Advanced kanban overview for waterfall & scrum practitioners (16x9 deck)

2,160 views

Published on

Advanced kanban overview for waterfall & scrum practitioners (16x9 deck)

Published in: Leadership & Management
0 Comments
12 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
2,160
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
42
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
47
Comments
0
Likes
12
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • A Wine (or tea) tasting session based on Ravi Tadwalkar’s training during KCP (Kanban Coaching Professional) Masterclass for kanban practitioners taught by LKU (David Anderson), during 2014, Apr 28 – May 2; and LKNA 2014, during 2014, May 5-8- both events held at SFO.

    New to kanban? The name ‘kanban' originates from Japanese[かんばん] (Chinese: 看板), and translates roughly as "signboard" or "billboard".
    In both Japanese and Chinese, the syllable “kan” is used a verb and it means “to see”; and “ban” means “billboard”.
    While we are starting this workshop, glance thru’ a tiny booklet titled “STOP Starting, START finishing” by Arne Roock. I usually distribute ~10 copies that I use for this kind of event. We can play getkanban game at a later time when possible.
    In my kanban coaching experience, kanban "flow & pull" aspect orientation forces you to "stop starting, start finishing", better than scrum "inspect & adapt" orientation. Kanban being workflow management tool, requires solid engineering practices for teams to succeed in lean software development. However, it's non-prescriptiveness can let newbies fall back on practices & controls that worked in waterfall world. For those, I have always found scrumban to be a practical middle-ground since it brings best from both scrum and kanban. In this session, we will discuss 5 important topics related to kanban and scrumban, comparing & contrasting with scrum, as and when needed.
  • New to kanban? The term ‘kanban' originates from Japanese[かんばん] (Chinese: 看板), and translates roughly as "signboard" or "billboard".
    In both Japanese and Chinese, the syllable “kan” is used a verb and it means “to see”; and “ban” means “billboard”.
    While we are starting this workshop, glance thru’ a tiny booklet titled “STOP Starting, START finishing” by Arne Roock. I usually distribute ~10 copies that I use for this kind of event. We can play getkanban game at a later time when possible.
    We will focus on these 5 topics for discussion:
    Comparing “Toyota kanban” with “software kanban”
    Scrum vs. Scrumban vs. Kanban
    Feedback Loops in kanban
    Kanban Metrics
    Kanban Depth Framework
  • Source: Ohno, Taiichi (1988). Toyota Production System: Beyond Large-Scale Production. Productivity Press. p. 176. ISBN 9780915299140.
    I would relate to lean manufacturing literature (including TQM & six sigma related information) only for comparisons. What works for TPS does not work for knowledge work. As such, I would stop there to avoid any confusion around terminology and maintain my focus on “Kanban for knowledge work”. I refer you to read the blue book by David J. Anderson, creator of “Kanban for knowledge work”, instead of lookup on Wikipedia or any other literature that is not considered the gold standard for knowledge work related Kanban framework and David Anderson’s Kanban Method.
  • Sources:
    Ohno, Taiichi (1988). Toyota Production System: Beyond Large-Scale Production. Productivity Press. p. 176. ISBN 9780915299140. Translation of 1977 Japanese Edition.
    Waldner, Jean-Baptiste (September 1992). Principles of Computer-Integrated Manufacturing. London: John Wiley. pp. 128–132. ISBN 0-471-93450-X.
    lean.org, the Lean Lexicon: http://www.lean.org/Common/LexiconTerm.aspx?termid=242
    Lean glossary of terms : http://www.systems2win.com/c/time_definitions.htm#LeadTime
    Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kanban
  • From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kanban_%28development%29
  • Proto-Kanban is a term used for teams new to kanban, and is not meant to be derogatory term such as scrumbut.
  • Expedite swimlane: You can use this swimlane to visualize a single work item that is allowed to violate work in progress (WIP) limits.
    Intangible swimlane: You can use this swimlane for intangible work such as architectural refactor. Cards in this swimlane are similar EPICs that bubble up (i.e. become tangible) from stack of product backlog items in scrum.
    Already doing kanban? Read the blue book (David Anderson’s Kanban book), page 70, figure 6.5 for an example of kanban board with work type based swim lanes indicating capacity allocation.
    In my kanban coaching experience, kanban "flow & pull" aspect orientation forces you to "stop starting, start finishing", better than scrum "inspect & adapt" orientation. Kanban being workflow management tool, requires solid engineering practices for teams to succeed in lean software development. However, it's non-prescriptiveness can let newbies fall back on practices & controls that worked in waterfall world. For those, I have always found scrumban to be a practical middle-ground since it brings best from both scrum and kanban.

  • Proto-Kanban is a term used for teams new to kanban, and is not meant to be derogatory term such as scrumbut. It’s their first step on a lean journey!
    In my kanban coaching experience, kanban "flow & pull" aspect orientation forces you to "stop starting, start finishing", better than scrum "inspect & adapt" orientation. Kanban being workflow management tool, requires solid engineering practices for teams to succeed in lean software development. However, it's non-prescriptiveness can let newbies fall back on practices & controls that worked in waterfall world. For those, I have always found scrumban to be a practical middle-ground since it brings best from both scrum and kanban. In this session, we will discuss 5 important topics related to kanban and scrumban, comparing & contrasting with scrum, as and when needed.
  • The name 'Kanban' originates from Japanese[看板], and translates roughly as "signboard" or "billboard".
    The term scrumban was introduced by Corey Ladas in his original blog: http://leansoftwareengineering.com/ksse/scrum-ban/
  • The name 'Kanban' originates from Japanese[看板], and translates roughly as "signboard" or "billboard".
    The term scrumban was introduced by Corey Ladas in his original blog: http://leansoftwareengineering.com/ksse/scrum-ban/
    Scrumban Level 1
    - Scrum but no commitment to the content
    - Teams get most value out of daily standups, retrospectives, grooming and to a lesser degree planning (at least some planned work is done)
    - Aim to empty the queue in each timebox
    - Don't split stories
     
    Scrumban Level 2
    - Essentially Kanban but timeboxed
    - It forces stories to be broken down so work is completed (versus open ended Epics)
    - Aim to empty the queue in each timebox
    - Don't split stories

  • The name 'Kanban' originates from Japanese[看板], and translates roughly as "signboard" or "billboard".
    The term scrumban was introduced by Corey Ladas in his original blog: http://leansoftwareengineering.com/ksse/scrum-ban/
  • The name 'Kanban' originates from Japanese[看板], and translates roughly as "signboard" or "billboard".
    The term scrumban was introduced by Corey Ladas in his original blog: http://leansoftwareengineering.com/ksse/scrum-ban/
  • The name 'Kanban' originates from Japanese[看板], and translates roughly as "signboard" or "billboard".
    The term scrumban was introduced by Corey Ladas in his original blog: http://leansoftwareengineering.com/ksse/scrum-ban/
  • References:
    https://www.scrum.org/Portals/0/Documents/Scrum%20Guides/2013/Scrum-Guide.pdf http://www.crisp.se/file-uploads/Kanban-vs-Scrum.pdf (Chapter 6) http://leansoftwareengineering.com/ksse/scrum-ban/ http://www.eylean.com/blog/2013/04/scrum-vs-kanban-vs-scrumban-iterations-work-routines-and-scope-limits/ http://www.netobjectives.com/blogs/why-contrasting-scrumban-and-kanban-belies-lack-understanding-both
    http://www.ontheagilepath.net/2013/09/scrum-kanban-scrumban-fast-overview-and.html
    Kanban Applied to Software Development: from Agile to Lean What is Best, Scrum or Kanban?
  • Proto-Kanban is a term used for teams new to kanban method, and is not meant to be derogatory term such as scrum-butt.
  • “Stop Starting, Start Finishing” booklet exemplifies how to conduct daily standups in kanban.
    Feedback loops are not limited to those three. Some advanced practitioners found interesting, custom organizational feedback loops that help them evolve their departments in a way that helps the whole company seek, contextual fitness for purpose.
  • There are 3 primary metrics in kanban: average lead time, due date performance, and flow efficiency.
    There is growing trend of using Monte-Carlo simulation based to forecast delivery dates for planning fixed bid projects.
  • I request you all to not consider cycle time as far as kanban/scrumban team metrics are of your concern. Here is why:

    Even though there are well-established definitions of lead time & cycle time on the lean glossary of terms, those apply to lean manufacturing world, not always to knowledge work. In contrast, just like Stefan Roock’s blogpost, vendors like Rally (on this Rally help page) have defined cycle time as time from “WIP” to “accepted”, and I tend to agree with that definition for knowledge work.
     
    However, in past few months after my advanced Kanban coaching related training, I have had several discussions with various scrum/kanban experts on this and they don’t find cycle time practical for Kanban workflows. David J Anderson’s Kanban book (called “the blue book”) is considered equivalent of scrum guide in the lean Kanban community, and the blue book does not even mention the term “cycle time”. At a recent lean Kanban retreat, the practitioners of the Kanban method (David J Anderson & his disciples) decided not to recommend use or application of cycle time, since cycle time is not as important to the “customer”, even though it may be dearer to the delivery/product team management. There is an excellent blog post that mentions this with examples: The difference between Cycle Time and Lead Time... and why not to use Cycle Time in Kanban
     
    There is more continuous improvement happening in the Lean Kanban community with contributors like Arne Roock (known for “Stop Starting Start Finishing!”), Russell Healy (getkanban.com game creator), Christophe Achouizntz (known for Kanban team kaizen survey)  or Hakan Forss (known to popularize flow efficiency metric as the primary Kanban metric).
     
  • I request you all to not consider cycle time as far as kanban/scrumban team metrics are of your concern. Here is why:

    Even though there are well-established definitions of lead time & cycle time on the lean glossary of terms, those apply to lean manufacturing world, not always to knowledge work. In contrast, just like Stefan Roock’s blogpost, vendors like Rally (on this Rally help page) have defined cycle time as time from “WIP” to “accepted”, and I tend to agree with that definition for knowledge work.
     
    However, in past few months after my advanced Kanban coaching related training, I have had several discussions with various scrum/kanban experts on this and they don’t find cycle time practical for Kanban workflows. David J Anderson’s Kanban book (called “the blue book”) is considered equivalent of scrum guide in the lean Kanban community, and the blue book does not even mention the term “cycle time”. At a recent lean Kanban retreat, the practitioners of the Kanban method (David J Anderson & his disciples) decided not to recommend use or application of cycle time, since cycle time is not as important to the “customer”, even though it may be dearer to the delivery/product team management. There is an excellent blog post that mentions this with examples: The difference between Cycle Time and Lead Time... and why not to use Cycle Time in Kanban
     
    There is more continuous improvement happening in the Lean Kanban community with contributors like Arne Roock (known for “Stop Starting Start Finishing!”), Russell Healy (getkanban.com game creator), Christophe Achouizntz (known for Kanban team kaizen survey)  or Hakan Forss (known to popularize flow efficiency metric as the primary Kanban metric).
     
  • The flow efficiency metric is getting very popular in the lean Kanban community. For flow efficiency, touch time & lead time, I refer you to Forss’s presentation link from Agile2014 conference event, the slide number is 58 and it is about flow efficiency related industry stats: http://schd.ws/hosted_files/agile2014/b2/1313_How_to_improve_Flow_Efficiency__remove_the_red_bricks_Agile_2014.pdf

  • Source: Dimitar Bakardzhiev, Expert in managing successful and cost-effective technology development
    How to use Monte Carlo simulation for predicting the delivery time for your next project. Dimitar goes pretty quickly through the slides and focus on how to simulate project delivery time using Monte Carlo simulation in MS Excel. The method presented can be used by any team that uses user stories for planning and tracking project execution no matter the development process used (Scrum, XP, kanban systems). The PPT can be seen here : https://www.slideshare.net/dimiterbak/noestimates-project-planning-using-monte-carlo-simulation And here is an Excel file to show how Monte Carlo is done http://modernmanagement.bg/data/NoEstimate_Project_Planning_MonteCarlo.xlsx
    play video #NoEstimates project planning using Monte Carlo simulation youtube.com
    Dimitar Bakarzhiev: “Clients come to us with an idea for a product and they always ask the questions - how long will it take and how much will it cost us to deliver? They need a delivery date and a budget estimate. This talk is about planning a fixed bid project by applying Monte Carlo simulation using collected historical data about lead time per story.”
  • FYI: Metrics guru (Dr.) Larry Maccherone has 2 PDFs shared with me when I was talking to him about 3 key kanban metrics popularized by David Anderson. You will note that Larry cautions me against doing control charting for knowledge work. Here is his email to me about avoiding control charts:
     
    From: Larry Maccherone [mailto:lmaccherone@rallydev.com] Sent: Monday, May 26, 2014 9:38 AM To: TADWALKAR, Ravi  
    Hi Ravi,
     
    I am not a believer in the value of "control" with respect to TiP. The visualization of TiP along with the distribution is valuable. The analysis of common cause variation and special cause variation is also great. The analysis of the TiP of specific work items is also very valuable as a conversation starter.  I discuss some of this here in this paper. I discuss why controls charts are "sins" here in sins #1 and sin #6. 
     
    So, I don't think we're going to be adding a true control chart any time soon to Rally. That said, we will be providing a visualization toolkit with an example TiP chart so you would be able to easily add your own control limits to that chart and achieve your goal.
     
    Thanks,
    Larry
  • Kanban team assessments tend to be much broader due to serviceability agenda of kanban, when compared with product-focused scrum team assessments. Let’s see why!
  • Kanban assessment focusses around these “skills”: visualization, WIP limiting, Flow management, explicit policies (e.g. we will expedite work 3 days prior to due date), Feedback loops (daily, input queue replinisment & ops-reviews) and improvements (kaizen aspect).
  • The colors indicate the questions from the survey that reflect the kanban depth: teams need to move from red (inner-most) to green (outer-most) “color”.
  • The colors indicate the questions from the survey that reflect the kanban depth. Update: Ravi Tadwalkar created spreadsheet based model of Kanban Team Assessment tool, using Kanban Depth Framework of Christophe Achouiantz
    He has been interacting with @ChrisAch on the spreadsheet based survey created out of these questions, to define & refine those via a crisp glossary of terms he used in this survey. PFA the attached spreadsheets titled “Example 1” and “Example 2”, that include notes from our correspondence..
  • In summaryKanban is a catalyst for change through small, incremental improvements to your existing process – be it scrum or otherwise.
    Rooted in lean manufacturing, kanban is a signaling system that can be effectively applied to software development, DevOps, IT operations, and many other processes.
  • Advanced kanban overview for waterfall & scrum practitioners (16x9 deck)

    1. 1. Advanced Kanban Overview for Waterfall/Scrum Practitioners Ravi Tadwalkar Lean/Agile/DevOps Coach Co-founder, “Cisco Internal Coaches Network”; Event Organizer, AgileCamp.org & SVALN This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
    2. 2. Advanced Kanban Overview Top 5 Topics for Discussion: 1. Compare “Toyota kanban” (aka TPS) with “software kanban” (aka “K”anban) 2. Scrum vs. Scrumban vs. Kanban Evaluator 3. Feedback Loops in Kanban 4. Kanban Metrics 5. Kanban Depth Framework- A Model for Kanban Team Assessment
    3. 3. Compare Kanban for lean manufacturing (aka TPS) With Kanban for knowledge work (aka “K”anban)
    4. 4. Kanban for lean manufacturing TPS (Toyota Production System) invented “kanban” • In Lean Manufacturing, a kanban is a signaling device that gives authorization and instructions for production or withdrawal (conveyance) of items in a pull system. Toyota's Six Rules from TPS 1. Later process picks up the number of items indicated by the kanban at the earlier process. 2. Earlier process produces items in the quantity and sequence indicated by the kanban. 3. No items are made or transported without a kanban. 4. Always attach a kanban to the goods. 5. Defective products are not sent on to the subsequent process. The result is 100% defect-free goods. 6. Reducing the number of Kanban reduces WIP and increases the sensitivity of the system to pull signals (kanbans), because there is less buffer between the processes. Kanbans maintain inventory levels; a signal is sent to produce and deliver a new shipment as material is consumed. These signals are tracked through the replenishment cycle and bring extraordinary visibility to suppliers and buyers. Purpose: Logistic control system Implemented at: Toyota Date implemented: 1953 Source: Ohno, Taiichi (1988)
    5. 5. Kanban for knowledge work • David J Anderson created “K”anban, now known as Kanban Method. Kanban for knowledge work is a management method of just-in-time delivery based on capacity to do work. As such, here the focus is not to overload the team members. • In kanban, the process workflow, from definition of work to its delivery to the customer, is displayed for participants to see and team members pull work from each queue. • Kanban for software development means a visual process management system that tells what to produce, when to produce it, and how much to produce- inspired by the Toyota Production System and Lean Manufacturing. • For more details on “Kanban (Method)”, please check out this wikipedia page. Source: : David J Anderson (2010)
    6. 6. Done F E I Engineering Ready Deployment Ready G D GY PB MN 2 ∞ P1 AB Ongoing Development Testing Done Verification Acceptance 3 3 DE Proto-Kanban You may have used or seen a kanban board for running events like conference or even hackathon. Whenever a team starts visualizing work with a kanban board, that team is doing proto-kanban! Explicit policies & WIP Limits based on queues (aka lanes or columns) Lead time ends at 1st infinite queue! There could be additional queues with no WIP limit. Lead time “clock” starts at the 1st queue aka input queue!
    7. 7. Done F E I Engineering Ready Deployment Ready G D GY PB MN 2 ∞ P1 AB Ongoing Development Testing Done Verification Acceptance 3 3 Expedite 1 3 Fixed Date Standard Intangible 2 2 DE Lead time ends at 1st infinite queue! Lead time “clock” starts at input queue! NPD i.e. New Prod Dev (60%) Defect& Tech Debt (30%) Innov ation (10%) Getting Beyond Proto-KanbanGetting beyond visual board: Hedge risk by allocating capacity, by defining WIP limits to shape demand (total WIP) for queues/swimlanes. Explicit policies & WIP Limits based on classes of service & work type! 5 2 1 In my kanban coaching experience, kanban "flow & pull" aspect orientation forces you to "stop starting, start finishing", better than scrum "inspect & adapt" orientation. Kanban being workflow management tool, requires solid engineering practices for teams to succeed in lean software development. However, it's non- prescriptiveness can let newbies fall back on practices & controls that worked in waterfall world. For those, I have always found scrumban to be a practical middle-ground since it brings best from both scrum and kanban.
    8. 8. From proto-kanban to kanban: A Practitioner’s Way to improve Flow Efficiency A team improves its average lead time and flow efficiency by applying explicit policies, WIP limits for queues/swim-lanes, at regular cadence! Mature kanban teams calculate lead time when accepting cards flowing on the physical/virtual card wall, with scrumban-style regular cadence. After participating in release planning, such kanban teams commit to iterative development/support on a cadence so as to finish in 1-2 weeks. Rallying with virtual kanban board & syncing physical card wall with it! That’s one way to do scrumban! Source: PayPal
    9. 9. Scrum vs. Scrumban vs. Kanban Evaluator Scrumban Level 1 - Scrum but no commitment to the content - Teams get most value out of daily standups, retrospectives, grooming and to a lesser degree planning (at least some planned work is done) - Aim to empty the queue in each timebox - Don't split stories Scrumban Level 2 - Essentially Kanban but timeboxed - It forces stories to be broken down so work is completed (versus open ended Epics) - Aim to empty the queue in each timebox - Don't split stories
    10. 10. Compare & Contrast Scrum, Scrumban & Kanban: Do Planning to fill available (not all) slots User Story Template • scrumban/kanban process is about moving story/task/activity cards as fast as you can across the value stream to have shortest lead time. This requires slightly different way to look at requirements than following scrum-style user story templates. – So while it does help when you use a user story template with tasks associated for teams that prefer that kind of card on their board, it can very well be at a granular activity level if all other cards on the board are of similar size and they are also activities rather than stories. Unlike scrum framework, in kanban (and scrumban) there is no need to take a particular stance on this. – Stories hover around typical size for kanban/scrumban teams (e.g. 3,5,8 if average size is a 5 pointer story). • Kanban manifesto could very well begin with this one liner: We prefer having typical sizes over following user story template! • Kanban does not put emphasis on estimation of work, as long as all work items have similar levels of effort, complexity & risk. – Decomposition- using patterns for splitting (i.e. slicing) work- remains same scrumban adds timeboxing on top of kanban board. Planning mechanism • This is another area where contrasting scrumban with scrum and kanban makes a lot of sense, based on Corey Ladas's blog about scrumban. In scrumban (& kanban), planning is done to fill the available (not all) slots: just in time & slack. Timeboxing • Scrumban does not distinguish between sprints/releases. It’s better to call it "timebox". – That way folks will know that in scrumban, burndown is less important than Lead Time and Cycle Time. Here are quotes from the scrumban creator Corey Ladas whose blog exemplifies this. Read on these 3 excerpts:
    11. 11. Burndown is less important than Lead Time and Cycle Time "With the pull system in place, our flow will become smoother as our process capability improves. We can use our inter-process buffers and flow diagrams to show us our process weaknesses and opportunities for kaizen. As we get closer to level production, we will start to become less concerned with burndown and more concerned with cycle time, as one is the effect and the other is the cause. Average lead time and cycle time will become the primary focus of performance. If cycle time is under control and the team capacity is balanced against demand, then lead time will also be under control. If cycle time is under control, then burndowns are predictable and uninteresting. If burndowns are uninteresting, then goal-setting and risky heroic efforts are unnecessary. If burndowns are uninteresting, then iteration backlogs are just inventory for the purpose of planning regularity and feeding the pull system. As such, they should be the smallest inventories possible that optimize planning cost."
    12. 12. Sprint backlog- Smallest Inventory to Optimize Planning Cost "A simple mechanism that fits the bill is a size limit for the iteration backlog. Rather than go through the trouble of estimating a scope of work for every iteration, just make the backlog a fixed size that will occasionally run to zero before the planning interval ends. That’s a simple calculation. It’s just the average number of things released per iteration, which in turn is just a multiple of average cycle time. So if you have 5 things in process, on average, and it takes 5 days to complete something, on average, then you’ll finish 1 thing per day, on average. If your iteration interval is two work weeks, or 10 work days, then the iteration backlog should be 10. You can add one or two for padding if you worry about running out. This might be a point that’s been lost on the Scrum community: it’s never necessary to estimate the particular sizes of things in the backlog. It’s only necessary to estimate the average size of things in the backlog. Most of the effort spent estimating in Scrum is waste."
    13. 13. Why estimate the average size of things in the backlog? "In our final incarnation of Scrumban, iteration planning still happens at a regular interval, synchronized with review and retrospective, but the goal of planning is to fill the slots available, not fill all of the slots, and certainly not determine the number of slots. This greatly reduces the overhead and ceremony of iteration planning. Time spent batch processing for iteration planning estimation can be replaced with a quality control inspection at the time that work is promoted to the ready queue. If a work item is ill-formed, then it gets bounced and repeat offenders get a root cause analysis."
    14. 14. Process Framework Evaluator – An Example Questionnaire Questions Explanation Planning: Despite the PO trying to do so, is it impossible to lock down the scope for your chosen timebox? Do you have more than 25% scope churn during the chosen timebox? Scrum: Scrum works best when requirements are stable for the duration of the Sprint so that the team can commit to their delivery. Kanban: Some scope change can be accommodated. By dropping the fixed timebox, Kanban can allow teams to adapt more easily to quickly changing priorities. Scrumban: Iteration planning is done at a regular interval, with the goal of planning is to fill the slots available - not fill all of the slots, and certainly not to determine the number of slots. Decomposition: Even after trying your best, is it impossible to break features into incremental pieces of value to be delivered within the chosen timebox? Both Scrum and Kanban work best when you break your work down into small incremental pieces. The Scrum Sprint timebox can help new teams recognize deficiencies (work not completed at the end of the sprint) and adapt (retrospective). Scrumban: Can you decompose work to lock scope for the timboxed duration? Estimation: Is it hard or impossible for the team to size the work in the chosen timebox? Does estimation take more than 3 hours? Kanban: Kanban removes the overhead of estimation in favor of measuring cycle time for like sized items. Work should be comprised of similarly sized activities for Kanban. Scrum: Scrum absolutely requires that all work be estimated so that the team can commit to the sprint. Scrumban: Scrumban does not require estimation. Responsiveness: Is your top priority to optimize responsiveness to customer needs? Must work begin in the current timebox (cannot wait until the next one)? Kanban has a strong focus on cycle time, where Scrum has a stronger focus on Velocity. Both can be tuned to provide very similar output, but Kanban has the flexibility to lower batch size to reduce cycle time at the potential cost of productivity. Predictability & Productivity: Is your top priority predictability and productivity for larger projects? You can achieve predictability and a high level of productivity using any agile framework. Scrum provides more guidance on how to handle release planning and progress tracking so is preferable for new teams. Process Oriented Culture: Does your team culture demand a higher degree of process ceremonies? Although Scrum has fewer ceremonies and artifacts than many other methodologies, it has more than Kanban and can more easily be integrated into a culture requiring them. Shared Team Members: Do you share engineers with other teams? Does your team lack all the required skills to complete the work? Scrum: Scrum teams work best when they do not have dependencies on people outside of the team . Kanban: With Kanban, others can see when there is work for them to do and pick it up at that time. Variety in work (complexity & size): Are your work items of approximately similar size & complexity? Both Scrum and Kanban work very well with similar sized work items. However, in Kanban the variability between different sized items makes it difficult to adhere to SLAs. Source: Steve Sanoff
    15. 15. Primary Feedback Loops in Kanban Kanban has three primary feedback loops: 1. Daily standups (team level) 2. System capability review (team/department level), and 3. Ops review (organizational). Kanban includes many retrospective feedback loops, focused on various aspects of improvement and closing daily, monthly and every time in between.
    16. 16. Implement Feedback Loops in Kanban • Daily Standups – First level of feedback is daily standups, where team collaborates to review flow of work and demand versus capability measures, metrics and indicators. – Why are daily standups in kanban are done differently than “daily scrums”? • Purpose of primary feedback loop - daily standup - in kanban – The focus of a kanban daily standup is on “flow”, with sanity check on WIP limits set for queues and swim-lanes. Your read the kanban board from right to left, as if the team were to read an Arabic poem! Watch what’s due in expedite, intangible & any other work-type specific swim-lanes, where the bottlenecks are developing, what is blocking the flow. – It’s no more about the scrum-style “3 questions” format then. • With that, size of a kanban team is not the issue, so team size can exceed the scrum team size of 5-9. • Daily standups result in the team/workgroup-level problem-solving activities that foster collaboration. • System Capability Review – Second level of feedback is known as system capability review – this is where the demand is shaped (replenished) at cadence based on average lead time. (We will revisit “shaping demand” when discussing average lead time, later.) – This feedback is at the level of the team, workgroup, department or business unit. • Ops Review – Third level of feedback - operations review – is where organizational process improvements occur beyond a localized team level, to realize full benefits of Kanban.
    17. 17. 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 48 1 6 9 1217202326293235384144475053 3 6 9 12151821242730333639 2012 2013 2014 Throughput (# of resolved tickets / week) Average Lead Time / week Average Flow Efficiency % / week Kanban Metrics * Lead Time Distribution indicates Predictability * Average Lead Time impacts SLA Adherence * High Productivity means better “Flow Efficiency” * Monte-Carlo forecasting for planning fixed bid projects How do you coach a kanban team on adjusting their "Total WIP“? By observing trends in throughput, lead time & flow efficiencies! Apply Little’s law: Total WIP (for each workday) = Avg. delivery rate (per workday) * Avg. lead time (in workdays) Source: PayPal
    18. 18. Lead Time Distribution indicates Predictability • Lead Time Distribution Curve – Average lead time helps “shape demand” by coming up with a cadence for replenishing input queue for “planning” work intake. – Team can try to reduce the average lead time by doing scrum-style decomposition. – Example stats: • Analyzing Lead Time Distribution Curve – Have you ever wondered how we measure lead time in Kanban and how we make use of them? – Alexei Zheglov has posted a couple of insightful articles on how to analyze, measure and understand lead time. Click to read more - • Analyzing the Lead Time Distribution Chart • Inside a Lead Time Distribution • Introducing Lead Time Forecasting Cards • Scrum Commitments, Little’s Law, and Variability • Lead Time and Iterative Software Development – Alexei Zheglov shows how scrum teams can analyze lead time distribution curve using mode, median, average and 75 percentile values of lead times as shown here: Lead Time Stats 33.80435(Average) 26.5 (Median) 0(Mode) 0 2 4 6 8 10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Frequencies Lead Times Lead Time Distribution (Frequency Curve) Lead Time Frequencies Smoother frequency curve is better!
    19. 19. Average Lead Time impacts SLA Adherence • Due Date Performance – For SLA adherence for classes of service, Due Date Performance metric can be used. – In this example, the +ve numbers indicate few missed SLAs, whereas the –ve numbers indicate that the SLAs were met on time or even earlier. – According to Russell Healy, creator of getkanban board game: +ve and -ve values should not be treated equally. The cost of delay for a fixed delivery date item is a "Heaviside step function" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heaviside_step_function) modified for the opportunity cost incurred for -ve values of x. Go figure! 10/3/2013 11/22/2013 1/11/2014 3/2/2014 4/21/2014 6/10/2014 7/30/2014 -50 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 AcceptanceDates SLA Adherence Due Date Performance Accepted Date earlier (i.e. on time or before) is better!
    20. 20. High Productivity means better “Flow Efficiency” Flow Efficiency metric • What percentage of lead time does a work item actually take end-to-end, on an average? By comparing lead time against the touch time (aka assigned time), we get “waste indicator”. • waste can be due to high WIP • waste can be due to wait/blocked times • How to compute Flow Efficiency? • It should be possible to create histogram based this formula: Flow Efficiency = “touch time” / “lead time” • Although very difficult to measure flow efficiency for knowledge work, histograms are useful • David Anderson mentions that 15% flow efficiency is quite normal for knowledge workers. In this example, max flow efficiency is 5.3%, with average of 0.6% which is too low. • What can teams do to increase it? In other words: How do you use this metric to inspire teams to be even more productive? In order to improve flow efficiency , teams should try to reduce the WIP, so that less cards will have delays due to wait times and/or blocked times. 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 FlowEfficiency% Acceptance Dates Flow Efficiency (Ratio) Flow Efficiency higher % is better! It means there is not much waste!
    21. 21. Monte-Carlo forecasting for planning fixed bid projects Monte Carlo Simulation • Lean Kanban community & tool vendors recommend using Monte Carlo based forecasting for planning fixed bid projects, e.g. the forecast below: Use the 85 percentile as the delivery time • Based on projected delivery time histogram above, Dimitar Bakarzhiev recommends using 85th percentile for commit point, which David Anderson talks about during his kanban training as well. 0.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00% 80.00% 100.00% 120.00% Probability Projected Delivery time (days) Source: Dimitar Bakardzhiev
    22. 22. Control Chart vs. “Time In Process” • Control Chart for Lead Time Variability Control chart can be used to determine lead time variability. It is a useful way to observe anomalies about out-of-control frequencies of lead times. In the example below, there are outlier lead times with values of greater than 80 days. Team should analyze special causes behind those outliers before ruling those out, to get smoother control “band”: • Time In Process – This metric is specific to Rally Insights tool, and sounds very complementary to lead time, cycle time, and time to market. – Time in Process is the number of business days a typical user story is in the "In-progress" or "Completed" column. (i.e. not accepted yet). – Why is this Important? According to renouned metrics guru Larry Maccherone, Accurate planning & budgeting need accurate estimates. – Time in Process charting in Rally shows how long the median of Stories are in process. -50 0 50 100 150 200 10/3/2013 11/22/2013 1/11/2014 3/2/2014 4/21/2014 6/10/2014 7/30/2014 LeadTimes Acceptance Dates Control Chart for Lead Time Variability Lead Time Smoother control band is better!
    23. 23. Kanban Depth Framework- A Model for Kanban Team Assessment
    24. 24. Practitioners in smaller organizations have tended to adopt a relative assessment model Outer edge defines specific local goals Visualize Limit WIP Manage FlowExplicit Policies Feedback Loops Improvements Activity Not present at Proto-Kanban levelWhere we would like to be
    25. 25. Assessing the Depth of a Kanban Implementation Limit WIPFeedback Loops (13) (4) (11)(12) (7) (10) VisualizeImprove Explicit Policies Manage Flow 7 1 2 5 2 Lean Excellence 10 2 68 3 2 Effects 4 7 (12) 12 3 10 10 6 4 10 Improving Sustainably Necessary for sustainable improvements 6 • See & Understand (WIP, Blocks, Queues) • Increase Liquidity • Measure Flow / capability (WIP, throughput, Queues, lead time) • Defer Commitment • Improve Predictability • Reduced Task Switching • Reduced Lead times • Reduced Overburdening (quality, sustainability) • Set Standards to improve upon • Generate actionable feedback (information) from stakeholders to improve • Improve continuously in a sustainable way Source: Christophe Achouiantz – @ChrisAch
    26. 26. Team: ________ Date: __/__/__ Visualize 1. Work (all, according to current policies) 2. Work Types 3. Workflow (“process”, way-of-working, value stream) 4. ‘Next’ & ‘Done’ 5. Current Team Focus (avatars) 6. Blocks 7. Current Policies (DoD, DoR, capacity allocations, etc.) 8. Ready for Pull (“done” within the workflow/in columns) 9. Metrics (lead-times, local cycle times, SLA targets, etc.) 10. WIP limits 11. Inter-work dependencies (hierarchical, parent-child, etc.) 12. Inter-workflow dependencies 13. Risk dimensions (cost-of-delay, technical risk, market risk) Limit Work in Progress 1. No WIP limit, but commitment to finishing work over starting new (eventually reaching a WIP level that “feels OK” for the team) 2. Some explicit WIP limits, at lower level than workflow (a.k.a Proto-Kanban): personal Kanban, WIP limit per person, WIP limits for some columns or swim-lanes, workflow with infinite limits on “done” queues, etc. 3. Explicit WIP limit at workflow level - Single workflow full pull 4. Multiple interdependent workflows with pull system Manage Flow 1. Daily planning meetings (as “daily” as agreed by policies) 2. Blocks out of team control are escalated for resolution 3. Next is re-prioritized continuously (no commitment in Next)- Deferred Pull decisions (dynamic prioritization) 4. CFDs (updated at least once a week) 5. Control Charts (updated at least once a week) 6. Size of ongoing work items is limited (large work is broken down) 7. Flexible staff allocation (swarming) 8. Cadence is established (planning, delivering, retrospective) 9. Flow metrics (number of days blocked, lead-time efficiency) 10. SLA expectations and forecasts (lead-time targets) 11. Capacity Allocations Make Policies Explicit - All Policies must be CURRENT (known & actually used) 1. Definition of Work Types and Work Item (template) 2. How to pull work (selection from ‘Next’/prioritization of WIP) 3. Who and when manages the ‘Next’ and ‘Done’ queues 4. Staff allocation / work assignment (individual focus) 5. Definition of Ready for ‘Next’ 6. Who, when and how to estimate work size 7. Limit size of work items (work breakdown) 8. How to select & prepare work for the ‘Next’ queue 9. Definition of Done at all steps (seen as a Target Condition) 10. Knowledge spreading/sharing strategy 11. Class-of-Service 12. Capacity allocation Implement Feedback Loops 1. Daily Team standups 2. Key stakeholders (mngt, customers, other groups) are regularly updated on the current situation 3. Managers go and see (walk the ‘gemba’) regularly 4. Regular discussions with upstream and downstream partners 5. Regular presentations and discussions about Financial performance 6. Regular presentations and discussions about Quality KPI (defect rate, customer satisfaction, etc.) 7. “Regularly” means once per month or more often Improve 1. The group knows why it exists and its criteria for success 2. Regular Retrospectives / Kaizen events 3. The team knows its current condition (may require metrics) 4. True North exists, is communicated and shared by the team 5. The team knows the current target condition (the challenge) 6. There is a validation criteria (test) for the current target condition to know when the target condition is reached 7. The team knows what obstacles are preventing them from reaching the target condition 8. The team knows what obstacle is being currently addressed 9. The team knows what is the next step in resolving the current obstacle (PDCA) 10. The team go and see what they have learned from taking that step Effects (seeing Evidence of…) 1. Team members are seeing and understanding the Big Picture (team-level vs. local situations) 2. Better “team spirit” (helping each-others to complete work, respect) 3. Focus on removing blocks 4. Focusing on finishing work rather than starting new work 5. Team is working on the “right” thing (“right” prioritization) 6. Limiting work to team’s capacity (limited stress, optimal lead- times) 7. Team has motivation to drive improvements 8. Local process evolution (visualization, workflow, policies, WIP limits) 9. Increase depth of Kanban implementation 10. Process evolution was model-driven 11. Process or management policy evolution as a result of mentor- mentee 12. Inter-workflow or management policy evolution due to Limit WIPFeedback Loops (13) (4) (11)(12) (7) (10) Visualize Improve Explicit Policies Manage Flow 7 1 2 5 2 Lean Excellence 10 2 68 3 2 Effects 4 7 (12) 12 3 10 10 6 4 10 Baseline Necessary 6 Source: Christophe Achouiantz – @ChrisAch 00Current ”Score” Trend
    27. 27. References & External Links There is more continuous improvement happening in Lean Kanban community with contributors like Arne Roock (known for “Stop Starting Start Finishing!”), Russell Healy (getkanban.com game creator), Christophe Achouizntz (known for Kanban team assessment survey) or Hakan Forss (creator of flow efficiency metric as the primary Kanban metric). References • Pre-requisite #1: “STOP Starting, START finishing” by Arne Roock • Pre-requisite #2: Anderson, David (April 2010). Kanban - Successful Evolutionary Change for your Technology Business. Blue Hole Press. • Pre-requisite #3: Anderson, David (April 2012). Lessons in Agile Management- On the road to Kanban. Blue Hole Press. • Pre-requisite #4: Scrumban - Essays on Kanban Systems for Lean Software Development by Corey Ladas • External links – David Anderson’s blog posts & Henrik Kniberg’s blog posts – InfoQ eBooks by Henrik Kniberg & others [e.g. Jasper Boeg (2012-02). "Priming Kanban" (in English). InfoQ] – The difference between Cycle Time and Lead Time... and why not to use Cycle Time in Kanban – Scrumban - Essays on Kanban Systems for Lean Software Development by Corey Ladas – What is Kanban? by Joseph Hurtado – Aspects of Kanban by Karl Scotland – De-mystifying Kanban by Al Shalloway of Net Objectives – Kanban Applied to Software Development: from Agile to Lean – What is Best, Scrum or Kanban? – Kanban for Teams by Al Shalloway – Open Kanban Presentation – Open Kanban Documentation – LKNA conferences & related links • https://plus.google.com/113439681622341364754/videos • http://leankanban.com/case-studies • http://blackswanfarming.com/cost-of-delay/

    ×