• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Key Note - Lean Kanban France 2013 - Kanban Evolutionary Management
 

Key Note - Lean Kanban France 2013 - Kanban Evolutionary Management

on

  • 206 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
206
Views on SlideShare
206
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
13
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

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
  • Alistair Cockburn has declared - the end of methodology! What has replaced it are - Reflective Improvement FrameworksThe Kanban Method is an example of a “reflective improvement framework.”http://alistair.cockburn.us/The+end+of+methodologyCockburn’s suggested name for this new class of methods
  • A software engineering methodology is a description of techniques - what to do and how to do it - strung together in sequences or workflows - when to do it - and wrapped with a definition of roles and responsibilities - who does what.A methodology tells us who does what, when and how it should be done.Ideally, a methodology should tell us why and give us a context to define its appropriateness
  • Many styles of software development/engineering emerged - some just personal prefences in style (e.g. PSP versus XP), but others for specific contexts or risk profiles (e.g. the many risk profiles captured in a 2-dimensional grid in Cockburn's Crystal methods).Some styles came in schools or movements - such as the Agile movement - while others came as large frameworks such as Rational Unified Process designed to be tailored to a context**CMMI ML3 includes specific practices for process definition & tailoring
  • The Kanban Method was born out of frustration with these many styles of software engineering and the challenge of installing them effectively in an organization.The question wasn't whether a methodology worked or not, or whether appropriateness of context had been assessed correctly or not, the problem was organizations were being seduced into pursuing changes that were too large and too ambitious and beyond their capability and maturity to manage such changes.
  • 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
  • However, change initiatives fail more often than projects fail!Change initiatives often fail (aborted) or produce lack luster results, and fail to institutionalize resulting in regression back to old behavior (and maturity levels).
  • 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.
  • There are some parallels in the story of Bruce Lee and the emergence of his approach to Kung Fu.Lee rejected the idea of following a particular style of Chinese Martial Arts.
  • Lee rejected these for various reasons, mainly that they gave the practitioners a false sense of ability and put them at risk in real combat situations. He was against Kata (learning patterns without an opponent) and described them in derogatory terms such as "dry land swimming."
  • Instead he sought to break the art down into a set of basic principles:The four ranges of combatKickingPunchingTrappinggrapplingand the Five* Ways of Attack***Single Direct Attack (SDA)Attack By Combination (ABC)Progressive Indirect Attack (PIA)(Hand) Immobilization Attack (HIA)Attack by Drawing (ABD)Single Angle Attack (SAA)*Apparently still called the Five Ways, there are actually now six **with the later inclusion of SAA**The fact that The Five Ways has six elements is evidence of evolution in action***Incorporated core ideas such as "center line" and single fluid motion from Wing Chun and parrying from Epee Fencing********Not a Chinese Martial Art and hence evidence of "no limitation as limitation"
  • He named his approach JeetKune Do - the way of the intercepting fist - after one of the principles taught in his method. He was quick to point out that it was just a name, a way of communicating a set of ideas. He was passionate that practitioners shouldn't get hung up on the name or the inclusion of any one move or action.
  • The JeetKune Do emblem incorporates the words..."having no way as way." There would be no specific style or school to his approach. It is not fixed or patterned but guided by a set of principles. An individual would adapt their own style that worked best for them by learning the principles and practicing different types of kicking, punching, trapping and grappling."having no limitation as limitation." In other words, Lee would be prepared to pull ideas from any source if it made the (martial) art better and made the individual a better practitioner. His concern was the logical improvement of the method rather than loyalty to any one tradition or tribe. He was happy to borrow ideas from Western traditions as much as Eastern.
  • While JeetKune Do is often described as a framework from which an individual can pick and choose to develop their own style, it is also an evolutionary approach. Lee referred to "absorb what is useful" and discard the remainder. And this was at the personal level for an individual developing their own style. If they chose to discard "intercepting fist" this would be acceptable. They were following the philosophy faithfully and the inclusion of any one maneuver or set of maneuvers was not critical.
  • In JeetKune Do training is always with an opponent. This provides the core feedback loop and learning opportunity that allows a practitioner to select that which "is useful" and discard that which is not.Lee pursued ever more elaborate approaches to protected real combat training to enable the closed loop learning that was core to the evolutionary nature of JKD. In comparison patterned styles of martial arts taught with "kata" were open loop and not adaptive.
  • 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.
  • The Kanban Method evolved with this principle in mind. That we must discover a way that enabled change while avoiding invoking sources of resistance - even better if we could motivate the people involved to advocate for the changes required. With Kanban you start with what you do now, and "kanbanize" it, catalyzing the evolutionary process into action. Changes to processes in use will occur and evaluating whether a change is truly an improvement can be done using fitness criteria that evaluate the external outcome.
  • Fitness criteria are metrics that measure things customer or other external stakeholders value such as delivery time, quality, predictability, conformance to regulatory requirements or metrics that value actual outcomes such as customer satisfaction or employee satisfaction
  • 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.
  • 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.
  • Kanban installs an adaptive capability in the organization and the style of working - the methodology - emerges and evolves, adapting gracefully to changes in business conditions, risks and uncertainty.Such an adaptive capability makes the organization robust and resilient and enables the possibility of continued sustainable long term competitiveness.
  • There are some differences between JKD and Kanban. It is dangerous to draw too close an analogy.JKD contains a martial art framework. It contains a core set of principles based on an underlying theory of fighting and vulnerability of the human body: concepts such as "center line" from Wing Chun, for example.Kanban is really a management method. It directly addresses change management. It also creates a mechanism for framing operational decisions through its core concepts such as use of pull systems and the consequent concept of deferred commitment.Kanban does not contain a framework of concepts for doing any specific types of work. There are no techniques for developing software or performing any other type of creative knowledge work.
  • There are some differences between JKD and Kanban. It is dangerous to draw too close an analogy.JKD contains a martial art framework. It contains a core set of principles based on an underlying theory of fighting and vulnerability of the human body: concepts such as "center line" from Wing Chun, for example.Kanban is really a management method. It directly addresses change management. It also creates a mechanism for framing operational decisions through its core concepts such as use of pull systems and the consequent concept of deferred commitment.Kanban does not contain a framework of concepts for doing any specific types of work. There are no techniques for developing software or performing any other type of creative knowledge work.
  • For specific domains, Kanban cannot guide you or tell you what to do, there must be knowledge of that domain, such as software engineering, and within those domains, different schools of thought will still exist. Kanban is, therefore, not an equivalent of JKD for software engineering.Kanban is not a framework for evolving a personal style of software engineering, in the way that JKD is a framework for evolving a personal style of combat.Kanban is a complete method for installing evolutionary capability in an organization. It is domain agnostic.
  • Our opponents are uncertainty & risk. Engage directly. Validate speculation quicklyTeach beginners to set up safe-to-fail, learning environments at the individual, team and project levelEvolutionary methods are required to help us manage in complex environmentsFitness-for-purpose & sustainability come from developing strong adaptive capability

Key Note - Lean Kanban France 2013 - Kanban Evolutionary Management Key Note - Lean Kanban France 2013 - Kanban Evolutionary Management Presentation Transcript

  • Kanban and Evolutionary Management Presenter: David J. Anderson Lean Kanban France Paris October 2013 Release 1.0 dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo Lessons we can learn from Bruce Lee’s journey in martial arts
  • The End of Methodology dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo
  • Is Kanban heralding in a new era? It’s the end of methodology!* Reflective Improvement Frameworks** are the future! Alistair Cockburn Kanban is such a Reflective Improvement Framework * http://alistair.cockburn.us/The+end+of+methodology ** Cockburn’s suggested name for this new class of methods dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo
  • A methodology defines behavior • A software engineering methodology is a description of techniques – what to do – how to do it – When to do it - sequences or workflows – Who does what - definition of roles and responsibilities • Ideally, a methodology should tell us why and give us a context to define its appropriateness dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo
  • Many styles of software engineering emerged over several decades • Some just personal preferences in style (e.g. PSP versus XP), but others for specific contexts or risk profiles (e.g. the many risk profiles captured in a 2dimensional grid in Cockburn's Crystal methods). • Some styles came in schools or movements - such as the Agile movement • While others came as large frameworks such as Rational Unified Process designed to be tailored to a context dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo
  • Motivation for the Kanban Method dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo
  • The Kanban Method was born out of frustration with these many styles In 2002, I was questioning whether the specific methodology really made that much difference The question wasn't whether a methodology worked or not, or whether appropriateness of context had been assessed correctly or not, the problem was organizations were being seduced into pursuing changes that were too large and too ambitious. These change initiatives were beyond their capability and maturity to manage them dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo
  • Managing change has greater leverage than picking the right methodology I came to the conclusion (circa 2002) that the important issue in creative knowledge work wasn't the selection of the right methodology Instead the bigger challenge with the greater leverage on outcome was learning to manage change in the organization dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo
  • 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
  • Change initiatives fail (even) more often than projects Change initiatives often fail (aborted) or produce lack luster results They fail to institutionalize resulting in regression back to old behavior dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo
  • Daniel Kahneman has given us a simple model for how we process information Learning from theory Learning by Experience SLOW FAST But slow to learn System 1 Sensory Perception Pattern Matching dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo But fast to learn Daniel Kahneman 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 Carbon-based life form
  • Changing methodologies challenges people psychology & sociologically • New roles (defined in a methodology) attack their identity • New responsibilities using new techniques & practices threaten their self-esteem and put their social status at risk • Most people resist most change because individually they have more to lose than to 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
  • 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 a new methodology • Is designed for carbonbased life forms Evolutionary change that is humane dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo
  • 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
  • The Kanban Method is a new approach to improvement Kanban is a method without methodology dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo
  • Bruce Lee’s Journey in Martial Arts dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo
  • Bruce Lee rejected traditional teaching and styles of Chinese martial arts • There are some parallels in the story of Bruce Lee and the emergence of his approach to Kung Fu • Lee rejected the idea of following a particular style of Chinese Martial Arts dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo
  • Kung Fu Panda simplified the art to only four styles Mantis Snake Tiger Monkey dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo
  • There are in fact very many styles… dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo
  • “Dry land swimming” provides a false sense of capability • The only way to learn is to train with a live opponent • Lee rejected the many styles of martial arts for various reasons, mainly that they gave the practitioners a false sense of capability, putting them at risk in real combat situations • He was against Kata (learning patterns without an opponent) and described them in derogatory terms such as "dry land swimming.“ dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo
  • Lee wanted to start from first principles and core concepts Four ranges of combat • • • • Kicking Punching Trapping Grappling Five* Ways of Attack*** • Single Direct Attack (SDA) • Attack By Combination (ABC) • Progressive Indirect Attack (PIA) • (Hand) Immobilization Attack (HIA) • Attack by Drawing (ABD) • Single Angle Attack (SAA) *Apparently still called the Five Ways, there are actually now six **with the later inclusion of SAA **The fact that The Five Ways has six elements is evidence of evolution in action ***Incorporated core ideas such as "center line" and single fluid motion from Wing Chun and parrying from Epee Fencing**** ****Not a Chinese Martial Art and hence evidence of "no limitation as limitation" dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo
  • Lee’s approach still needed a name • He named his approach Jeet Kune Do - the way of the intercepting fist - after one of the practices taught in his method • He was quick to point out that it was just a name, a way of communicating a set of ideas. He was passionate that practitioners shouldn't get hung up on the name or the inclusion of any one move or action. dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo
  • Jeet Kune Do Having no limitation as limitation dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo Using no way as way
  • Jeet Kune Do encourages development of a uniquely personal style "absorb that which is useful“ discard the remainder dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo • a framework from which to pick & develop a personal style • an evolutionary approach where adoption of maneuvers is learned & reinforced by training with an opponent • Nothing was sacred
  • Training with an opponent provides the core feedback loop to drive adaptation Lee pursued ever more elaborate approaches to protected real combat training to enable the closed loop learning that was core to the evolutionary nature of JKD dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo
  • Kata are not adaptive In comparison with JKD, patterned styles of martial arts taught with "kata" were open loop and not adaptive. There is no learning from practicing kata dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo
  • Water flows around the rock “be like water” the rock represents resistance dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo
  • The Kanban Method dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo
  • 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
  • Principles of 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
  • Kanban’s Core Enabling Concepts Kanban is based on some simple concepts for managing work • service-orientation • service delivery involves workflow • and work flows through a series of information discovery activities Kanban would be less applicable if a serviceorientated view of work were difficult to conceive or the work was without a definable workflow dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo
  • 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
  • Start with what you do now • The Kanban Method evolved with the principle that it “should be like water” - enable change while avoiding sources of resistance • With Kanban you start with what you do now, and "kanbanize" it, catalyzing the evolutionary process into action. Changes to processes in use will occur • Evaluating whether a change is truly an improvement is done using fitness criteria that evaluate an external outcome dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo
  • Fitness Criteria dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo
  • Fitness criteria are metrics that measure observable external outcomes • Fitness criteria are metrics that measure things customers or other external stakeholders value – – – – Delivery time Quality Predictability Safety (conformance to regulatory requirements) • or metrics that value actual outcomes such as – customer satisfaction – employee satisfaction dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo
  • Net Promoter Score is a Fitness Evaluator but is it the only metric we need? • Steve Denning has proposed that Net Promoter Score (NPS) is the only metric that business should care about • NPS is interesting because it is a fitness evaluator. It Steve Denning will indicate whether a business (or product) is likely to survive & thrive • But is it the only metric we need? dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo
  • Net Promoter Score is a way of evaluating customer satisfaction • In a general sense and at an abstract level NPS tells us whether customers like what we offer but we cannot know what they truly care about • For the abstract problem of, “Can we measure customer satisfaction?” NPV is a reasonably good measure, if used properly dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo
  • The problem with Net Promoter Score is that it doesn’t tell you what to do! • Net Promoter Score (if used properly) will tell you whether your product or service is likely to continue selling • However, it doesn’t give you any clues about what to do or how to improve • If NPS is your only metric you’re left to randomly experiment to generate a higher score • Like biological evolution, random mutation is expensive, takes a long time & involves luck dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo
  • Can we be smarter by using better fitness criteria than NPS? • 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
  • 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
  • If we need a medical procedure… • Short waiting time – Queuing time from diagnosis to procedure • Short procedure & recovery time – Fast procedure, fast recovery time, implies minimally invasive surgery and use of technology to reduce the craft input and eliminate variability • Predictability of schedule & outcome – Procedure should proceed as scheduled – Outcome should have high probability of success • Safe – Low risk of complications – Regulatory health & safety procedures followed dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo
  • Don’t believe what people say. Observe what they do! • Behavioral economics tells us it is better to observe what people do and derive models from actual behavior • Pragmatic philosophy in action! • NPS would be a stronger metric if it asked, “Did you recommend this product/service to a friend or colleague?” than “How likely are you to […] on a scale of 0 to 10?” dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo
  • Validate Fitness Criteria with real customers • It is necessary to keep checking that the fitness criteria we are measuring do indeed matter to customers. • Variation in what matters provide the opportunity to segment demand and offer different classes of service within your kanban system • Will you pay extra to have your pizza delivered faster? dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo
  • Business Risks, Fitness Criteria & Classes of Service should all align • If your kanban system is designed properly the classes of service you are offering should align with the true business risks in the domain • And the metrics being used to evaluate system capability, should be fitness criteria that are derived from the business risk being managed • For example, cost of delay requires us to measure lead time dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo
  • Enabling Evolutionary Management dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo
  • Institutionalize feedback systems to enable evolutionary change Operations Review System Capability Review manager to subordinate(s) (both 1-1 and 1-team) dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo Standup Meeting
  • Business risks, fitness criteria & classes of service should be transparent Operations Review Lead time Quality Predictability System Capability Review manager to subordinate(s) (both 1-1 and 1-team) dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo Use the fitness criteria at all 3 levels of feedback Lead time Quality Predictability Lead time Quality Predictability Standup Meeting
  • Other metrics should only be used as input to models to drive improvement • Flow efficiency will help us identify wasteful delay • Time blocked and blocker clustering will help identify wasteful delay from specific assignable causes such as vendor dependency • Metrics like this help us focus improvement initiatives to improve the fitness criteria results – e.g. removing delay improves lead time dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo
  • Know why you are using a metric! • Is your metric a fitness criteria that assesses system capability and indicates fitness for purpose and likelihood of surviving and thriving by satisfying customers? • Or, is your metric evaluating and guiding a specific change to improve fitness of the system? • If neither, you don’t need it! dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo
  • Adaptive capability enables sustainable competitiveness • Kanban installs an adaptive capability in the organization – the style of working - the methodology - emerges and evolves, adapting gracefully to changes in business conditions, risks and uncertainties • Such an adaptive capability makes the organization robust and resilient and enables the possibility of continued sustainable long term competitiveness dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo
  • Comparing Kanban with Jeet Kune Do dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo
  • Kanban is not “Jeet Kune Do” for software development or IT operations Center line dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo • JKD contains a martial art framework. It contains a core set of principles based on an underlying theory of fighting and vulnerability of the human body: concepts such as "center line" from Wing Chun, for example.
  • Kanban does offer us a framework for service-delivery management • Kanban is really a management method. It directly addresses service delivery and (evolutionary) change management • It creates a mechanism for framing operational decisions such as – Risk (or Value) trumps Flow, Flow trumps Waste Elimination – Use of pull systems and the consequent concept of deferred commitment (real option theory) • Kanban does not contain a framework of concepts for doing any specific types of work. There are no techniques for developing software or performing any other type of creative knowledge work. dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo
  • Kanban may be analogous to JKD for Service Delivery Management • Kanban provides a management framework for evolving uniquely tailored workflows for improved service delivery • Kanban embraces the idea of “using no way as way” – evolving your own style of service delivery • Kanban embraces the idea of “no limitation as limitation” by encouraging the use of models from many domains to improve workflows and service-delivery dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo
  • More Evolutionary Management dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo
  • The Kanban Method makes a business fitter for purpose • The Kanban Method enables a business to improve its service delivery so that it is fitter for purpose and more likely to survive & thrive • The Kanban Method enables an adaptive capability within the organization so that it can adapt to changing demands and other risks in the external environment dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo
  • Lean Startup is another evolutionary approach Build-Measure-Learn Cycle dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo • Lean Startup focuses on validating assumptions about the fitness for purpose of a product or service offering • It does this by “engaging the enemy” directly using techniques to create “safe-tofail” experiments • For example, “Fake a Feature”
  • Lean Startup makes a product or service fitter for purpose • By use of techniques that validate assumptions early and quickly, Lean Startup enables a product or service offering to evolve quickly • In doing so the product or service becomes fitter for purpose and is more likely to survive and thrive dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo
  • Like Kanban, Lean Startup is a Pragmatic approach • Lean Startup suggests that you don’t speculate about the future behavior of people, rather you set up experimental situations and observe what they actually do • In this respect, Lean Startup is like behavioral economics applied to product or service design • Like Lee’s philosophy in JKD, it engages the opponent (uncertainty) directly dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo
  • Businesses need to do both – be adaptable and adapt their products • Adaptive capability enables a business to insure it is doing things right and continuing to do them well in the face of a changing external environment • Adaptive product or service design enables a business to insure it is doing the right thing and continuing to offer the right things to a fickle and evolving market dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo
  • Together Kanban & Lean Startup bring the philosophy of JKD to modern creative knowledge work industries • Don’t adopt a methodology or patterned style • Engage the opponent (uncertainty & risk) directly in a safe environment • Learn from fast feedback • Adapt a unique product, service or method of service delivery that is fitter-for-purpose dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo
  • Conclusion dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo
  • The future of creative knowledge work should be inspired by Bruce Lee & JKD • Our opponents are uncertainty & risk. Engage directly. Visualize & make them explicit • Teach beginners to set up safe-tofail, learning environments at the individual, workflow & business unit levels • Evolutionary methods are required to help us manage in complex Trainenvironments with live opponents • If humans are involved the No kata environment is complex No "dry land swimming“ • Fitness-for-purpose & sustainability come from developing strong adaptive capability dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo
  • Thank you! dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo
  • About David Anderson is a thought leader in managing creative knowledge workers. He leads a consulting, training, publishing and event planning business dedicated to developing, promoting and implementing sustainable evolutionary approaches for management in 21st Century industries. 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 methods at large companies such as Sprint and Motorola. David is the pioneer of the Kanban Method an evolutionary approach to change and improved service delivery & business agility. His latest book is, Lessons in Agile Management – On the Road to Kanban. David is a founder of the Lean Kanban University, a trade association dedicated to assuring quality Kanban training through a worldwide network of accredited trainers and defined, peer reviewed curriculum. dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo
  • Acknowledgements Joe Campbell first blogged about the similarity in philosophy between the Kanban Method and the teachings of Bruce Lee. He coined the phrase “Kanban should be like water”. This presentation was inspired by Alistair Cockburn’s blog post “The End of Methodology”. My approach to change was influenced by an observation from Peter Senge, “People do not resist change, they resist being changed!” “Safe-to-fail Experiment” is a term used by Dave Snowden in his Cynefin framework. Steve Denning proposed NPS as the only metric a business needs in his book, Radical Management. dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo
  • dja@leankanban.com @lkuceo