CIS3002 – Assignment 1 Page 1 of 5ASSESSMENT TASK INFORMATION: CIS3002 Agile MethodsAssessment 2 – Assignment 1This document provides you with information about the requirements for your assessment. Detailedinstructions and resources are included for completing the task. The Criterion Reference Assessment (CRA)Rubric that markers use to grade the assessment task is included. Task OverviewTask descriptionShort answer response.What you need to doAnswer all questions in Appendix 1Due DateThe date for submission of assignments is in the Course Specifications. Task snapshotsLengthLength of written response for questions:Question 4 should be on average 1 page in length per user storyQuestions 1,2,3,5,7 should be on average between 3/4 and 1 1/2 page in lengtheachQuestions 6,8 should be on average between 1 and 2 pages in length eachWeighting30 %Individual or GroupIndividualFormative orSummativeSummativeHow will I be assessedRubricThe table below outlines the alignment of learning objectives and mark distributionfor the assignment.No Section Mark Learning outcomes1 Question 10 2,32 Question 10 2,33 Question a-b 12(2@6) 2,34 Question 18 (3@6) 2,35 Question 10 2,36 Question a-c 15 (3@5) 2,37 Question 10 2,38 Question a-e 15 (5@2) 2,3Learning objectives1. Engage in teamwork to address business problems and produce viable solutionsusing Agile techniques, methodologies and theories.2. Undertake research and communicate information using a business / academicwriting style.3. Describe and appraise the major Agile methodologies used in the design anddevelopment of a business system.4. Apply the ACS Code of Professional Conduct and Code of Ethics in a businesssetting CIS3002 – Assignment 1 Page 2 of 5 Submission informationResources available tocomplete taskFor Question 6 and 8: you will find the case studies in Appendix 2• Library services –• Referencing guides –• Study Support – you need to submitOne document as a PDF document that contains the following items:Assignment Cover Sheet – must include:• course code and name, semester and year, assignment title, student nameand student number• the following statement of authorship:In submitting this work, I understand that my work may be submitted to Turnitin andconsent to this taking place.Submission requirementsThis assessment task must:• use USQ Harvard referencing for citing academic literature• be submitted in electronic format as an Adobe PDF documentvia Turnitin by following these steps:1. Access the Turnitin Submission link2. Click on the Submit button3. Give the submission a title, select the correct file and click theUpload.4. Click Confirm.5. Click Return to Assignment list6. To check successful submission, you will receive a text match %, andyou are able to resubmit, view or download your paper.7. ALWAYS check your student email for the submission receipt.ModerationAll staff who are assessing your work meet to discuss and compare their judgementsbefore marks or grades are finalised. Academic IntegrityAs a student of the USQ academic community, you are asked to work to uphold the principles ofacademic integrity during your course of study USQ sets expectations and responsibilities of students,more specifically it states that students “adopt an ethical approach to academic work and assessment inaccordance with this policy and the USQ Academic Integrity Policy: web linkAt university, students are expected to demonstrate their own understanding and thinking using theideas provided by ‘others’ to support and inform their work, always making due acknowledgement tothe source. While we encourage peer learning, it is not appropriate to share assignments with otherstudents unless your assessment piece has been stated as being a group assignment. If you do shareyour assignment with another student, and they copy part of or all of your assignment for theirsubmission, this is considered collusion and you may also be reported for academic misconduct. If youare unsure and need further information you can find this at Academic Misconduct: web link CIS3002 – Assignment 1 Page 3 of 5 Assignment 1 RubricAssessment name: Assignment 1 Short answer responseWeighting: 30%Mark: 100 Criteria7 (100 – 85%)6 (84 – 75%)5 (74 – 65%)4 (65 – 50%)3 – 1 (49 – 0%)1. Critically applyspecialist Agile skillsto meet an identifiedIT problem.Compelling and well roundedAnalyses key Agile skills of tomeet problem and, bringingan originality of perspectiveStrong understanding ofAgile and the tasks. Answersall parts well.Sound understanding of Agileand the task.Answers all parts of the tasksbut still misses criticalanalysis of some relevantissues pertaining to the task.Basic to fair understanding ofAgile and the task/s. May nothave answered all the issuesrelevant to the task.Lacks a demonstratedunderstanding of Agile andthe task/s. Not all issuesrelevant to the task/s havebeen answered.Misunderstood theassignment focus.2. Synthesise multipleinformation sourcesto formulate bestpractice IT strategiesand solutions.Strong supporting referencesAnalysis evidence fromrelevant sources,synthesising and evaluatingvarious perspectives and/orapproachesProvides conclusions thatdraw logical links to the fullrange of solutions andinformation provided,including opposingviewpoints. Clearly outlineskey consequences andimplications.Clear evidence ofindependent research andwider reading. Referencesare well integrated into thediscussions.Very good use of examples tosupport answers. A goodselection of scholarlysources.Accurate Harvard AGPSreferencing.Rudimentary critical analysis.Maybe minor inaccuracies inunderstanding of Agile.Good use of examples fromthe case to support answer.Uses the full number ofprescribed references,Accurate Harvard AGPSreferencing.Some irrelevancies and orinaccuracies inunderstanding of Agile andthe tasks.Included some additionalreferences althoughintegration of all or some ofthese references needsimprovement.Limited range of citationsincluded some irrelevantmaterial.Minor errors in HarvardAGPS referencing.Included mostly irrelevantmaterial. Did not use thetexts/readings as the primarysource. Included irrelevantsources (web pages, studybooks, articles frommagazines). Included fewcredible academic sources(peer reviewed books,journal articles).Limited examples fromindependent research tosupport answer.Inaccurate Harvard AGPSreferencing style3. Communicateeffectively,persuasively andprofessionally withstakeholders.• Well formatted in anacademic style• Consistent use ofacademic / businesslanguage throughoutthe document• No spelling /grammatical errors• Well formatted in anacademic style• Consistent use ofacademic / businesslanguage throughoutthe document• Little to no spelling /grammatical errors• Formatting inconsistentwith an academic style• Inconsistent use ofacademic / businesslanguage throughout thedocument• Minor spelling /grammatical errors• Formatting inconsistentwith an academic style• Inconsistent use ofacademic / businesslanguage throughout thedocument• Minor spelling /grammatical errors• Poorly formatteddocument• Little to no use ofacademic / businesslanguage throughout thedocumentSignificant spelling /grammatical errors CIS3002 – Assignment 1Appendix 1 – QuestionsResearch and answer the following questions1. In the perspective of agile, what does the term self-directed teams mean. Use examples from yourresearch to explain what agile practices are commonly cited as enablers for this team function.2. According to DSDM there are two styles of timeboxing. Explain the different project requirementsthat would trigger use of the different styles using examples from your research.3. Read: from the perspective of a project manager:a. What are the difficulties you see with what Ron Jefferies is saying?b. What is the one metric or combination of metrics you think should be the most importantand why?4. Using 3 actors with different perspectives write 3 fully developed user stories that highlight howdiffering perspectives can alter the project outcome of building a forum page in an LMS system.(refer to module 6.1.0 For an explanation of a User Story, Perspective of the Actor, Acceptancecriteria & INVEST)5. Consider the key agile practice of Iterative delivery of cumulative value, is it possible to deliver valueto the end user every sprint? In the Scrum guide’s Increments section it says: “The increment mustbe in useable condition regardless of whether the Product Owner decides to release it.” Does thissuggest value does not have to be delivered iteratively? What is done with the value if it is notgoing to the end user? Discuss these points supporting your arguments with examples from yourresearch.6. Read the BuildPort case study (Appendix 2) then answer these questions:a. Explain which Cynefin category you believe this project falls into.b. Based on the Cynefin category defined in answer 6.a what PM framework do you thinkshould be used?c. With the PM framework you suggest what challenges do you see occurring during theproject lifecycle? Explain what tools from the framework you would use to mitigate thesechallenges.7. Explain the differences between the three commonly used minimum product requirementdefinitions M.V.P, M.M.F, M.U.St. Use examples from your research to explain when each would bebest used.8. Read the WAC case study (Appendix 2) then answer these questions:a. What framework is being used to deliver MoveNow?b. Explain the significance of the 4-hour timebox meeting. In the framework what is thismeeting called and why is it that length?c. Explain the other 4 meetings mentioned in the case study, what is their names in theframework?d. Explain the ‘cards’, what phases (lifecycle) they go through, what are the names of thephases in the framework?e. Using the names of the roles in the framework explain who is filling what roles mentioned inthe case study?CIS3002 – Assignment 1Appendix 2 – Case StudiesCase Study 2 – BuildPortEsso Ltd is a small software company located in Trondheim, Norway. They specialize in onlinefacility management systems (FMS). FMS are used for managing, operating and maintainingbuildings and properties. Esso Ltd was founded in 2006. They have nine employees in Norwayand six employees in Philippines. Esso’s main product is called BuildPort (Building Portfolio), customersrange from small to large organizations in both private and governmental sectors.Their main solution, BuildPort, was launched in 2009 as a web-based FMS solution. In 2012 theyCame to the conclusion that mobile support was less than optimal, so in February 2013, Esso decided toset up a four-person team in their Manila, Philippines office. The goal was to enhance the existing solutionwith a mobile app principally for Android platform. A project manager (PM) and a Business Analyst havebeen engaged, they are located in Trondheim and the rest of the team will remain in Manila. The businessrequirements will be collected from the employees in Trondheim as well as major customers of theprogram. It has been decided that the development team will commence work before all therequirements have been gathered. Meaning the end solution has not been defined yet. A delivery date hasbeen set at 4 months from now & a budget approved. Management agree that they need a flexibleapproach for planning and implementing it with low governance overhead.Case Study 3 – WACWagga Wagga Alliance Consulting is a consulting company located in Wagga Wagga, New SouthWales. They specialize in tools for analysing stock rotation in warehouses. They were founded in 2001and have had local success since the beginning. Their primary product is called MoveNow, it is a tool basedon a physical board with different cards which represented various stock rotation requirements. Anopportunity has been recognised to expand their market by making their product intosoftware solution. WAC have the product knowledge but no IT experience, so it was decided to set up aproject to build the digital version of MoveNow.First WAC hired a Project manager, Janine. With her advise they hired a group of 6 developers with a mixof skills. The company’s top salesman, Alan was picked to work on the project as he has been selling &integrating MoveNow into local companies since its inception.Janine set up a meeting. First Alan walked the team through MoveNow. They then spent some timewriting on cards all the features MoveNow has. The developers discussed & decided on a platform & alanguage they would write the application in. The whole group then walked through the cards they hadwritten discussing & voting on the level of effort each card should take. The developers then discussedeach card with Alan working out if each feature was necessary or just desired for the product to work.The next day Janine took the effort votes from the cards & calculated out how long the project maytake. She went to the owners of WAC & explained what the team had done, how long the project shouldtake & the cost based on that time frame. The Owners approved the project to go ahead.Armed with the good news Janine set up a 4-hour meeting with the whole team. They chose the first cardsthey thought they could achieve in two weeks, the development team asked Alan questions about thecards & then listed a set of tasks to be done on each card and a set of tests to be done on each card.Janine set up a daily meeting where each person in the development team explained what they had beenup to the day before & what they intended to do that day.At the end of two weeks Janine set up a meeting with the whole team & the owners of WAC. Thedevelopers went through and demonstrated the work they had done that fortnight. The owners werehappy with the results & said they could not wait for next fortnights results.Straight after the meeting with the owners Janine got the whole team to discuss how they had workedtogether for the last two weeks & if there was anything that should be done differently.The next day the cycle started again with the whole team met for a 4-hour meeting to discuss what wasnext to build.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *