Skip to main content

Adding gateways to task patterns

An important part of defining the process for your project is defining how to know when a task is complete. Is a development task complete before unit testing for example? Almost certainly not. But if acceptance testing for an enhancement is a separate task in your process, at what stage does the developer hand it over for acceptance testing?

One way to define this in xProcess is to define a gateway for the task so that the user is prompted by a checklist to ensure he has completed the required work.
In the task pattern shown above you can see that a gateway called "Feature complete" has been added to the "Develop" task. To do this in one of your patterns simply switch from the Project Manager perspective to the Process Engineer perspective, you can thenopen the pattern diagram for your pattern (right-click on the pattern). You can then select "Gateway Type" from the palette and drop it on the task in the pattern that you want to have a gateway.

The content of the gateway is defined by creating or editing a Gateway Type in your process. Right-clicking on your process and selecting New -> Type of Gateway opens an editor like the one shown here on the right. This is where you can enter in the questions / checklist items that are presented to the user when he closes one of these tasks. In this case the questions are:
  • Tests complete and pass?
  • Documentation complete?
  • User approved?
In each case we must also specify the set of possible answers and whether the answer represents a "pass" or "fail" condition.

Let's now see how this shows up when a participant on the project closes one of these tasks using the web client. Here's the gateway screen that a user would complete before closing one of these tasks (click on the image to enlarge).
You can see that for questions where a "fail" response is selected a comment is required in order that a reviewer can understand why this was done. You can learn more about gateways in xProcess from the help files. See for example Answering Gateways.

The next article in this series concerns Artifact Templates.
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Does your Definition of Done allow known defects?

Is it just me or do you also find it odd that some teams have clauses like this in their definition of done (DoD)?
... the Story will contain defects of level 3 severity or less only ... Of course they don't mean you have to put minor bugs in your code - that really would be mad - but it does mean you can sign the Story off as "Done"if the bugs you discover in it are only minor (like spelling mistakes, graphical misalignment, faults with easy workarounds, etc.). I saw DoDs like this some time ago and was seriously puzzled by the madness of it. I was reminded of it again at a meet-up discussion recently - it's clearly a practice that's not uncommon.

Let's look at the consequences of this policy. 

Potentially for every User Story that is signed off as "Done" there could be several additional Defect Stories (of low priority) that will be created. It's possible that finishing a Story (with no additional user requirements) will result in an increase in…

"Plan of Intent" and "Plan of Record"

Ron Lichty is well known in the Software Engineering community on the West Coast as a practitioner, as a seasoned project manager of many successful ventures and in a number of SIGs and conferences in which he is active. In spite of knowing Ron by correspondence over a long period of time it was only at JavaOne this year that we finally got together and I'm very glad we did.

Ron wrote to me after our meeting:

I told a number of people later at JavaOne, and even later that evening at the Software Engineering Management SIG, about xProcess. It really looks good. A question came up: It's a common technique in large organizations to keep a "Plan of Intent" and a "Plan of Record" - to have two project plans, one for the business partners and boss, one you actually execute to. Any support for that in xProcess?

Good question! Here's my reply...

There is support in xProcess for an arbitrary number of target levels through what we call (in the process definitions) P…

Understanding Cost of Delay and its Use in Kanban

Cost of Delay (CoD) is a vital concept to understand in product development. It should be a guide to the ordering of work items, even if - as is often the case - estimating it quantitatively may be difficult or even impossible. Analysing Cost of Delay (even if done qualitatively) is important because it focuses on the business value of work items and how that value changes over time. An understanding of Cost of Delay is essential if you want to maximise the flow of value to your customers.

Don Reinertsen in his book Flow [1] has shown that, if you want to deliver the maximum business value with a given size team, you give the highest priority, not to the most valuable work items in your "pool of ideas," not even to the most urgent items (those whose business value decays at the fastest rate), nor to your smallest items. Rather you should prioritise those items with the highest value of urgency (or CoD) divided by the time taken to implement them. Reinertsen called this appro…