Using agile and lean to lead business transformation agile 2010
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Using agile and lean to lead business transformation agile 2010

on

  • 2,649 views

Companies need a sustainable model for leading continuous change - yet most leadership teams are too busy running the business to effectively lead change. Many transformation efforts fail due to false ...

Companies need a sustainable model for leading continuous change - yet most leadership teams are too busy running the business to effectively lead change. Many transformation efforts fail due to false starts, organizational resistance, and a lack of effective governance. We will explore a strategic change project management model that has repeatedly resulted in successful ongoing change initiatives. The model draws on Agile and Lean principles and techniques to lead change initiatives in a way that is simple, provides focus and transparency, and builds trust.

Statistics

Views

Total Views
2,649
Views on SlideShare
2,648
Embed Views
1

Actions

Likes
3
Downloads
93
Comments
0

1 Embed 1

https://www.linkedin.com 1

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
  • IntroductionSituationInitial AssessmentIntroducing Kanban to the development organizationApproach to Achieving the Business ObjectiveIntroducing Kanban at the strategy execution levelCeremonies for the Strategy Execution KanbanResults of our effortApplication of Boyd’s O-O-D-A
  • merchandising offering went back in-house due to customer margin pressure and conflict of interest concerns; Remodeling and Construction were significantly down due to lack of investment by customers; leaving resets as the core business
  • Everything needed to be fixed. Within the timeframe we couldn’t fix the entire system – we need to focus on just the areas that we could change to achieve the strategy.
  • NPD has since moved to an online board – not visible on our board anymore.Switched payment for Defects from hours committed to hours moved to Done-DoneCore system WIP is limited from the strategy board – that’s nextBy the time the developers delivered anything – the business had moved on. Either solving it with a spreadsheet or deciding it wasn’t actually that important to fix. The problems would then reemerge later – repeating the same crisis over and over.
  • Everything needed to be fixed. Within the timeframe we couldn’t fix the entire system – we need to focus on just the areas that we could change to achieve the strategy.
  • Notice the result of the A3 shows three key standards to get work done.Outcome – Deliverables in the context of the problem & prioritized (isn’t this what we want from the business?)Sequence – what order do they need to be doneTiming – When will it be done (can be assigned at the last responsible moment)Owner - Coordination
  • Notice the result of the A3 shows three key standards to get work done.Outcome – Deliverables in the context of the problem & prioritized (isn’t this what we want from the business?)Sequence – what order do they need to be doneTiming – When will it be done (can be assigned at the last responsible moment)Owner - Coordination
  • Notice the result of the A3 shows three key standards to get work done.Outcome – Deliverables in the context of the problem & prioritized (isn’t this what we want from the business?)Sequence – what order do they need to be doneTiming – When will it be done (can be assigned at the last responsible moment)Owner - Coordination
  • Notice the result of the A3 shows three key standards to get work done.Outcome – Deliverables in the context of the problem & prioritized (isn’t this what we want from the business?)Sequence – what order do they need to be doneTiming – When will it be done (can be assigned at the last responsible moment)Owner - Coordination
  • Notice the result of the A3 shows three key standards to get work done.Outcome – Deliverables in the context of the problem & prioritized (isn’t this what we want from the business?)Sequence – what order do they need to be doneTiming – When will it be done (can be assigned at the last responsible moment)Owner - Coordination
  • Notice the result of the A3 shows three key standards to get work done.Outcome – Deliverables in the context of the problem & prioritized (isn’t this what we want from the business?)Sequence – what order do they need to be doneTiming – When will it be done (can be assigned at the last responsible moment)Owner - Coordination
  • Notice the result of the A3 shows three key standards to get work done.Outcome – Deliverables in the context of the problem & prioritized (isn’t this what we want from the business?)Sequence – what order do they need to be doneTiming – When will it be done (can be assigned at the last responsible moment)Owner - Coordination
  • Today, the line managers are more interested because they need to move their card to execution – defects often still linger in acceptance.
  • Development and deployment was iterative. Basics in place at kick off. Continued to refine and deploy enhancements in flight. Despite lack solid engineering practices. Aggressively followed up daily on use of the system.The engagement has been extended and the contingency will be paid
  • OODAMilitary strategist Colonel John Boyd described the OODA loop for fighter pilots. It has since been applied to define the Marine Corps Doctrine in Maneuver warfare. Chet Richards applies it business strategy in Certain To Win. The primary concept is to expend the least resource to accomplish the next objective and to operate at a decision cycle faster than your competition can achieve. This allows you to go farther and faster than your competition.Unfortunately, it can not as simple as “observe, then orient, then decide, then act.” In fact such a sequential model would be very ponderous and would not well describe how successful competitors operate.The key to quickness turns out to be the two “implicit guidance and control” arrows at the top. In other words, most of the time people and groups do not employ the explicit, sequential O-to-O-to-D-to-A mechanism. Most of the time, they simply observe, orient, and act. There is data coming out to support this (see Gary Klein’s book, Sources of Power.)The question, of course, is, “What action?” A thinking opponent doesn’t provide us with a laundry list of his tactics so we can work out responses in advance. The mechanism which handles this uncertainty and makes the loop function in a real world situation is “Orientation.”As we suck in information via the “Observe” gateway, it may happen that we notice mismatches between our orientation and what we’re observing in the real world. If we don’t spot these mismatches and correct our orientation, the actions that flow from it may not be as effective as we intend. This can open up opportunities for our opponents. Boyd’s concept of strategy places heavy emphasis on attacking the other side’s orientation to open up just these kinds of opportunities, and he suggests many ways to do this.Note that “OODA” speed is quite different from the speed of our actions. Doing something dumb or irrelevant, but doing it at high speed, may not provide much of a competitive advantage.The “Decision/hypothesis” block is the learning part of the loop, where we experiment and in the process add new actions to the Implicit Guidance and Control link. You can also think of it as programming orientation for future intuitive actions.

Using agile and lean to lead business transformation agile 2010 Using agile and lean to lead business transformation agile 2010 Presentation Transcript

  • Using Agile and Lean to Lead Business Transformation
    A Case Study
  • Dennis StevensSynaptusdennis.stevens@synaptus.com 770.851.8025web: www.synaptus.comblog: www.dennisstevens.comtwitter.com/dennisstevensAgile Project ManagementAgile Project RecoveryKanbanLean – Agile Transformation
  • Agenda
    Obstacles to Business Transformation
    Overcoming Obstacles to Business Transformation
    Case Study
    Situation
    Initial Assessment
    Introducing Kanban to the development organization
    Approach to Achieving the Business Objective
    Introducing Kanban at the strategy execution level
    Ceremonies for the Strategy Execution Kanban
    Results of our effort
    Continuous Transformation - Boyd’s O-O-D-A
  • What makes transformation hard?
    #1 Difficulty translating transformation goals into specific action
    #2 Methods of problem solving that aren’t sufficiently collaborative to address different perspectives and competing concerns
    #3 Challenges coordinating across teams resulting a lack of focus and abandoned efforts
  • By the way
    Culture, culture, culture
    The obstacles to successful software development are often not in the software development organization
    We have to change the habits and conversations in the organization to make lasting change
    Lean and Agile provide us tools to overcome the obstacles to transformation – while creating the potential for changing the culture
  • Overcoming transformation challenges
    #1 Difficulty translating transformation goals into specific action
    Business Value-Performance Heat Map
    (Story mapping, Business Value, Performance)
    Explicitly connect the transformation effort to business capabilities
  • Overcoming transformation challenges
    #2 Methods of problem solving that aren’t sufficiently collaborative to address different perspectives and competing concerns
    A3 Problem Solving(Lean)
    Leverage a proven collaborative problem solving and planning tool
  • What makes transformation hard?
    #3 Challenges coordinating across teams resulting a lack of focus and abandoned efforts
    Transformation Execution Kanban
    (Lean -Agile)
    Use visible tools for tracking and coordinating the status of transformation activities
  • Case Study: Situation
    $100 million retail service provider
    Merchandising
    Remodeling
    Construction
    Resets
    The economy has drastically reduced remodeling and construction
    Significant shift in the market eliminates merchandising
    The entire business focus is now resets
    Not traditionally profitable – and the business processes and technology were not optimized to perform resets
  • Initial Findings: Technology
    Software development was technically competent but not very mature and in churn
    The system had been designed in information silos
    Spreadsheets and personal recall were used to run the business - the spreadsheets were the glue between the information silos
    There was a lack of access to any management information in the system – there was no useful reporting – management couldn’t get out what they needed
    Over 40% of technology developed over four years had not been deployed in the business
  • Approach: Technology
    Performed information flow analysis against current systems and processes to address the new needs
    Six systems and over a dozen spreadsheets
    Swivel Chair Integration
  • Approach: Technology
    Established Kanban board for development - visualized their process and all the existing work
    Established three classes of service based on source of funding
    Still have not explicitly limited WIP on the development board
    Major bottleneck was in customer acceptance
    Next Analysis Development Acceptance “Done-Done”
    (5) (3) (5) (3)
    NPD
    Enhance
    Core System
    Enhancex of 40
  • Identifying the Constraint
    Having visibility into the constraint create the opportunity for conversation with the business.
    Why is the stuff the business asked us to build not the stuff the business needs?
  • Addressing the Constraint
    We had development under control – but we had to get rapidly get business results
    We needed to help the business articulate the most important requirements to technology
    We needed to understand the conflicting concerns in the business that resulted in the low adoption rate
    We needed to create focus on implementing change in a time of rapid shift, turmoil, and duress
  • Initial Findings: Business
    Owners: Very successful entrepreneurs with deep understanding of the industry – innovative and strategic thinkers
    Management:
    Tactically focused, in transition, stretched very thin
    Lack clear line of site to their costs or economic drivers in this new business model
    Out of necessity run the business on intuition and response to crisis
    Back office: Very hard working knowledgeable people
    Overall: Not a demonstrated history of getting ideas from concept to implementation
  • Approach: Business
    Facilitated Strategy Articulation
    based on Strategic Goals, COGS model and SWOT analysis
    We changed the senior leadership conversation from “technology” to “business outcomes”
  • Approach: Business
    Analyze business model to identify capabilities
    This changed the line manager conversation from local improvement to system improvement
  • Approach: Business
    Assess the Business Capabilities
    Value (border)
    How strongly does this affect focusing objectives?
    How strongly does this affect standard operating objectives?
    Is this value-added?Supporting? Controlling?
    Performance (fill)
    How is this capability performing today?
    Would a small improvement here improve BT bottom line performance?
    Do we understand how to improve performance?
    Risk (dot)
    How difficult is this capability to scale (for CR1)?
    Is this constrained by Customer (HD) policy?
    Is the process complex? Highly dependent on other capabilities? Subject to compliance issues?
    Verb Noun(Action – Entity)
    KEY
    High Value
    Medium Value
    Low Value
    Low Performing
    Medium Performing
    High Performing
    High Risk
    Moderate Risk
    Low Risk
  • Capability Value Performance Map
    Building this model resulted in a lot of explicit conversations about business value, performance, and risk at the business outcome level.
  • Assess the model
    Capability Map gave us clarity on what the business did and what we had to change to deliver value.
    Assessing the model determined what was most important to the business.
    The business was aligned with the outcome because they developed it.
  • Approach: Business
    The most important areas to focus on became clear – to technology, to management, and across the business.
    Swivel Chair Integration
    We aren’t trying please every individual – the conversations are about the bigger business outcomes.
  • Overcoming Obstacles to Transformation
    #1 Difficulty translating transformation goals into specific action
    Strategy is clear and there is a shared context within the business
    Clearly understand what capabilities need to change and the impacted processes and technology
    Different perspectives and competing concerns have been addressed
  • A3 Problem Solving: Overview
  • A3 Problem Solving: Outcome
  • A3 Problem Solving: Outcome
  • A3 Problem Solving: Analysis
  • A3 Problem Solving: Analysis
  • A3 Problem Solving: Plan
  • A3 Problem Solving: Sequence, Timing and Owner
  • Overcoming Obstacles to Transformation
    #2 Methods of problem solving that aren’t sufficiently collaborative to address different perspectives and competing concerns
    Management follows up (some actually do) with their line managers from their A3s.
    We have a clear understanding of what needs to happen to delivery the solution – not just the technology
    We have explored unintended consequences and gained acceptance of the solution from the impacted parts of the organization
    We understand the relationship between the technology deliverables and the other parts of the organization
  • Now the big obstacle
    Execution
    Technology is a small component of the solution - how can we coordinate the necessary process and organizational changes across HR, the field, accounting, and operations?
    How can we get technology deployed so that the business realizes the value?
    How can we get management to maintain focus?
  • Strategy Execution Kanban Board
    Expand / collapse tasks from the plan in each column
    Next Analyze Prepare Execute Measure
    Expedite
    AcceptanceCriteria
    AcceptanceCriteria
    AcceptanceCriteria
    AcceptanceCriteria
  • Strategy Execution Kanban Board
  • Strategy Execution Kanban
  • Strategy Execution Ceremonies
    Walk the board with management once a week.
    Blocked items are flagged with a red tab with a note of who needs to unblock it.
    There is a lot of focus on getting stories on the technology board through acceptance now.
    We have an expedite column on the management board. We limit crisis to one at a time. Board ensures current projects maintain (regain) focus.
  • Overcoming obstacles to transformation
    #3 Challenges coordinating across teams resulting a lack of focus and abandoned efforts
    Expand and collapse model makes coordination explicit
    We have structured conversations about how to get to “Done”
    The business is motivated to pull work from acceptance in development – we have elevated the constraint
  • Results
    Achieved focus across the business
    Reduction in the crisis management tendency
    Technology deployed on time – continue to refine and deploy enhancements in flight
    Provide management with real time data to manage their resets
    Business is delivering work profitably
    Trust has been established between us (effectively the technology group and PMO) and the business
    Continuous transformation model in place in the business
  • Success Attributed To
    Visual control of the Kanban board
    Focus
    Momentum
    Shared Alignment
    Visual nature of the strategy articulation
    Decisions by developers and management are made in a shared strategic context
    Collaborative nature of the capability map, A3, and the Kanban board
    Shared understanding
    Participative design
    Accountability
    Rapid maturing of the organization regarding strategy execution
    Courage and commitment of the Beam Team leadership
  • Model of Continuous Transformation
  • Time as a Strategic DifferentiatorThe new Bargain of Agility
    The primary concept of the new Bargain of Agile is to expend the least resource possible to exploit the next most valuable opportunity.
    Observe
    Orient
    Decide
    Act
    Unfolding circumstances
    Implicit guidance and control
    Implicit guidance and control
    Understand
    Culture
    Tradition
    New Information
    Previous Experience
    Synthesis
    Action
    (Test)
    Observations
    Feed
    Forward
    Feed
    Forward
    Decision
    Feed
    Forward
    Outside information
    Feedback
    Unfolding interaction with the environment
  • Dennis StevensSynaptusdennis.stevens@synaptus.com 770.851.8025web: www.synaptus.comblog: www.dennisstevens.comtwitter.com/dennisstevensAgile Project ManagementAgile Project RecoveryKanbanLean – Agile Transformation