Borland Agile Assessment 2009

Recently at Borland, we participated in a second-annual self-assessment of our agility.   The survey itself was internally developed, inspired by the Nokia Test (which sets a nice minimum bar),  and cross-referenced with the Agile Manifesto, as well as summaries of agile principles from Alister Cockburn, James Shore, Scott Ambler, and Tom & Mary Poppendieck.  It consists of 12 questions answered (anonymously) on a 5-point agree/disagree scale.  The results create a diagnostic profile that can be very helpful in identifying areas to focus on for agile improvements.  Here is the assessment survey itself:

Please answer the following Agile Assessment questions based on the rating scale below:

1 = Strongly Disagree
2 = Disagree
3 = Neutral
4 = Agree
5 = Strongly Agree

1. We deliver valuable software early and often (on the order of weeks rather than months) in order to satisfy our customers.
2. We welcome changing requirements that represent our improving understanding of customer needs.
3. We measure progress in business-valued terms such as time-to-value, cost/benefit ratio and customer satisfaction.
4. Stakeholders and team members work in close collaboration (on a daily basis).
5. We work in an environment of trust and respect, where individuals organize themselves the best way they know how to accomplish the organization’s goals.
6. Our leadership supports, rather than directs, our work (as demonstrated by our immediate supervisors)
7. We encourage collaboration rather than competition (focus on what to improve, not whom to blame).
8. We use the most effective means of communication available to coordinate our efforts (usually face-to-face).
9. We can sustain our development pace for an indefinite period of time without loss of quality.
10. We invest in technical excellence and good design to keep the cost of future development low.
11. We automate repetitive work (e.g.: regression tests) to eliminate human error and speed delivery.
12. On a regular basis we reflect on ways to improve, expecting that improvement is always possible as learning increases.

Instructions to the assessment participants included these statements:

There is no "score" to this assessment.  It is administered anonymously with results reported in aggregate.  This is a diagnostic tool to help us all reflect on our processes and identify ways to improve.  It cannot measure "improvement" from a previous assessment, only relative importance of potential improvements to our current situation.  
 
As such, we ask that you answer in the context of your current organizational structure, teams and projects.  We are asking "what is", not "what should be".  When answering the survey questions, "we" means yourself and your immediate co-workers, "leadership" means your management chain, with most emphasis on your direct manager, "customer" means the people who will use the results of your work, and "stakeholder" means those who are funding and sponsoring the work.  
 
Finally, this is not a competition.  The results will be most useful in helping you reflect on your current circumstances and establish priorities within your teams on areas of potential growth.

Every time we apply this assessment internally, we gain a lot of actionable information that helps us focus our attention to the right areas.  We hope that by sharing our assessment instrument, we can encourage others to use this tool as part of their continuous process improvement efforts.