TOCPA 2013 - Towards a Framework for Managing Knowledge Work
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

TOCPA 2013 - Towards a Framework for Managing Knowledge Work

on

  • 616 views

This presentation looks at aspects of Theory of Constraints that have worked for me in creative knowledge work activities such as software development. It also looks at others that haven't and ...

This presentation looks at aspects of Theory of Constraints that have worked for me in creative knowledge work activities such as software development. It also looks at others that haven't and features 6 suggestions for how this experience affects the body of knowledge of the Theory of Constraints

Statistics

Views

Total Views
616
Views on SlideShare
615
Embed Views
1

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
17
Comments
0

1 Embed 1

https://twitter.com 1

Accessibility

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment
  • Traditional change is an A to B process. A is where you are now. B is a destination. B is either defined (from a methodology definition) or designed (by tailoring a framework).To get from A to B, a change agency* will guide a transition initiative to install destination B into the organization.*either an internal SEPG or external consultants
  • The reason is people resist change. The traditional change model would work perfectly well with silicon-based life forms because the benefits could be argued and agreed with logical. But carbon-based life forms resist change because they don't process it logically but with their sensory perception, their emotional intelligence, the older brain function Daniel Kahneman calls "system 1".
  • The reason is people resist change. The traditional change model would work perfectly well with silicon-based life forms because the benefits could be argued and agreed with logical. But carbon-based life forms resist change because they don't process it logically but with their sensory perception, their emotional intelligence, the older brain function Daniel Kahneman calls "system 1".
  • New roles (defined in the methodology) attack their identityNew responsibilities using new techniques & practices attack their self-esteem and put their social status at riskStatistically, most people resist most change because individually they have more to lose than to gain. Probabilistically, it is safer to be conservative and stick to current practices and avoid shaking up the current social hierarchy. Only the brave or the reckless will pursue grand changes.
  • The Kanban Method rejects the traditional change management method and rejects the installation of a new style of working - a new methodology. It does this because it is better to avoid resistance than to push harder against it.The Kanban Method introduces an evolutionary approach to change that is humane. It is designed to work with carbon-based life forms processing change with system 1. The Kanban Method catalyzes improvement through the use of kanban systems and visual boards (also known as "kanban" in Chinese and in Japanese when written with Chinese characters). It is from the use of kanban that the method takes its name, but it is just a name. Anyone who thinks Kanban is just about kanban (boards & systems) is truly mistaken. The Kanban Method is an example of a new approach to improvement. It is a method without methodology.
  • The Kanban Method rejects the traditional change management method and rejects the installation of a new style of working - a new methodology. It does this because it is better to avoid resistance than to push harder against it.The Kanban Method introduces an evolutionary approach to change that is humane. It is designed to work with carbon-based life forms processing change with system 1. The Kanban Method catalyzes improvement through the use of kanban systems and visual boards (also known as "kanban" in Chinese and in Japanese when written with Chinese characters). It is from the use of kanban that the method takes its name, but it is just a name. Anyone who thinks Kanban is just about kanban (boards & systems) is truly mistaken. The Kanban Method is an example of a new approach to improvement. It is a method without methodology.
  • Bruce Lee was a philosopher. He majored in philosophy at the University of Washington, Seattle. His own personal philosophy was heavily influenced by Taoism and Buddhism. He brought this philosophy to his interpretation of Kung Fu and the heart of JeetKune Do.One of his key teachings was "to be like water". Water flows around the rock. The rock represents resistance - in fighting, the resistance is from the opponent.
  • In change management, resistance is from the people involved and it is always emotional.To flow around the rock, we must learn how to avoid emotional resistance.
  • Kanban, like JKD, _is_ based on simple principles. As already described, these are: service-orientation service delivery involves workflowand work flows through a series of information discovery activitiesThese principles give us a lens through which to view knowledge work activities and some clues as to the applicability of Kanban. Kanban would be less applicable if a service-orientated view of work were difficult to conceive or the work was without a definable workflow.
  • Traditional change is an A to B process. A is where you are now. B is a destination. B is either defined (from a methodology definition) or designed (by tailoring a framework).To get from A to B, a change agency* will guide a transition initiative to install destination B into the organization.*either an internal SEPG or external consultants
  • Kanban closes the learning loop using 3 feedback mechanisms:the standup meeting in front of the kanban boardthe manager to subordinate meetings (both 1-1 and 1-team)the operations review meetingIronically, these have come to known as the Kanban Kata. Ironic because Lee was opposed to Kata as they normally represent an open loop system without learning.
  • If we order a pizza we want it quickly. We want it to be accurate – if we order a pepperoni, we don’t want a hawaiian. And we want predictability of delivery. If they say they’ll be there in 30 minutes, we expect delivery in 25-35 minutes. And we want the pizza to be still warm.
  • Kanban closes the learning loop using 3 feedback mechanisms:the standup meeting in front of the kanban boardthe manager to subordinate meetings (both 1-1 and 1-team)the operations review meetingIronically, these have come to known as the Kanban Kata. Ironic because Lee was opposed to Kata as they normally represent an open loop system without learning.

TOCPA 2013 - Towards a Framework for Managing Knowledge Work TOCPA 2013 - Towards a Framework for Managing Knowledge Work Presentation Transcript

  • Towards a framework for managing knowledge work How TOC influenced my thinking … Presenter David J. Anderson TOCPA Utrecht Netherlands November 2013 Release 1.0 dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo And where it didn’t! Copyright Lean Kanban Inc.
  • How I got into this… • Published in 2003 • Synthesized • Feature-Driven Development • Lean Product Development • TOC • • • • dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo Copyright Lean Kanban Inc. Five Focusing Steps DBR Throughput Accounting TDD
  • Futility • I was writing the wrong book • Lots of (I believed at the time) logically correct, valid guidance but likely to be almost impossible to implement • Humans resist change! • Installing methodologies (defined or designed processes) meets with resistance dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo Copyright Lean Kanban Inc.
  • My Evolutionary Epiphany • What was needed was a “start with what you do now” approach – an evolutionary approach • An approach where consensus could be formed around the no.1 problem and what to do about it • Theory of Constraints and its Five Focusing Steps provided such a method • Identify the bottleneck (with consensus) • Agree (collaboratively) what to do about it • Resistance (if any) is minimized! dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo Copyright Lean Kanban Inc.
  • dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo Copyright Lean Kanban Inc.
  • Motivation for the Kanban Method dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo Copyright Lean Kanban Inc.
  • Traditional Change is an A to B process Designed Current Process Defined transition Future Process • A is where you are now. B is a destination. • B is either defined (from a methodology definition) • or designed (by tailoring a framework or using a model based approach such as VSM* or TOC TP**) • To get from A to B, a change agency*** will guide a transition initiative to install B into the organization * Value stream mapping, ** Theory of Constraints Thinking Processes ***either an internal process group or external consultants dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo Copyright Lean Kanban Inc.
  • Daniel Kahneman has given us a simple model for how we process information Learning from theory Learning by Experience SLOW FAST But fast to learn But slow to learn System 1 Sensory Perception Pattern Matching dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo Daniel Kahneman Copyright Lean Kanban Inc. System 2 Logical Inference Engine
  • How we process change… I logically evaluate change using System 2 I adapt quickly I feel change emotionally using System 1 Silicon-based life form I adapt slowly Daniel Kahneman dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo Copyright Lean Kanban Inc. Carbon-based life form
  • Adopting new processes challenges people psychologically & sociologically • New roles attack identity • New responsibilities using new techniques & practices threaten self-esteem & social status • Most people resist most change because individually they have more to lose than gain • It is safer to be conservative and stick to current practices and avoid shaking up the current social hierarchy • Only the brave, the reckless or the desperate will pursue grand changes dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo Copyright Lean Kanban Inc.
  • TOC Observation #1 • Thinking Processes represent managed change with a transition initiative • Despite all the counter-measure considerations with negative branches the “designed destination” process changes are likely to invoke (passive-aggressive) resistance amongst a knowledge worker workforce dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo Copyright Lean Kanban Inc.
  • The Kanban Method dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo Copyright Lean Kanban Inc.
  • The Kanban Method… • Rejects the traditional approach to change • Believes, it is better to avoid resistance than to push harder against it • Don’t install new processes • Don’t reorganize • Is designed for carbon-based life forms • Evolutionary change that is humane dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo Copyright Lean Kanban Inc.
  • The Kanban Method… • Catalyzes improvement through use of kanban systems and visual boards* • Takes its name from the use of kanban but it is just a name • Anyone who thinks Kanban is just about kanban (boards & systems) is truly mistaken *also known as "kanban" in Chinese and in Japanese when written with Chinese characters dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo Copyright Lean Kanban Inc.
  • Water flows around the rock “be like water” the rock represents resistance dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo Copyright Lean Kanban Inc.
  • Kanban should be like water* In change management, resistance is from the people involved and it is always emotional (system 1) To flow around the rock, we must learn how to avoid emotional resistance * http://joecampbell.wordpress.com/2009/05/13/be-like-water/ dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo Copyright Lean Kanban Inc.
  • Principles behind the Kanban Method • Start with what you do now • Agree to pursue evolutionary change • Initially, respect roles, responsibilities and job titles • Encourage acts of leadership at all levels The first 3 principles were specifically chosen to address System 1 objections, to flow around the rock of emotional resistance in humans dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo Copyright Lean Kanban Inc.
  • The Kanban Lens Kanban asks us to view the world of work through a new lens • Creative work is service-oriented • Service delivery involves workflow • Workflow involves a series of knowledge discovery activities Kanban would be less applicable if a serviceorientated view of work were difficult to conceive or the work was sufficiently new that a definable series of knowledge discovery activities had not emerged dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo Copyright Lean Kanban Inc.
  • 6 Practices Enable Process Evolution The Kanban Method Visualize Limit Work-in-progress Manage Flow Make Policies Explicit Implement Feedback Loops Improve Collaboratively, Evolve Experimentally (using models & the scientific method) dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo Copyright Lean Kanban Inc.
  • Any WIP Limited Pull System will work Bottleneck (a) D-B-R (b) CONWIP (c) D-B-R + CONWIP (“CapWIP”) (d) Kanban dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo Copyright Lean Kanban Inc.
  • TOC Observation #2 • Arguing about which pull system is better is futile for knowledge work • Limiting WIP catalyzes conversations about problems and how to improve (evolve) • Limiting WIP also forces conversations about what to… • Work on now • Leave until later • Abandon altogether • Limiting WIP forces real options theory thinking dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo Copyright Lean Kanban Inc.
  • Flow Management dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo Copyright Lean Kanban Inc.
  • Flow Efficiency Dev Ready Ideas Flow efficiencyDevelopment measures the Test Ready Testing UAT 5 3 5 3 ∞ percentage of total lead time Ongoing is spent actually adding Done value (or knowledge) versus waiting Flow efficiency = Work Time Flow efficiencies of 1-5% are F commonly reported. *, ** P1 D > 40% is good! G PB I GY DE Waiting Working x 100% Local Multitasking means time spent E in working columns is often Cycle waiting time Working Time Waiting Lead Time * Zsolt Fabok, Lean Agile Scotland, Sep 2012, Lean Kanban France, Oct 2012 ** Hakan Forss, Lean Kanban France, Oct 2013 dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo ∞ Lead Time MN AB Waiting Release Ready Copyright Lean Kanban Inc. Waiting
  • Focus on Delay • Eliminating sources of delay is the highest leverage on improving the system • Delay comes in both special cause (external) forms such as vendor dependencies and common cause forms such as queues and buffers dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo Copyright Lean Kanban Inc.
  • Upstream Kanban Prepares Options Pool of Ideas Biz Case Dev Requirements Analysis Ready for Engineering ∞ 24 - 48 12 - 24 4 - 12 K L Min & Max limits insure sufficient options are always available Committed 4 Development Testing 3 3 Ongoing Done Verification J I D F Options $$$ spent acquiring options Committed Work Reject Abandoned O P Q Commitment point dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo Copyright Lean Kanban Inc.
  • Bottleneck should always be downstream of the commitment point Pool Enginof Ideas eering Ready Ongoing 2 Pull F Development Analysis 3 Done Testing 3 Verification Acceptance Ongoing Done Bottleneck workers should never be asked to work on something that is optional and may be discarded. This includes any risk analysis (or estimation in legacy processes) that may be D P1 required to assess viability of an option G E PB GY Reject DE MN AB Abandoned Bottleneck should be here I Commitment point dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo Copyright Lean Kanban Inc. 3
  • Competing pressure of Last Responsible Moment versus Upstream Bottleneck There is a natural boundary Pool Enginbetween “the business” and the eering Testing Analysis Development Ready 3 3 delivery/engineering function. 3 of Ideas Ongoing Done 2 Ongoing Done Verification Acceptance One generates options, the other F Keeping the bottleneck early in the workflow converts options / delivers means all downstream functions have slack commitments capacity. Reduces our need to manage WIP and reduces negative effects of variability in demand D P1 G GY Different governance is required E PB for each DE MN AB Bottleneck early in workflow Last Responsible Moment Commitment point dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo Copyright Lean Kanban Inc.
  • TOC Observation #3 • Our delivery/engineering function must be capacity constrained, in comparison to… • Our business function must generate excess options. Options are discarded in proportion to the risk & uncertainty in the business domain • Upstream business function must have “slack” capacity. This is used to generate options that will be discarded dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo Copyright Lean Kanban Inc.
  • Common cause variability dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo Copyright Lean Kanban Inc.
  • Variability in Delivery Rate (velocity) • It is important to understand the role that delivery rate plays in long term planning. However, it is not useful for short-term goal setting due to extreme variation • Often velocity exhibits a +/-2x spread of variation • As a result velocity cannot be used as a short-term planning tool See following examples dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo Copyright Lean Kanban Inc.
  • Velocity Variation South African Team from 2011plotted per Sprint (2 weekly) Mean 29, UCL (+1 sigma) 43 (+1.5x), LCL (-1 sigma) 15 (- 2x) dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo Copyright Lean Kanban Inc.
  • DBA Team Velocity 90 80 Trend 70 60 50 Total Velocity Small support tasks 40 30 Trend 20 10 (not included in total velocity) Week of Christmas 0 Mattias Skarin client based in Paris in 2009/2010, plotted weekly Mean 42, +1 sigma = 55, -1 sigma = 29 (+/- 1.4x) dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo Copyright Lean Kanban Inc.
  • Investment Bank, London, Extreme Programming Weekly Mean 10, Max = 16, Min = 6 Spread (+/- 1.6x) dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo Copyright Lean Kanban Inc.
  • TOC Observation #4 • In as many of 90% of cases the bottleneck is moving about on a day-to-day basis • Playing “stop the bottleneck” whack-a-mole isn’t a good use of managerial time and is frustrating for workers • Kanban systems solve this problem • All we need to know is that the bottleneck is downstream of the commitment point • Selecting the commitment point is the valuable lever rather than managing a bottleneck in a narrowly defined activity dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo Copyright Lean Kanban Inc.
  • Evolutionary Management dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo Copyright Lean Kanban Inc.
  • Evolutionary change has no defined end point Initial Process Evaluate Fitness Roll back Evaluate Fitness We don’t know the end-point but we do know our emergent process is fitter! Evaluate Fitness Roll forward Evolving Process Evaluate Fitness Evalua Fitnes Future process is emergent dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo Copyright Lean Kanban Inc.
  • Institutionalize feedback systems to enable evolutionary change Operations Review System Capability Review Standup Meeting manager to subordinate(s) (both 1-1 and 1-team) dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo Copyright Lean Kanban Inc.
  • Fitness criteria are metrics that evaluate capabilities external stakeholders care about • If we have a service-oriented view of the world, and want to evaluate service delivery then we already know what customers care about • • • • Lead time Quality Predictability Safety (or conformance to regulatory reqs) dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo Copyright Lean Kanban Inc.
  • If we order a pizza we know what we care about… • Fast delivery • lead time from order to delivery • Accuracy and quality • Pepperoni not Hawaiian • Still warm on delivery • Predictable Delivery • If they say “ready in 30 minutes”, we want delivery in 25-35 minutes dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo Copyright Lean Kanban Inc.
  • Disintermediate! Risks, fitness criteria & classes of service should be explicit & transparent Operations Review Lead time Quality Predictability Expose risk, classes of service & fitness criteria at all 3 levels of Lead time Quality feedback System Capability Review manager to subordinate(s) (both 1-1 and 1-team) dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo Predictability Standup Meeting Copyright Lean Kanban Inc. Lead time Quality Predictability
  • Kanban viewed through a Cynefin*work types Multiple Lens Ordered Kanban systems alone Unordered aren’t enough in the unordered domain domains Pragmatic Holistic Philosophy Probabilitic Quantum Mechanics Multiple classes of domains service Complex Kanban Method Emergent Practices Complicated Deep Kanban Good Practices System Single work type Enlightenment Reductionist Philosophy Single class of service disorder Chaotic Kanban Method Novel Practices Not Applicable *http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cynefin dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo Simple Simple Kanban Best Practice System Copyright Lean Kanban Inc. Deterministic Newtonian Physics
  • TOC Observation #5 • TOC’s Five Focusing Steps are a Complex Domain approach • Thinking Processes are an unordered domains, reductionist approach • Reviving a deep interest in Five Focusing Steps and an evolutionary approach is vital if TOC is to be relevant for managing knowledge work dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo Copyright Lean Kanban Inc.
  • Other TOC concepts I’ve tried and discarded dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo Copyright Lean Kanban Inc.
  • Critical Chain • In software development chains were often arbitrary • I was serving the method, not it me • Estimation is speculative • Decomposition is reductionist • Hedging for common cause variability meant buffers were too large! • Stakeholders only willing to accept 10-15% project buffer • Mathematics suggested ~50-67% buffer required dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo Copyright Lean Kanban Inc.
  • Throughput accounting • Time on the bottleneck requires speculative estimation • Reductionist • Not pragmatic • Bottleneck workers have to estimate future optional work • Disruptive • Doesn’t exploit the bottleneck • Core conflict! dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo Copyright Lean Kanban Inc.
  • TOC Observation #6 • Developing the Kanban Method has been an evolutionary, experimental process • Much of what has survived & thrived as concepts is counter-intuitive • Analogous mapping of practices from other domains such as manufacturing has proven dangerous or fruitless • Dogmatic attachment to practices leads to dissonance and denial of actual observations dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo Copyright Lean Kanban Inc.
  • Conclusion dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo Copyright Lean Kanban Inc.
  • Differentiators of the Kanban Method • • • • Pragmatic Probabilistic Evolutionary/Emergent Service-oriented • Not project oriented • Kanban Method is designed for complex domain problems • If humans are involved the domain is complex • System 1 always wins a cognitive discipline dispute dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo Copyright Lean Kanban Inc.
  • A future for TOC in knowledge worker industries • Too much of TOC assumes silicon-based life forms in the workplace • Sort the pragmatic, probabilistic and evolutionary techniques from the reductionist and speculative techniques • Amplify the Five Focusing Steps and other work that applies to the complex domain • Ray Immelman’s work on tribalism embraces the complex nature of humans • It embraces that System 1 is in charge dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo Copyright Lean Kanban Inc.
  • Thank you! dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo Copyright Lean Kanban Inc.
  • About David Anderson is a thought leader in managing effective software teams. He leads a training, consulting, publishing and event planning business dedicated to developing, promoting and implementing sustainable evolutionary… He has 30 years experience in the high technology industry starting with computer games in the early 1980’s. He has led software teams delivering superior productivity and quality using innovative agile methods at large companies such as Sprint and Motorola. David is the pioneer of the Kanban Method an agile and evolutionary approach to change. His latest book, published in June 2012, is, Lessons in Agile Management – On the Road to Kanban. David is a founder of the Lean Kanban Inc., a business dedicated to assuring quality of training in Lean and Kanban for knowledge workers throughout the world. dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo Copyright Lean Kanban Inc.
  • dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo Copyright Lean Kanban Inc.