...
Critical work items are considered must have before launch otherwise the launch will not happen.
Important work items will not block the launch, but not completing the item may compromise success of the launch, so they need to be completed before launch.
High items will not block the launch but they should be completed before launch or as fast followers as they will lead to success of the launch.
Non-critical items are nice to have before launch but they can be be done soon after launch as followers.
SharePoint version:
Work item (summary) | Description (details and purpose) | Priority (Critical, Important, High) | Work type (Tech, non-tech) | PBI created (number) | Effort/ Complexity Size (L,M,S) | Are there dependencies outside TK | Key dependencies (teams or processes) | Planned completion date MM-DY-YR | Status details (latest progress or any notes) | Status (in progress, done) | Lead | Notes or open questions | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Set-up launch preparation plan in confluence |
| Critical | Both | N/A | S | - | - | 06-04-21 | Populating the plan with what is known already. |
| Sunny | Closed this item once we have a somewhat firm grasp of the remaining work documented on this page. | ||||||
2 | MVP rollout strategy and declare target go live date |
| Critical | Both | S | Determine the exact population that will be targetted targeted with MVP.
Do we leave the backlog applications where they are (i.e. mail log) or should the backlog be moved over to the new application. If its the later then need to decide how to do this, whether manual data entry or if we need to automate it. | |||||||||||||
3 | Business approval completed |
| Critical | Non-tech | M | What are the different approvals that are needed? | |||||||||||||
4 | Operational reporting needs | Come up with the key operational reporting needs for MVP and define how to fulfil the needs. | Critical | Both | M | Yes | Business and user team | Need to collect the requirements here for MVP in addition for post MVP. | |||||||||||
5 | Production release process for MVP | Understand the process that needs to be followed including mandatory approvals to go live in production. | Critical | Both | S | Do we have a documented process that can be followed? If not, we can document the process if we know who can explain this to us. | |||||||||||||
6 | Provision and deploy to pre-production environments | Prepare the DEV, TEST, ACC regions environments in Azure cloud and push the code into each region without any errors and functioning application. This work will be a precursor for production launch and critical for end users to conduct UAT. | Critical | Tech | M | Yes | Cloud team? TNT? |
| What are the exact regions that are in scope and required? Should we consider TNT in scope here since they are dependency for document management service and vice versa for workload management? | ||||||||||
7 | Provision and deploy to production environments | Production region in cloudPrepare the production environment in Azure cloud and push the code in without any errors and functioning application. The application should be accessible to end users and ready for their use. | Critical | Tech | M | Yes | Cloud team? TNT? | Once the application is accessible and ready for use this work items can be closed. Should we consider TNT in scope here since they are dependency for document management service and vice versa for workload management? | |||||||||||
8 | Approvals to launch in production | This is the action of confirming that all of the required approvals have been obtained and that approvals will not be blockers to launching in production. | Critical | Both | ? | Yes | ? | This item is a reminder to make sure we double check that any administrative work is closed out. This is not about understanding what approvals are required as that was a precursor to this work item. | |||||||||||
9 | User identify management |
| Critical | Tech | M | Yes | Business and Vessel registry users, Seafarer users | Need the different user roles defined and whom to assign to what roles. | |||||||||||
10 | Ensure that all of the PBI’s and features for MVP launch are captured in Devops |
| Important | Tech | N/A | S | Yes? | TNT? | 06-28-21 | Started to clean up Devops to have one MVP launch Epic with related features and PBI’s documented. |
| Troy | Can close once we feel confident we have remaining PBI’s in the Epic for launch MVP. | ||||||
11 | Shared learning from recent launches in MSS |
| Important | Non-tech | N/A | S | Yes | MITRACK PO/PM | 06-18-21 | Received some information, compared notes against our draft plans and added anything new. |
| Sunny | We will also work closely with the Seafarer team to share and learn since both teams are trying to launch their MVP around the same time this year. | ||||||
12 | Understand application behavior in non-happy path scenarios |
| Important | Tech | ? | S | Need to discuss this and we close it out once we have a PBI that is completed. | ||||||||||||
13 | Vessel registry high level process documentation |
| Important | Non-tech | N/A | M | Yes | Registrar supervisors, Change management | 06-14-21 | First part of new process in draft continue to work on getting it completed. |
| Hugo | What is the final form that the documentation takes? Vision, Miro etc. | ||||||
14 | Release notes and history documentation |
| Important | Tech | N/A | S | - | - | 06-30-21 | Page has been drafted need to create a structure and start populating with the key features (tech and user facing) |
| Sunny | Is Confluence or sharepoint a better place for this material? | ||||||
15 | Revised registrar work instructions |
| Important | Non-tech | N/A | Yes | Registrars and registrar supervisors | TBD | We need to define the scope of this work and who is best suited. This is different from training materials? | ||||||||||
16 | Training plan of registrars to use workload management |
| Important | Non-tech | N/A | No? | Registrars and registrar supervisors | TBD | We need a plan to be created that answers:
| ||||||||||
17 | Creation of training artifacts |
| Important | Non-tech | N/A | Yes | -Registrars -Registrar supervisors -Change mgmt | TBD | Should be answered by the training plan. | ||||||||||
18 | Execution of the training |
| Important | Non-tech | N/A | Should be answered by the training plan. | |||||||||||||
19 | MVP monitoring plan |
| Important | Both | - | Yes | Registrar supervisors, BI team | Need a discussion about this from a business and IT systems perspective. | |||||||||||
20 | Operational reporting requirements for MVP |
| Important | Both | Who are the key stakeholders for the purpose of requirements gathering? | ||||||||||||||
21 | Build MVP operational reporting |
| Important | ? | Depending on the requirements and approach this could combination of tech and non-tech. | ||||||||||||||
22 | Production release process post-MVP |
| Important | Both | Should the release process be the same post MVP launch, its good to confirm if any of the process (that exists when MVP is launched) is scheduled to change during the summer so that its documented reducing future impediments. | ||||||||||||||
23 | Issue management process |
| Important | Both | Is there any existing models that we can use to model around? Discuss with other teams across MSS before inventing anything new. Should also include a method to bring the work into the team for prioritization and documentation on the backlog. | ||||||||||||||
24 | Runbook (MBM) | Important | Tech |
| |||||||||||||||
25 | UXR strategy | Design team created usability testing approach with input from PO/PM, designed usability testing plan, and identified/created relevant tools for collecting results (excel time tracker, Miro synthesis board, etc). | Important | Non-tech |
| ||||||||||||||
26 | Execution of UXR strategy | Onboarded new product and design team members to UXR strategy and synthesis process, created testing materials (ie. props) and test-run data collection tools prior to usablity testing. | Important | Non-tech |
| ||||||||||||||
27 | Review Summary of UXR results and closure identification of user blocking issues | Created user research synthesis board, design team and observors engaged in usability testing synthesis, designers presented key UX findings, and results were prioritized based on user and business needs. Results were captured in deliverables such as time on task, attitudinal survey, and product heat map. | Important | Non-tech |
| ||||||||||||||
28 | Closure of UXR issues | The prioritization of key UX issues to be resolved before MVP and creation of wireframes to address these issues. | Important | Priority of the work item depends on the types of issues. If the issues block the launch then this work is critical, otherwise it is important/high. | |||||||||||||||
29 | Go no go decision | Have a meeting that includes all of the key dependencies to provide a confirmation that they have no concerns with launching the MVP on the established target date. | Important | Both | N/A | 29S | Yes | All teams that lead to success of the MVP launch | Should we have an S2 (scrum of scrums) where representatives from across the dependencies for MVP launch come together to provide a thumbs up that they are ready for MVP to be launched and used in production? Have used this many times in the past and it proved valuable. I propose to have a recurring forum for this leading up to and post MVP launch, where ‘go no go decision’ is just a milestone step. | ||||||||||
30 | Communication strategy pre and post launch |
| Important | Non-tech | N/A | ||||||||||||||
3031 | User acceptance testing strategy |
| Important | Both | 31We can collaborate with the other teams to partner on the plan as there has already been work done. We can split this into plan and execute and report results if we would choose. | ||||||||||||||
32 | Execute post production testing plan | Start to execute on the monitoring plan to validate the new process and report the status and issues that are found and closed out. | Important | Tech | 32Both | Follow the plan that was devised in the earlier work item. | |||||||||||||
33 | New system of record for to house the procedures from the G drive |
| High | Both? | - | Yes | Registrars and registrar supervisors | 33Determine if this should be in scope or wait for later. | |||||||||||
34 | Modifications to vessel registry forms (pending changes) |
| Non-critical | Non-tech |
...