• Like
Case Study: Using CFD, SPC and Kanban on UK Government IT projects
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

Case Study: Using CFD, SPC and Kanban on UK Government IT projects

  • 1,068 views
Published

Valtech's Prinicpal Consultant Kevin Murray, who has many years of real-world experience in delivering Agile across organisations in the Public Sector presented this Case Study: Using CFD, SPC and …

Valtech's Prinicpal Consultant Kevin Murray, who has many years of real-world experience in delivering Agile across organisations in the Public Sector presented this Case Study: Using CFD, SPC and Kanban on UK Government IT projects at the Agile Business Conference 2011.

Published in Technology , Business
  • 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
1,068
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0

Actions

Shares
Downloads
10
Comments
0
Likes
1

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. CFD, SPC & KANBAN ON UK GOV IT PROJECTS
  • 2. 50 Projects50 Development teams50 Different Customers
  • 3. Background
  • 4. 7 SEPARATE LOCATIONS
  • 5. CFDSPCKanban
  • 6. CUMULATIVE FLOW DIAGRAMS
  • 7. WHY Inspired by peers Unfair perception of some projects Focus on the projects with true WIP issues The need to learn from the good examples Get across the positive successes
  • 8. Number of Problems 50 0 100 150 200 250 12/05 26/05 New 09/06 23/06 07/07 ALL PROJECTS 21/07 To Be Confirmed 04/08 18/08Time 01/09 15/09 29/09 Work in Progress 13/10 27/10 Scheduled 10/11 24/11
  • 9. Number of Problems 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 12/05 26/05 New 09/06 23/06 07/07 21/07 To Be Confirmed MATURE PROJECT 04/08 18/08Time 01/09 15/09 29/09 Work In Progress 13/10 27/10 10/11 Scheduled 24/11
  • 10. Number of Problems 10 20 30 40 50 60 0 12/05 26/05 New 09/06 23/06 07/07 21/07 To Be Confrimed 04/08 CHAOTIC PROJECT 18/08Time 01/09 15/09 29/09 Work In Progress 13/10 27/10 10/11 Scheduled 24/11
  • 11. OUTCOMES Supplier (and customer) able to focus on the projects that needed the most help More face to face time between customer and projects where needed Unearthed and resolved resourcing issues
  • 12. STATISTICAL PROCESS CONTROL CHARTS
  • 13. WHY Understand variance and trends Correct misconception of poor level of service Raise awareness of the high number of incorrectly raised problems The need to identify bottlenecks Needed to learn from the good examples
  • 14. ALL PROJECTS300 Scheduled No Fix Required Scheduled Avg No Fix Required Avg250200150100 50 0 12/09 07/11 10/10 05/12 02/01 30/01 27/02 27/03 24/04 22/05 19/06 17/07 14/08 11/09 09/10 06/11
  • 15. MATURE PROJECT250 Scheduled No Fix Required Scheduled Avg No Fix Required Avg20015010050 0 07/11 11/09 10/10 05/12 02/01 30/01 27/02 27/03 24/04 22/05 19/06 17/07 14/08 09/10 06/11
  • 16. CHAOTIC PROJECT160 Scheduled No Fix Required Scheduled Avg No Fix Required Avg14012010080604020 0 19/06 17/07 07/11 05/12 02/01 30/01 27/02 27/03 24/04 22/05 14/08 11/09 09/10
  • 17. OUTCOMES Got positive message across at all levels Additional management support identified Improved customer collaboration Specific issues identified and resolved
  • 18. KANBAN
  • 19. PROJECT ISSUES Developed by another supplier Not documented very well Performance issues Buggy Rare technology skill sets
  • 20. DEVOPS (BY ACCIDENT, SORT OF…) Live incident analysis Bug Fixes RFCs New releases Build & Release= TOO MUCH WORK AND NOTHING GETTING DELIVERED
  • 21. CUSTOMER RELATIONSHIP Broken customer relationship Quite an aggressive customer Customer getting a very poor service Nothing actually getting delivered Poor communication (both ways)
  • 22. CUSTOMER COULDN’T PRIORITISE
  • 23. Order, don’t prioritise
  • 24. COST OF DELAYe.g. Additional work caused by workaround
  • 25. COST OF DELAYe.g. Risk of getting sued
  • 26. COST OF DELAYe.g. Legislative date
  • 27. KANBAN
  • 28. KANBAN BENEFITS Limiting WIP Involved the whole team Identified bottlenecks Effective ordering of tasks Enabled continuous releases Better customer relationship
  • 29. VISIBLE IMPROVEMENT180 Scheduled Scheduled avg No Fix Required No Fix Required avg16014012010080604020 0 10/10 07/11 05/12 02/01 30/01 27/02 27/03 24/04 22/05 19/06 17/07 14/08 11/09 09/10
  • 30. ?ANY QUESTIONS …
  • 31. kevin.murray@valtech.co.ukhttp://www.valtech.co.ukhttp://blog.valtech.co.ukhttp://twitter.com/valtechhttp://twitter.com/Kev_C_Murray