Portfolio Kanban - Low-Friction Method to Improve Organization's Effectiveness

  • 1,215 views
Uploaded on

When we think about improving effectiveness we often focus on team level. The sources of ineffectiveness, however, are often rooted on a different level - in project portfolio. Too many concurrent …

When we think about improving effectiveness we often focus on team level. The sources of ineffectiveness, however, are often rooted on a different level - in project portfolio. Too many concurrent projects, little knowledge about available capabilities and lack of discussion on cost and value often result in a situation where main decision factor is a gut feeling.

Common approaches to solve the problem are heavy-weight and strongly formalized. On the other hand Portfolio Kanban is a low-friction method that allows tackling the issue steering change at PMO level. As with every Kanban implementation there is little, if any, changes at the very beginning and changes are steered in evolutionary manner.

The picture isn’t rosy though. As long as you can say that there are standard approaches to introducing Kanban on a team level, there are no for portfolio level. As long as the method itself is easy to operate, its implementation is going to be anything but obvious and simple.

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
1,215
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1

Actions

Shares
Downloads
21
Comments
0
Likes
4

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Portfolio Kanban Low-Friction Method to Improve Organization’s Effectiveness Pawel Brodzinski @pawelbrodzinski
  • 2. Hi, I’m PawelLunar LogicChief cook and bottlewasherhttp://llp.pl
  • 3. I’ve beensupervising multipleconcurrentprojects for 8 years...
  • 4. ...and it sucks
  • 5. Excel frenzy
  • 6. Goal: Findmeaningful data
  • 7. You’ll make it!
  • 8. Give me more!
  • 9. Oh, there arejust too many of them!
  • 10. It doesn’t comefor free
  • 11. Cost of context switching Source: Gerald Weinberg, Quality Software Management: Vol. 1 System Thinking
  • 12. Zeigarnik Effect:Tendency to experienceintrusive thought about an objective left incomplete Source: S. Greist-Bousquet, N. Shiffman: The effect of task interrupton and closure on perceived duration
  • 13. Cost of task switching is rooted in interferencefrom thoughts about the task your are not doing Eyal Ophir
  • 14. Time to market
  • 15. Lower quality Source: E. Ophir, C. Nass, A. Wagner:Cognitive control in media multitaskers
  • 16. Don’t weknow thecure already?
  • 17. Portfolio Kanban Story
  • 18. Where would you start?
  • 19. Variability stupid!
  • 20. Stalled board
  • 21. WIP limits? Oh...
  • 22. Side note:There areexceptions
  • 23. Two-tier board
  • 24. Few have suchcomfort though
  • 25. Non-standardboard designs
  • 26. Alternative design
  • 27. Team-level
  • 28. Individuals
  • 29. Total capabilities
  • 30. Different capabilities
  • 31. Free capabilities
  • 32. Commitments
  • 33. Concurrent engagements
  • 34. Planned time span
  • 35. Types of work
  • 36. Future commitments
  • 37. Planned work
  • 38. Unavailability
  • 39. Show methat here
  • 40. Low hangingfruit
  • 41. What about WIP limits then? 5O
  • 42. Free capabilities
  • 43. WIP limits byconversation
  • 44. Finally,data fromothersources
  • 45. What’s init for me?
  • 46. A system of local optimais not an optimal system at all; it is a very suboptimal system Eli Goldratt
  • 47. Processing the waste more effectively ischeaper, neater, faster waste. Stephen Parry
  • 48. If you are doing thewrong thing you can’tlearn, you will only betrying to do the wrong thing righter. John Seddon
  • 49. Problem we tend to ignore
  • 50. Low-frictionmethod
  • 51. Thank you Pawel Brodzinskiblog.brodzinski.com llp.pl @pawelbrodzinski