechExcel has only a small share of the market.
Overview
• DevSuite includes most of the functionality associated with full-featured ALM, from requirements to task management.
• DevSuite offers a high degree of flexibility, making it useful for development on a range of platforms.
• TechExcel integrates with a variety of development tools and
Strengths
Info-Tech Research Group 16
Info-Tech Recommends:
Organizations seeking a full-featured ALM solution should consider TechExcel, particularly if they have limited support needs.
• TechExcel integrates with a variety of development tools and supports development using diverse methodologies.
• TechExcel offers relatively weak support for a major player, providing telephone support only during business hours.
• TechExcel lacks key release management functionality and some reporting and analytics capabilities as well.
• Despite its longstanding presence in the market, TechExcel lacks a strong global revenue footprint.
Challenges
$1
3 Year TCO: Tier 7; between $100K and $250K
$1M+
Product:Employees:
Headquarters:Website:
Founded:Presence:
ConcertoUnavailableMonrovia, CAparasoft.com1987Private company
Concerto provides a range of functionality and targets high-maturity development shops
Market Pillar• A long-standing player in the ALM market, Parasoft has a wide
array of patent holdings that gives it a competitive edge in the marketplace.
Overview
• Concerto includes most of the functionality associated with full-featured ALM, including requirements and task management.
• Concerto can integrate with .NET and Eclipse IDEs.• Concerto allows the user to create custom workflows in UML.• Parasoft has a strong market focus on the ALM space.
Strengths
Info-Tech Research Group 17
$1
Info-Tech Recommends:
Concerto will provide strong support for organizations of any size that require a high level of development process maturity.
• Parasoft has a strong market focus on the ALM space.
• Concerto does not include release management functionality and Parasoft has no intention of adding this.
• While Parasoft has clients in the SMB space, Concerto targets a level of process maturity (CMMI 3 or above) that most Info-Tech SMBs do not have.
• Parasoft has a limited footprint compared to larger players.
Challenges
Pricing was not made available
$1M+
Product:Employees:
Headquarters:Website:
Founded:Presence:
Integrity5,000Needham, MAptc.com1985NASDAQ: PMTCFY10 Revenue: $1B
PTC Integrity provides a range of ALM offerings within a Project Lifecycle Management context
Emerging Player• PTC acquired MKS in 2011 to integrate MKS’s Integrity ALM
offerings into PTC’s suite of Product Lifecycle Management (PLM) tools.
Overview
• Integrity provides almost all of the functionality associated with full-featured ALM, from requirements to task management.
• Integrity supports both Agile and waterfall methodologies, plus the ability to graphically edit processes.
• Integrity benefits from strong integration with other lifecycle
Strengths
Info-Tech Research Group 18
$1
Info-Tech Recommends:
Integrity has a strong offering for larger organizations, or any organization seeking to integrate ALM with a broader PLM suite.
• Integrity benefits from strong integration with other lifecycle management tools sold by PTC.
• The target client for the product has at least 25 software developers, making it a difficult proposition for many SMBs.
• PTC limits phone support to weekdays, unusual for a vendor of this size.
• While PTC has a long history in the PLM space, its ability to manage the ALM side of the business remains unproven.
Challenges
Pricing was not made available
$1M+
Product:Employees:
Headquarters:Website:
Founded:Presence:
SmarteSuite50Austin, TXsmartesoft.com1999Private company
SmarteSoft provides full-featured ALM at a substantial price; support offering is weak
Emerging Player• SmarteSoft entered the ALM field in 2005 with its SmarteSuite
of tools.• The suite centers around SmarteQM, a quality-oriented ALM
and testing tool.
Overview
• Despite its positioning as a test automation tool, SmarteQM has most of the functionality associated with ALM.
• Half of SmarteSoft’s clients are still mid-sized businesses, a relatively strong focus on the SMB client.
• Customizable workflow in SmarteQM allows users to adapt to
Strengths
Info-Tech Research Group 19
Info-Tech Recommends:
SmarteSoft’s credentials in test management software will make this a suitable choice for users with heavy testing and quality management needs.
• Customizable workflow in SmarteQM allows users to adapt to various development platforms and methodologies.
• SmarteSoft offers relatively weak support given the cost of SmarteQM: initial contact is usually via email with a 24-hour turnaround time.
• Given its recent entry, SmarteSoft lacks proven longevity in the space, a concern given the high price tag.
Challenges
$1
3 Year TCO: Tier 8; between $250K and $500K
$1M+
Product:Employees:
Headquarters:Website:
Founded:Presence:
Mingle, Twist, GoUnavailableChicago, ILthoughtworks-studios.com1993Private company
ThoughtWorks offers a strong offering for Agile development but limited support for waterfall or other methods
Emerging Player• A recent entrant into the Agile ALM market, ThoughtWorks
provides a robust offering but limited support for non-Agile development activity.
Overview
• ThoughtWorks includes most of the functionality associated with full-featured ALM, from requirements to task management.
• ThoughtWorks has an organizational focus on Agile ALM and long-standing experience in Agile development.
Strengths
Info-Tech Research Group 20
Info-Tech Recommends:
ThoughtWorks can make sense for Agile-oriented organizations, or organizations seeking training and help in moving towards Agile.
long-standing experience in Agile development.• ThoughtWorks testing is designed for a variety of platforms.
• ThoughtWorks offers email-only support and a one-day turnaround, a relatively weak support offering.
• ThoughtWorks has a strong focus on the Agile methodology, limiting the usefulness of the tool for waterfall or other methods.
• As well, integration with .NET is not offered.
Challenges
$1
Pricing was not made available
$1M+
The Info-Tech Agile ALM Vendor Shortlist Tool is designed to generate a customized shortlist of vendors based on your key priorities.
Identify leading candidates with the Agile ALM Vendor Shortlist Tool
• Overall Vendor vs. Product Weightings
• Top-level weighting of product vs. vendor criteria
• Individual product criteria weightings:�Features
This tool offers the ability to modify:
Info-Tech Research Group 21
�Features�Usability�Affordability�Architecture
• Individual vendor criteria weightings:�Viability�Strategy�Reach�Channel
Look for a vendor that provides a full-featured testing solution as part of the ALM offering.
Quality-sensitive development shops require tight integration with a top-notch testing tool
Quality-sensitive development1
2
Exemplary Performers
Viable Performers
Info-Tech Research Group 22
Agile focused
Development integrated
2
3
Viable Performers
Adequate Performers
4
Seek an ALM product with native support for Agile processes and artifacts.
Agile-focused environments should seek a tool with strong support for Agile
Quality-sensitive development1
2
Exemplary Performers
Viable Performers
Info-Tech Research Group 23
Agile focused
Development integrated
2
3
Viable Performers
Adequate Performers
4
Look for native integrations as well API-based integrations for niche IDEs.
Organizations requiring development integration should seek flexible integration capabilities
Quality-sensitive development1
2
Exemplary Performers
Viable Performers
Info-Tech Research Group 24
Agile focused
Development integrated
2
3
Viable Performers
Adequate Performers
4
Appendix
• Vendor Evaluation Methodology
• Value Index Ranking Methodology
• Product Pricing Scenario & Methodology
Info-Tech Research Group 25
Vendor Evaluation Methodology
Info-Tech Research Group’s Vendor Landscape market evaluations are a part of a larger program of vendor evaluations that includes Solution
Sets that provide both Vendor Landscapes and broader Selection Advice.
From the domain experience of our analysts, as well as through consultation with our clients, a vendor/product shortlist is established. Product
briefings are requested from each of these vendors, asking for information on the company, products, technology, customers, partners, sales
models, and pricing.
Our analysts then score each vendor and product across a variety of categories, on a scale of 0-10 points. The raw scores for each vendor are
then normalized to the other vendors’ scores to provide a sufficient degree of separation for a meaningful comparison. These scores are then
weighted according to weighting factors that our analysts believe represent the weight that an average client should apply to each criteria. The
weighted scores are then averaged for each of two high level categories: vendor score and product score. A plot of these two resulting scores
is generated to place vendors in one of four categories: Champion, Innovator, Market Pillar, and Emerging Player.
Info-Tech Research Group 26
For a more granular category by category comparison, analysts convert the individual scores (absolute, non-normalized) for each
vendor/product in each evaluated category to a scale of zero to four whereby exceptional performance receives a score of four and poor
performance receives a score of zero. These scores are represented with “Harvey Balls,” ranging from an open circle for a score of zero to a
filled in circle for a score of four. Harvey Ball scores are indicative of absolute performance by category, but are not an exact correlation to
overall performance.
Individual scorecards are then sent to the vendors for factual review, and to ensure no information is under embargo. We will make corrections
where factual errors exist (e.g. pricing, features, technical specifications). We will consider suggestions concerning benefits, functional quality,
value, etc; however, these suggestions must be validated by feedback from our customers. We do not accept changes that are not
corroborated by actual client experience or wording changes that are purely part of a vendor’s market messaging or positioning. Any resulting
changes to final scores are then made as needed, before publishing the results to Info-Tech clients.
Vendor Landscapes are refreshed every 12 to 24 months, depending upon the dynamics of each individual market.
Value Index Ranking Methodology
Info-Tech Research Group’s Value Index is part of a larger program of vendor evaluations that includes Solution Sets that provide both Vendor
Landscapes and broader Selection Advice.
The Value Index is an indexed ranking of value per dollar as determined by the raw scores given to each vendor by analysts. To perform the
calculation, Affordability is removed from the Product score and the entire Product category is reweighted to represent the same proportions.
The Product and Vendor scores are then summed, and multiplied by the Affordability raw score to come up with Value Score. Vendors are
then indexed to the highest performing vendor by dividing their score into that of the highest scorer, resulting in an indexed ranking with a top
score of 100 assigned to the leading vendor.
The Value Index calculation is then repeated on the raw score of each category against Affordability, creating a series of indexes for Features,
Usability, Viability, Strategy and Support, with each being indexed against the highest score in that category. The results for each vendor are
displayed in tandem with the average score in each category to provide an idea of over and under performance.
Info-Tech Research Group 27
The Value Index, where applicable, is refreshed every 12 to 24 months, depending upon the dynamics of each individual market.
Product Pricing Scenario & Methodology
Info-Tech Research Group provided each vendor with a common pricing scenario to enable normalized scoring of Affordability, calculation of
Value Index rankings, and identification of the appropriate solution pricing tier as displayed on each vendor scorecard.
Vendors were asked to provide list costs for Agile ALM software licensing to address the needs of a reference organization described in the
pricing scenario.
Additional consulting, deployment, and training services were explicitly out of scope of the pricing request, as was the cost of enhanced
support options, though vendors were encouraged to highlight any such items included with the base product acquisition. Vendors were asked
to prepare a three-year total acquisition cost for their respective Agile ALM solutions. This three-year total acquisition cost is the basis of the
solution pricing tier indicated for each vendor.
Finally, the vendors’ three-year total acquisition costs were normalized to produce the Affordability raw scores and calculate Value Index
ratings for each solution.
Info-Tech Research Group 28
Key elements of the common pricing scenario provided to Agile ALM vendors included:
• A six-site organization with 2,200 employees, located at two locations in each of the US, England, and France. The US locations create
software to be used internally, as well as for external clients, while the development resources in England and France are focused almost
entirely on externally facing applications, including mobile solutions.
• The development organization has grown rapidly through acquisitions. While the teams work well together, projects are often seen as
chaotic when crossing office boundaries.
• The corporate development group has determined that implementing ALM consistently across all locations and projects would greatly
improve the overall efficiency of the collective global development group.
• The corporate development group would like to create visibility for the corporate stakeholders into all projects being executed with real-time
(or near real-time) access to data. Dashboards and reports should be able to be filtered by project, by development group, and across the
entire corporation.
• Development projects are typically run with an Agile approach, following two-week sprints for most projects.
top related