Fred George Interview

Fred George is a developer and co-founder of Outspace system. He is a principle consultant at Fred George Consulting. Fred coined the term microservices. He coaches teams in Advance Agile concepts and in microservice architecture. Fred is one of the early adopters of Agile and OO. He has used over 70 programming languages and have worked across the globe. He started ThoughtWorks University in Bangalore, India, based on a training program he developed in the 90’s.

His specialities includes Software development; programmer anarchy; agile; lean; change agent; XP; software architecture; Ruby; Web HTML and CSS; Sinatra; Rails; 70+ languages

His contributions to the Agile community is remarkable and he continues to make an impact through his experience and domain expertise. 

Fred George

Here is an excerpt from the conversations we had with him.

1. What does it take to be an early adopter of any new language or technology?

Two thing: awareness and a bit of luck. First of all, you need to be aware of what new stuff is coming. There are an awful lot of blogs and announcements every day, so I find this channel useless. I tend to use conferences to expose myself to the latest thinking. And with so many conferences producing videos, a survey of the conference program and a few minutes of video can give you hints of what new is coming. Lately, MicroServices (which just had a dedicated conference in Berlin) and Docker seem hot.

The second thing is a bit of luck: Is this new idea worthy of attention, or is it one of the thousands of ideas that is seriously flawed? Fortunately, you can make your own luck. Find a handful of respected names in the industry that seem to be on top of the latest things, and watch what they do. Martin Fowler, (Pragmatic) Dave Thomas, and Neil Ford are some of my favorite guys to watch. They each have excellent track records of moving to better languages and technology platforms.

2. What is your advice to a novice polyglot programmer?

By polyglot, we are talking about a programmer who knows several different languages. My advice is to keep learning them, and strive for diversity of styles. Ruby and Python are very close; better to learn Clojure or Elixir if you already know Ruby. You should be trying to pick up at least one new language a year.

Everyone has their own style of learning. I am “hands-on”; I need to write a real program in the new language to really understand it. I know others that read a book and come away skilled (that’s just not me). So know your learning style. For me, I take some standard exercises (or code kata’s), and implement it in a language I know and a new language. What seems hard? Go look that up online.

3. Out of the 70, do you have any favourites programming languages? Why?

I think I had two profound languages that changed my programming style. The first was PL/C, an internal IBM language similar to C. Before that I was using assembly language, and I didn’t trust a program to write code better than I could. I was wrong. The early compilers didn’t get register assignments confused. I converted.

The second profound language was Smalltalk, a true object-oriented language. I read the book in 1987. It made great sense. I then started to write code, and realized I had no idea where to start: complete brain freeze. It took most of the next five years to understand it, and another five before I was really more productive.

So the short answer is Smalltalk because of how it helped me decompose real problems. I currently favor Ruby which is very close to Smalltalk in programming style.

4. These days microservices has become a buzzword. Personally I heard about microservices from you first in 2011 time frame. Tell us a bit about what created the need for a microservice architecture?

I coined the term originally to describe the ridiculously tiny programs I was writing at a client in 2005-6. As I was learning service-oriented architectures, I constantly hounded my colleagues to help me understand the appropriate granularity of services. I finally tried making them as small as possible, but still do something (an OO design technique). The idea of microservices really took off when we used the technique at a London startup in 2008.

Microservices is a natural result of simply going faster, measured from requirement through delivery. It has been facilitated by widely available cloud computing, better languages and platforms (Ruby, Python, Node.js), and high bandwidth communication between services (there is a 50GB backplane on high-end server racks). I know of at least 3 places that have independently arrived at the same design (microservices) for the same reasons.

In London, we were deploying new code into production every 3-4 minutes. That also drove organizational changes.

5. What are the advantages of microservice architecture?

There are two real business benefits: The ability to try ideas out efficiently without large time and resource expenditures, and robustness of systems that can detect and restore failures so quickly. I strive to design systems that survive failures, something much easier with microservices.

There is also an organizational benefit: Happier developers. We want to write and deliver code, and being able to do that everyday is very satisfying. Most of us exposed to the rapid processes that support microservices would not go back to the old processes.

6. Many companies are finding it hard to decide how micro should a microservice be. What is your advice to them?

First, realize there is a lot of diverse opinions on what microservices are. There are variations in size (from a few dozen lines of code to a few thousand) and interaction design (chains of service invoked via RESTful interfaces, or loosely couples, bus-attached services). So we (as an industry) are still exploring the possibilities.

Regardless, some of the early steps are the same: Break the single, cohesive database fiction most enterprises hold dear. One recent successful CTO cited his first step as “killing the JOINs” as a means of breaking the database down.

There are several representative projects to model yourself after. Netflix (which tends toward larger services) has open source most of their infrastructure, and other major companies are picking that up with great success. On the smaller side, the rewrite of uSwitch (of London) is a great example, as is the recent rewrite of Wunderlist (of Berlin); both are talked about publicly.

I’m hoping that we can have a much deeper discussion on this during my workshop at Agile India 2015 Conference. Join us, if you are interested in being part of the discussion.

This workshop has limited seats. Book early to avoid disappointments:

Diana Larsen Interview

Diana Larsen founder of FutureWorks Consulting has many years of experience working for products in Software Industry. Besides coaching the teams in Agile ways-of-working she also leads teams/projects based on collaborative thinking and planning. Her skills as a facilitator for open space sessions and retrospectives requires no introduction. Her ability to solve critical problems in tough situations has given her an edge in her work.

Diana Larsen

She has co-authored three books including ‘Agile Retrospectives: Making Good Teams Great’. Her work with James Shores on Agile FluencyTM model is quite a hit and its been applied across teams all over the world. She has served as a chair for Agile Alliance and have joined as a board member for Organisation Design Forum.

Agile Retrospectives

We had a short chat with her about her work and also about her workshop at the Agile India 2015 conference.

1. What is the biggest bottleneck for collaborative work culture?

In most organization that find a bottleneck (not all do), I’ve seen a bottleneck caused by shifting expectations. The change in expectations influences bottlenecks in information flows, communication channels, product decisions, opportunities to learn from experience, and many more aspects of software development and product delivery. Transitioning from a hierarchical way of working to a more collaborative work culture creates changes in role definitions and role requirements. It requires letting go of habitual behaviors that may have worked well in the hierarchy, but no longer serves anyone when collaboration becomes a critical part of the work process.

For example, a QA or Engineering manager may have been rewarded for managing a number of people in a narrow functional area, for getting information from direct reports and transmitting it to the manager’s boss, for following conventional wisdom for keeping costs low and productivity high. In short, for working well within their functional silo. Now we know that for knowledge work like software development, none of these activities deliver the desired result…though they did protect opportunities for promotion. As many have said, “what gets rewarded gets done” And no one was being rewarded for taking the kind of risks that lead to innovation or other breakthroughs in performance which thrive in a climate of collaboration.

Visionaries are designing organizations for collaboration. These firms remove the bottlenecks imposed by the strict hierarchies of the past.

2. What are the typical challenges you’ve seen with Agile implementation in large organisations?

The biggest challenge I see is the belief that an Agile implementation begins and ends with making changes in how front line delivery teams do their work. Another, more insidious, challenge is a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of knowledge work and how it is best accomplished. This misunderstanding seems to expand with the size of the organization. I rarely encounter it in startups or small companies.

Knowledge work differs from other work by its emphasis on “non-routine” problem solving. Tim Ottinger and I have shared conversations about whether software development is more about the ability to learn quickly or make high quality decisions quickly. In truth, it’s both. Knowledge workers spend a large proportion of their time seeking information, much of the rest making sense of what they’ve found, and relatively little time in applying what they now know. As some have said, they “think for a living.” This stands in stark contrast to managers who believe that software development can be measured by the amount of time a person spends typing on the keyboard.

Shifting people’s beliefs about what constitutes work poses a huge challenge.

3. Over the next few years, what does the future of Agile look like?

I have a standard answer. In my view, Agile is in its adolescence. We don’t know what it’s capable of yet. Every month or so, I read or hear about a new model or approach that adds to the body of knowledge we have about “Agile” and what it looks like. The future of Agile is one of continued evolution and increasing efficacy in ways we can’t imagine today. Like all complex ideas, it’s usefulness will continue to emerge. It may even become known by a different name. Look for its hallmarks: humanized work with an emphasis on mastery of our craft, a focus on rapid learning and feedback, delivery of business value (sooner not faster), and close connection to customer needs (even ones the customers’ haven’t noticed yet).

4. What is your view on ‘prescriptive’ retrospectives?

I’m not sure what that term means. When I looked it up, the first url was a Christian History blog. And I didn’t find much that was useful after that. So, I’m going to take a guess. The definition of prescriptive leads to a sense of “rule-based” “right and wrong” as opposed to descriptive which is more focused on the current situation and its needs. I’m not a big fan of the focus on right and wrong. One of my favorite quotations comes from Rumi, “Out beyond ideas of wrong-doing and right-doing, there is a field. I’ll meet you there. When the soul lies down in that grass, the world is too full to talk about.”

I want my retrospectives, and everyone’s, to provide a useful focus on continuous learning and improvement for the team, its product, and the organization and customers it serves. If kaizen (incremental improvement) or kaikaku (transformative improvement) are the result, you’re doing fine, in my opinion. If your retrospectives give you no benefit, stop! Or rethink how you’re approaching improvement.

The framework for retrospectives that Esther Derby and I described in our book has worked well for me as an organizing principle for designing the meeting. Every retrospective I lead is custom-designed for that team at that time with those conditions. it describes their current state and looks for ways to make it better.

What gets taught in too many Scrum and Agile training courses, “make lists of what worked well and what we want to do differently,” doesn’t work for me. Maybe there’s some team somewhere for whom that’s effective. Not me, not mine. That truncated retrospective form is a way of pandering to organizations who want their retrospectives short (half hour) more than they want them to be useful.

5. What are the fundamental principles for any retrospective?

First, prepare in advance. Come to the meeting with a designed flow of group process activities. (Sounds more daunting than it is.)

During the meeting:
Bring people together in a way that helps them focus on the work of improvement. Esther and I called this, “Set the Stage.” Pay attention to the setting and the mindsets.
As a group, describe the situation so that every team members can view the iteration (or other period of work) from all perspectives, not just their own. We called this, “Gather Data.” My colleagues at the Human Systems Dynamics Institute and the Institute for Cultural Affairs call this “What?”-answering the question, what is the current state? what have we just experienced? I have also called this the learning aspect of the retrospective. Everyone learns what everyone else knows, has experienced, and how it impacted their work.
Spend time making sense of the “what”. In the Agile Retrospectives framework, we called it, “Generated Insights.” Others describe it as the “So What?” step. Now that we know what we know, what meaning do we make of it? This is the group thinking/analysis part–discovering implications, interpretations, significance, and evaluation.
If we’ve done a great job of #2 and #3, the next step is to choose our next improvement action or experiment or , to “Decide What to Do” or frame the “Now What?” which includes the small increment of action and how we’ll track and assess its effectiveness.
Finally, “Close the Retrospective.” End the meeting in a way that respects and honors the people and the work they’ve done, reinforces the action they chose, and helps to give feedback to the facilitator, so they can improve the way they serve the team.

Beyond that, the fundamental principle is: find a way to continuously learn and improve that actually works for the team. I don’t care whether you use our framework, the Toyota Improvement kata, Quality Circles and A3 reports, or some other process…find one that works. That’s my only prescription.

6. How important are open space sessions for Agile community?

Open Space Technology as proposed by Harrison Owen nearly 40 years ago makes a great match with the principles of Agile. Both foster empowered action and self-organization. My most recent Open Space experience ended just two days ago – Agile Open Northwest 2015 – and it was another delightful instance of community members coming together to discuss what’s most important to them right now. I find people understand Agile better after they’ve spent time in an Open Space.

We often find companies confuse Agile Fluency Model with an Agile Maturity Model? Using it as a yardstick to measure their teams. What advice do you have for them?

Agile has a problem. When we started out with Agile, people used it because it made their lives and products better. Now people complain that Agile is about meetings, top-down mandates, and wasting time. We can do better. It’s time for a change.
In response, James Shore and I developed The Agile Fluency™ Model and Martin Fowler published it, “Your Path Through Agile Fluency”. The model describes how teams grow in their understanding of Agile over time. It’s a descriptive model, because it reflects what happens in the real world, and in it’s an aspirational model, because you can use it to understand how to invest in improving your teams.
We’ve found the model very useful for helping teams, managers, and executives understand what they can get from Agile and what they need to invest in order to get those results. The model’s emphasis on concrete outcomes means executives are open—even eager—to devote the effort needed. Leaders appreciate being able to see the tradeoffs and make a strategic decision, and teams thrive when given meaningful goals and the time and resources needed to achieve them.
We hope the model is used in this spirit and not as an Agile Maturity Model. If this sounds interesting, come to my session at Agile India 2015 to find out how the fluency model can help you and your teams.

This workshop has limited seats. Book early to avoid disappointments: h

Open Submission System VS. Closed/Blind Selection of Conference Talks

Recently, we announced the Selenium Conf 2014 to be held in Bangalore India. Based on my past experience running others international conferences for the last 10 years, I put together the following review process:

Interested speakers are requested to submit their proposals directly on our proposal submission system. All proposals will be public. Registered user of the submission system will be able to comment on your proposal. Submitters may also post comments on reviews or public comments of their own proposals to provide clarifications, explain revisions and respond to questions. Comments by public users are information that can be utilised by both the submitter and the review team. Ultimately the decision to accept a session resides with the program team, the program chair, and the conference chair.

Your proposal stands the best chance to be selected, if it’s unique, fully flushed, ready-to-go. Ensure you provide links to:

  • previous conference or user group presentations
  • open source project contributions
  • slides & videos of your (present/past) presentations
  • your blog posts or articles on this topic
  • and so on.

Following is my rationale behind this review process for conferences:

  • Fact: Writing a good proposal is one thing and Presenting on stage is a completely different thing. One could write really good proposal, but might be a poor speaker on stage. The conference attendees don’t care how good the speaker’s proposal was, they care how good was the delivery of the talk. Hence selecting proposals based on their ability to present rather than JUST their proposal becomes extremely important. I understand we want diversity and we want to give new speakers an opportunity. But do we really want a speaker on stage who has never presented anything ever? Hopefully they have presented at a local conference or a local user group or even within their company. If noting, they can do a short 5 mins screencast or video on the talk and upload that video. We want them to contribute to open source projects and write at least a blog or an article about it. My thinking is: what is the harm is asking speakers to provide us this info, so the community and the review team can make a better, more informed decision?
  • Also along with this, using an open submission & review system, has the following advantages:
    • The most important element it brings is the transparency. (Being an open community, I’m sure we all appreciate that element.)
    • It really helps create a buzz for the conference. Which in-turn helps us get really good proposals and opportunity to get sponsorship.
    • When I as a speaker, look at other proposals, I get encouraged to submit a proposal myself.
    • Also in my experience the overall quality of the proposals increase because of the open eco-system and public feedback mechanism.
    • With the help of public voting, the review team gets a good sense of which topics people are most interested. (Public voting can be gamed, but there are ways to limit it. Also we might not pick the exact proposal with the highest votes, but certainly select similar topic.)
  • In the end, if the team still wants to do a blind selection, we can certainly export the proposals into a format they want and give them just the info they need. The approach we take is more open and allows us to achieve both options.

Would love to hear your experience.

Online Registratrions open for all 3 Agile India Conferences

Register for the three existing conferences coming up in India:

1. Agile Goa 2013 – Our 6th Annual Conference in Goa
We’ve a superb speaker lineup. Check out the program
Limited seats available, register today at:

2. Agile Kerala 2013 – FIRST ever Agile and Lean Conference in Kerala. Check out our Planned Program
Take advantage of the Early-Bird pricing, register today at:

3. Agile India 2014 – Asia’s Premier and Largest conference on Agile and Lean Methods. Get an opportunity to meet Martin Fowler, Dave Thomas, Dave Snowden, Ash Maurya and many other thought leaders…

We launched the online registration on Sep 2nd at 10:00 AM. In a matter of 40 mins, the entire Super Early Bird Registration Slab of 100 tickets was completely SOLD OUT. This is the best response we’ve got in the last 9 years of organizing these conferences.

Don’t miss this unique opportunity to grab a conference ticket at these special, limited-time, attractive prices –

Agile India: 4 New Exciting Conferences Coming Up…

Agile Software Community of India is happy to announce 4 new exciting conferences.


* Agile Coach Camp is an unconference for Agile Coaches, Scrum Masters, Agile Trainers, Leaders, Change Agents and Mentors. (Last coach camp in June was completely sold out 2 weeks in advance. Since we had a waiting list of 43 coaches, we’ve organized another coach camp in July. Last few seats left – register today –


* Agile Goa 2013 conference is our 6th Agile Conference in Goa. It will be held at Taleigao Community Centre, Panaji.
Interested in presenting at the conference? Submit your speaker proposals before July 31st. More details:
We are also looking for program reviewers, if interested find details at


* Agile Kerala 2013 conference is the FIRST ever Agile and Lean Software Development Conference in Kerala. It will be held at Park Centre, Technopark Campus, Trivandrum.
Interested in presenting at the conference? Submit your speaker proposals before August 31st. More details:
We are also looking for program reviewers, if interested find details at


* Agile India 2014 conference is Asia’s largest & premier international conference on Agile and Lean Software Development methods. Unlike previous years, next year, each day has a specific theme. Also each day is a stand-alone event and participants can register for 1 or more days. We’ll limit the participants to max 500 on each day to ensure higher collaboration.
Based on consistent feedback, in 2014, we’ll focus on have more practitioners sharing their Case Studies and Experience Report.

** Day 1 – Scaling Agile Adoption
** Day 2 – Offshore/Distributed Agile
** Day 3 – Agile Lifecycle
** Day 4 – Beyond Agile

Currently we are forming the program team. You can apply before June 30th to be a reviewer.

Conference overview presentation: slideshare or PDF

Stay tuned for more…

Agile India 2013 – Final Attendees Profile

Agile India 2013 Conference hosted a total of 904 attendees over the 4 days. These attendees represented the following 195 different companies:

99tests ABB IDC Accenture
Aconex India Pvt Ltd Aditi Technologies Aditya Birla Minacs IT services
Agile Developer, Inc. AgileFAQs Alcatel Lucent India
Alliance Global Services Allscripts Healthcare Solutions Allscripts India Pvt Ltd
Altair Engineering AppDev Aricent Technologies
ASCI Aspire Atex
Atlassian BA Continuum India Pvt Ltd Bank of America
BKTB Infosolutions Pvt. Ltd. BMC Software BNP Paribas India Solutions
Bwin.Party C-SAM India Solutions Pvt Ltd Centurylink Technologies India Pvt Ltd
CGI Inc Change Vision, Inc. Cisco Systems
Clear2Pay Cleartrip Cognizant Technology Solutions
Collabnet Software Pvt Ltd Comakers CommonFloor
Comviva Technologies ConceptBytes Consulting Consultant
Crest Premedia Crisp CSC
Curbralan Cybage Software Pvt. Ltd. Deinersoft, Inc.
Dell India R & D Dell International Services India Pvt Ltd Deloitte Consulting
Dev Bootcamp Digiata Digite Inc.
Directi Internet Solutions Pvt. Ltd. Direction Software Solution DuraSoft
Edventure Labs eGain Communications Enteleki Technology Solutions
Envestnet Asset Management India Pvt Ltd Equal Experts Ericsson
ESBU Exelplus Services Exilesoft Pvt Ltd
Fiberlink Software Pvt Ltd FICO India Fidelity Business Services India Pvt. Ltd.
Fidelity Worldwide Investment Fred George Consulting Freelancer
GE Appliances & Lighting GE Energy Management GE Healthcare
GE India GembaTech GSU
HCL Technologies Ltd Host Analytics Software Pvt Ltd Huawei Technologies
IBM India Pvt Ltd Independent Consultant Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur
InfoQ Infosys Limited Infotech Enterprises Limited
InMobi Ino software solutions InRhythm
Institut Agile Inteamo innovations IntelliGrape Software Pvt. Ltd.
Intense Technology Intergraph Consulting Pvt Ltd Intuit
Invision IVY COMPTECH John Deere India Pvt Ltd
JP Morgan Juniper Networks Khanyisa Real Systems
KulChitr Lean Mantra Leanpitch Technologies Pvt Ltd
Linda Rising LLC MailOnline Maxheap technologies
McAfee McFadyen Solutios McKinsey & Co
MEDIA iQ Digital Mindtree Limited Monsanto India IT
Moolya Software Testing Pvt Ltd MSCI Multunus Software Pvt Ltd
Napa Software Services India Pvt Ltd National University of Singapore Navteq India Pvt Ltd
NDS Services Pay TV Limited Ness Technologies India Pvt Ltd NIIT Technologies Ltd
Nokia Location & Commerce Novell Ostrya Labs
Pitney Bowes Software Pixelogue PM Power Consulting Pvt Ltd
Prowareness Pulse Energy Qualcomm India Pvt Ltd
Rakuten Ichiba Rally Software Development Reaktor
Renatus Consultants Rotary International Infotech Pvt. Ltd. S.I. Systems
Saab India Technology Sabre Holdings SAP Labs
Sapient SAS R&D, India Satyam
Schneider Electric India SCIT SCRUMguides
Sears Holdings India Shah Abdul Latif University Shop Smart Inc/
Shoptree Technologies Pvt Ltd ShuHaRi Agile Siemens Technology and Services
Siemens, CT DC AA Silver Stripe Software Simpthings
Societe Generale Software Artisan SolutionsIQ
Springer SSN College of Engineering Still Point Software
Stixis Technologies sumHR Support
Symphony Teleca Corporation Synerzip Softech Inida Pvt Ltd Tata Consultancy Services
TenXperts Technologies Tesco Hindustan Service Centre The Advisory Board Company
Thomson Reuters ThoughtObjectz LLC ThoughtWorks
Toboc International / Toboc Deals Transcendence Corporation U2opia Mobile Pvt Ltd
UNICOM UNOPS Valtech India
Valueinnova LLC Velammal Engineering College Visteon
VMware India Volvo India Pvt LTd Walmart Global Technology Services
Waseda University Watchy Wipro Technologies
Xicora Consultants Yahoo India Pvt Ltd Yellowtail Software
Yodlee YourBus Zenbilling

We had participants with 320 different roles at the conference:

Account Manager Advisory Technical Analyst Agile & IT Process Consultant
Agile and Lean Coach Agile Coach Agile Coach and Lead Engineer
Agile Coach and Scrum Trainer Agile Coach/Scrum Master Agile Consultant & Coach
Agile Head Coach Agile Project Manager Agile Strategist & Coach
Application Development Lead Architect Assistant Manager – Quality
Assistant Professor Assistant Vice President Associate
Associate Architect Associate Architect – QC Associate Manager
Associate Manager Development Associate Principal Architect Associate Professor
Associate Project Manager Associate Software Developer Associate Test Architect
Associate Vice President Blackbelt BUSINESS ANALYST
CFO Cheif Consultant, Agile Coach and Trainer Chief Architect & Head – Central Architecture Group
Chief Manager Chief Project Officer Chief Technical Lead
Chief Technology Officer Client Principal Co-Founder
Co-Founder & Managing Director Co-Founder and CEO Coach
CoE Lead – Agile SW engg and Web Technologies Commander Consultant
COO CTO Delivery Manager
Delivery Manager – Testing Deputy General Manager Designer/Founder
Developer Development Engineer Development Manager
Development Team Lead Development Vice President DGM
Director Director – Engineering Director – Enterprise Architecture & Core Technology
Director – Product Development Director – Products Director – Quality
Director – Software Development Director and Software Architect Director Engineering
Director ePlatform Development Director of Enterprise, Enterprise Applications Director of Programme Management
Director Sales Director Software Engineering Director, India Sales
Director, Product Marketing Director, Wireless Division Engineer
Engineering – Director Engineering Best Practice Specialist Engineering Lead
Engineering Manager Engineering Sr Director Enterprise Agile Coach
Enterprise Agile Coach, Delivery Manager Enterprise Architect EVP & CTO
Executive Manager Expert Software Engineer Founder
Founder, Director Free Agent Function House Head
General Manager General Manager – PMO General Manager – Quality
General Manager – Software Development Globla Operations Director Group Development Manager
Group Manager Group Manager – Consulting Group Manger
Group Product and Technology Director, Technology Group Program Manager Group Project Manager
Group Technology Director, Technology Head – Enterprise Architect Head – India Consulting
Head – IT Quality & Tools Head – Quality & Process Head – Tools Group
Head – IT,Defence and Aerospace markets Head Marketing Head of Engineering
Head of Project Management Head Product Manager – Partner Management HR Executive
ICT Development Team Lead Independent consultant India Sales Manager
Inside Sales Manager Integration Manager IT Architect
Lead – Development and Testing Lead Analyst lead application developer
Lead Business Analyst Lead Consultant Lead Developer
Lead Engineer Lead Enterprise Architect Lead Executive Quality
LEAD HR Lead Product Develper Lead Programmer
Lead Software Architect Lead Software Developer Lead Software Engineer
Lead Software QA Engineering Lead-Quality Assurance Lead-Software Engineer
Leader Engineer Lecturer Management and Organizational-design Consultant
Manager Manager – Projects Manager – QA
Manager – Software Development Manager – Software Engineering Manager – Software Quality Engineering
Manager Projects Manager Sales Manager, OPERATIONAL EXCELLENCE
Manager, R&D Program Management Managing Director MANAGING DIRECTOR & CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
Managing Director & Chief Technology Officer Manual QA Engineer Market Principal
Master Shifu Mentor-Coach MTS
Offshore Development Manager Operations Manager Owner
Partner PhD Student Portfolio Manager
Practice Head – Microsoft and Agile Transformation Services Practice Lead – QA Pre-Sales Consultant
President Principal Principal Agile Coach
Principal Agile Coach & Manager-Consulting Principal Architect Principal Consultant – QA
Principal Consultant & Agile Coach Principal Software Engineer Product Architect
Product Developer Product Development Manager Product Lead
Product Manager Product Manager, Platform & Analytics Product Owner
Product Owner – Non Functional Requirement’s Product Owner/Technical Lead Professor
Program Director Program Director – BSC Program Manager
Program Manager – Core Map Products Program Manager – QA Program Manager Quality
Program Mnager – QA Project Lead Project Lead and Scrum Master
Project Manager Project Quality Manager Projects Manager
PSC PSE QA Engineer
QA Lead QA Manager QA Project Lead
QA Technical Lead Quality Manager R&D Director
R&D Lead Project Manager Release Manager Research Engineer
RESEARCH SCHOLAR Ruby on Rails Programmer SAP Practice Manager
SBU Head Scrum Master Scrum Trainer and Agile Coach
SE Self Senior Agile Project Manager
Senior Architect Senior Business Analyst Senior Consultant
Senior Developer Senior Director Senior Engineer
Senior Engineer – QA Senior Engineer, BSP Senior Engineering Manager
senior executive – quality Senior Group Manager Senior IT Project Management
Senior Lecturer Senior Manager Senior Manager – Consulting
Senior Manager – Creative Senior Manager – QA Senior Manager – Software Development
Senior Manager – Technical Group Head Senior Manager – User Experience Senior Manager Engineering
Senior Manager Technology Senior Manager- Test Engineering Senior Manager-Technical Group head
Senior Manager, Agile Coach Senior Member – Technical Staff Senior Member Technical Staff
Senior Performance Lead Senior Perogram Manager Senior Product Manager
Senior Program Manager Senior Project Lead Senior Project Manager
Senior Project Manager – Infosys Tools Group Senior QA Engineer Senior QA Lead
Senior QA Manager Senior Quality Assuarance Enginner Senior Software Architect
Senior Software Developer Senior Software Development Engineer Senior Software Engineer
Senior Software QA Engineer Senior Systems Analyst Senior Systems Specialist
Senior Technical Architect Senior Technical Lead Senior Technical Manager
Senior Technical Specialist Senior Test Manager Senior Vice President
Service Manager Software Architect Software Artisan
Software Developer Software Developer (Embedded System) Software Development Manager
Software Engineer Software Engineering Sr Mgr Software Manager
Software Manager – Technical Writing Software Product Manager Solutions Architect
Specialist SSE Staff Engineer
Strategy and New Product Development Student Supervisor Software Development
Systems Analyst Team Lead Team Lead – Product Affiliates
Team Lead Software Development Team Manager Tech Fellow
Technical Architect Technical Director – Software Development Technical Leader
Technical Leader / Scrum Master Technical Product Manager Technical Project Lead
Technical Specialist Technologist Test Engineer
Test Engineer Manager Test Lead TEST MANAGER
Tester UI Engineer Vice President
Vice President – Engineering and Site Operations Vice President – Global Agile Strategies Vice President – Value Engineering
Vice President, Process Design Consultant VP – Corporate Relations VP & GM – APAC Sales
VP Market Development VP Solutions

Participants from 25 different countries participated in the conference:

Australia Brazil Canada
China Denmark Egypt
Finland France Germany
Gibraltar India Indonesia
Israel Japan Malaysia
New Zealand Pakistan Russia
Singapore South Africa SriLanka
Sweden Ukraine United Kingdom
United States

They had the following Agile experience:

Number of Years of Experience