Upgrade to Pro — share decks privately, control downloads, hide ads and more …

Pea Pods & Connecting the Upstream - Lean Kanban North America 2018

Pea Pods & Connecting the Upstream - Lean Kanban North America 2018

Pea Pods. A reflection on how achieving flow, and the intended business results of Agility, requires us to solve system problems that go beyond the team. The Kanban Method is shown to be applicable at the level of the whole organization.

Presented at Lean Kanban North America 2018
By Martin Aziz and Fernando Cuenca

Martin Aziz

April 10, 2018
Tweet

More Decks by Martin Aziz

Other Decks in Business

Transcript

  1. The Case for Organizational Flow Companies need to pay attention

    to end to end flow. Local optimization will only offer you temporary relief in solving your business challenges.
  2. Punctuated Equilibriums. A multi-year journey of transformation and emerging maturity.

    Punctuation Points At Equilibrium Managed Projects Some consistent process Heroics Inconsistent Outcomes Scrum Consistent Outcomes Teams & Tribes Scrum All Teams No projects No managers Business needs unmet. 2016 -> 2014-2015 < - 2013 Equilibrium Time Need something more!
  3. 5 to 7 Months Releasable Features Pea pods. From Years

    to Months – Highly Stable But still not fit.
  4. Give up point. Committed demand with an expired opportunity Soup

    Kitchens. Overburdening & Over Servicing
  5. Where is my stuff? What am I going to get

    at the end? Why does it take this long? Seems to work for me…. End to End Measurement for Fitness
  6. Comes from different sources Comes in different types, requiring different

    processing It has different frequencies of arrival It has different levels of urgency, Importance, and cost of delay It has different perceived value Cost of Delay and Heterogeneous demand
  7. Is the teams local agenda an issue? + Local Improvement

    Effort Complexity of Problem + + Number of Teams Tribal Behaviour
  8. How does this impact Lead Time and Fitness for Purpose?

    ‐ Complexity of Problem +? Lead Time Fit for Purpose
  9. What is the effect of a disconnect between commitments and

    capacity? Potential for overburdening Implicitness of Commitment Point Distance between Teams & Commitment Point Overburdening + +
  10. White Spaces, Revealed Complexity & Batch Sizes Delivery “chains” Shared

    team members Internal “shared services” Person with very specialized skills “floating” around teams “External” team members
  11. Overburdening and white spaces. Have we found the link to

    Fitness? + ‐ ‐ Over- burdening Coordination effort + White Space ‐ ‐ Number of Teams Flow Efficiency Lead Time Fit for Purpose
  12. What about batch sizes? Reinforcing relationship to transaction costs. Feeds

    Dark Matter. Amplifies lead time. + + Transaction Cost + Lead Time Batch Size
  13. Recognizability and Transaction Costs Some stay the same Some are

    re- aggregated and batched Some describe business functionality Some are purely technical tasks Some have internal dependencies Some are sent to other team’s backlogs
  14. Where does decomposition take us? Loss of Customer Recognizability. Losing

    your link to the customer. Number of Teams Tribal Behaviour + + Decomposition + Customer Recognizability Flow Efficiency ‐ Batch Size Local Improvement Effort + + Lead Time Fit for Purpose ‐ Implicitness of Commitment Point Distance between Teams & Commitment Point + Overburdening ‐ + Complexity of Problem Coordination effort + White Space + ‐ ‐ + + + + + + ‐ + Transaction Cost ‐ Decomposition Customer Recognizability
  15. Sprints are predictably delivered every 2 weeks but not exploitable

    5 to 7 Months Releasable Features DARK MATTER arrives or is revealed during a long batch. Unrecognizable by customer Batch has high transaction costs. Understanding the Pea Pod
  16. Number of Teams Tribal Behaviour + + Decomposition + Customer

    Recognizability Flow Efficiency ‐ Batch Size Local Improvement Effort + + Lead Time Fit for Purpose ‐ Implicitness of Commitment Point Distance between Teams & Commitment Point + Overburdening ‐ + Complexity of Problem Coordination effort + White Space + ‐ ‐ + + + + + ‐ + Transaction Cost ‐ Constraints ‐ ‐ Explicit Commitment ‐ Pull Policies Measurement ‐ ‐ Service Orientation + System level changes for the organization. Service Orientation Constraints Explicit Policies Pull Policies Measure- ment 1. Constraints 2. Service Orientation 3. Measuring 4. Pull 5. Policies Number of Teams Tribal Behaviour + + Decomposition + Customer Recognizability Flow Efficiency ‐ Batch Size Local Improvement Effort + + Lead Time Fit for Purpose ‐ Implicitness of Commitment Point Distance between Teams & Commitment Point + Overburdening ‐ + Complexity of Problem Coordination effort + White Space + ‐ ‐ + + + + + + ‐ + Transaction Cost ‐
  17. Sense & Promise Push Stories Scrum Team Scrum Team XP

    Team Story Accumulation Features Ideas Kanban Team Customers Delivery Customers Doing White spaces between teams sources of greatest delays. Work hard to recognize by customers Unconstrained demand Early Commitment without connection to capability Key challenges of the system
  18. Linking Upstream Flow to Downstream Capacity Sense Pull Features Option

    Do Next Ideas Customers Delivery Customers Options Do Options Good Constrained delivery pipeline Upstream Downstream Progress Customer Recognizable. No longer expressed as a team property. Delivery Improvements aligned to optimize for value delivery Work is pulled into delivery pipe automatically as capacity becomes available. Push is avoided to prevent overburdening. Shaping Demand
  19. Board for Enterprise Flow. 3 levels of Constraints Shaping Uncommitted

    Options Maintaining Recognizability in the downstream. F4P Feedback Loop to improve selection and delivery Work Stream pull
  20. Eliminating pea pods. Look beyond teams Constrain throughout the enterprise

    Maintain Customer Recognizability at all times Commit based on capacity signals