Developed Release Management System for Manufacturer
Please find under a summary covering project details and feedback. The innate facts are kept as they are, private information is amended.
Introductory information
Please draw your construction.
Samsung is a well-known electronics manufacturer. We',ve just made the announcement for our new flagship artifice, the Galaxy S7. We have formd a program for US-based developers which will hopefully be extended on a global level. It enables developers to work with us on a more individualal level when making apps and getting them to the Galaxy App Store. Our team acts as the institution for getting an app Store-prompt. We',ve formd an ecosystem, from the ideation point, all the way to monetization, helping with different support items and documentation. Our goal is to get the app developer prompt for prime-time. The partners in our network range from companies like Uber, HBO, Yelp, CNN and Expedia, to indie developers. The market is fragmented, 80% of it being composed of smaller-sized firms. This is the area in which we want to invest more heavily, as we ponder there',s a lot of good peculiarty coming out of it, which can form a sole experience for Samsung consumers. We want to fetch out a set of games, functions, and features that are only useful on Samsung artifices. We also want to form a sole experience about bigger brands by facilitating their nearness on our store and making those apps run fully on a Samsung artifice.
What is your position?
I am the head of developer programs. Two years ago, when I set up this division, we focused more on inner applications, like Samsung Hub and Samsung +. Over time, as we conversant what the specific effects of our developers were, we formd a more service-centric approach which we',re now rolling out. I',m responsible for it on all levels, making sure that it',s being used by as many entities as practicable in order to form a sole approach for developers.
Desired goal
What business challenge were you trying to address with Ascendro?
When we began our endeavor, the big effect was managing the information required for the forty different artifices coming out see year: smartphones, TVs and so on. On top of that, we had to deal with different livelihood releases for each artifice. We needed a tool that was smarter than an Excel spreadsheet.
Provided solution
Please draw the aim of their involvement.
When we occupied with Ascendro and showed them the issue and they developed a server-side infraconstruction using mainly PHP, that would allow us to approach the true information, run statistics, and see progress levels and application portfolio launches for each artifice.
We considered extending their involvement in other areas, but due to a restructuring phase, we determined to use inner developers. This is not a reflecting on the condition of their work.
How did you come to work with Ascendro?
The size of our project deemed that we would have to form a business case and have three resembling proposals. Ascendro came out on top in provisions of capabilities, knowledge, and their power to recoil to our challenge. Every other big firm wanted to take the complete structuring of the information upfront. We wanted to have an Agile process, and wanted more help from the developer, as we also have to run our day-to-day business. Even though this task was living to our core, there are only so many hours in a day that can be spent on it. Ascendro was capable to bridge the gap that other firms had an effect with. From a pricing point of view, Ascendro looked to be the better choice.
Could you prepare a perception of the size of this start in financial provisions?
The cost is private. It was a fixed-price project, which made it easy to estimate. We also formd change requests which were billed by time and material.
What is the terminal result of working with ?
We began our project in February of 2015 and the leading wave was completed in August. The work was liberateed in December.
Results executed
Could you share any statistics or metrics from this promisement?
I don’t have any real metrics or figures to share. We’re not big sufficient to veritably be measuring things in that way.
How did Ascendro execute from a project treatment standpoint?
We',ve known their organisation since 2006, and have worked on separate projects unitedly. I have been implicated in different capacities in past projects, so I knew precisely what to anticipate from Ascendro. From a reporting construction, there was a one individual forward of me. Because the division was mine, it was easy to maintain the agreed-upon team construction.
From a project treatment point of view, they used the documentation that we put unitedly for helping them in their day-to-day activities. We constantly reviewed how good our interaction format was for helping their team execute set goals.
We used an inner interaction infraconstruction. We tried to be as prescriptive as practicable due to lack of time. We used Balsamiq for wireframing, and Skype for exchanging documentation and conversation calls for showcasing features. We had both team and one interaction sessions.
When the work reached a true maturity level, we had our team collaborate straightly with the developers for any effects.
What distinguishes Ascendro from other preparers?
The big separation between Ascendro and other developers is that they understood our limitations and were able to execute their work just the same. Another differentiator is their power to liberate work that wasn',t discussed in detail. I asked them for rise code condition treatment functionalities. They prepared the true information, began automation testing, and so on.
Ascendro was very kind throughout the total promisement, it was very forcible. They don',t simply stick to the given promisement, staying out of the way if we need anything else, but rather analyzed what our requirements were and determined what they could do to promise on that level.
Is there anything Ascendro could have improved or done differently?
Because we were stressed for time, some of the features that we requested were less understood that what we would',ve wanted, which resulted in double iterations. It',s hard to fit this as a limitation of Ascendro. There was not sufficient time to write a peculiar user story. Even within these circumstances, they were useful to feel anything that went unfit.
