Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Strategy Execution

2,813 views

Published on

A straight forward and repeatable approach to creating Enterprise Agility by Connecting Strategy to Execution through the use of Facilitated Articulation, A3 Planning, Kanban Project Management, and Agile technology development. The approach results in alignment and drives effective change management.

Published in: Business
  • Be the first to comment

Strategy Execution

  1. 1. Executing Strategy as a Competitive Advantage:Beam Team Case Study<br />Using Lean and Agile <br />to Lead<br />An Organizational Transformation<br />
  2. 2. Situation<br />$100 million retail service provider<br />Merchandising<br />Remodeling<br />Construction<br />Resets<br />The economy has drastically reduced remodeling and construction<br />Significant shift in the market eliminates merchandising<br />The entire business focus is now resets <br />Not traditionally profitable – and the business processes and technology were not optimized to perform resets<br />
  3. 3. Situation<br />Several providers left the market<br />The Beam Team was in a good cash position so they acquired another large provider in an attempt to ramp back up to an efficient size<br />The took on the largest reset project they had ever done – without the systems to manage it profitably<br />There was churn in their IT organization and management lacked confidence their developers could deliver what was needed to achieve their business goals<br />
  4. 4. Initial Findings: Organization<br />Owners: Very successful entrepreneurs with deep understanding of the industry – innovative and strategic thinkers<br />Management: <br />Tactically focused, in transition, stretched very thin<br />Lack clear line of site to their costs or economic drivers in this new business model<br />Out of necessity run the business on intuition and response to crisis <br />Back office: Very hard working knowledgeable people<br />Overall: Not a demonstrated history of getting ideas from concept to implementation<br />
  5. 5. Initial Findings: Technology<br />Software development was technically competent but not very mature and in churn<br />40% of technology developed over four years had not been deployed in the business<br />The system had been designed in information silos<br />Spreadsheets and personal recall were used to run the business - the spreadsheets were the glue between the information silos<br />There was a lack of access to any management information in the system – there was no useful reporting<br />
  6. 6. Approach<br />Time pressure to ramp up for the huge reset project, cash flow challenges, an immature development team, and lack of historical ability to implement processes and technology combined to make this very risky<br />We took the project on a contingency basis to offset their business risk<br />Two prong approach<br />Get development under control <br />Identify and deploy a focused set of changes in the business<br />
  7. 7. Approach: Technology<br />Established Kanban board for development - visualized their process and all the existing work<br />Established three classes of service based on source of funding<br />Still have not explicitly limited WIP on the development board<br />Major bottleneck was in customer acceptance <br /> Next Analysis Development Acceptance “Done-Done”<br />NPD<br />Enhance<br />Core System<br />Enhancexof 40<br />
  8. 8. Refactoring the Development Board<br />
  9. 9. Approach: Business<br />We knew we could get development under control – but we had to get business results to earn the contingency<br />We needed to help the business articulate the most important requirements to technology<br />We needed to help the business adopt the technology<br />We needed to create alignment and focus in a time of rapid shift, turmoil, and duress<br />
  10. 10. Approach: Business<br />Performed information flow analysis against current systems and processes<br />Six systems and over a dozen spreadsheets<br />Swivel Chair Integration<br />
  11. 11. Approach: Business<br />Analyzed business model to develop a capability map<br />
  12. 12. Approach: Business<br />Facilitated Strategy Articulation <br />based on Strategic Goals, COGS model and SWOT analysis<br />
  13. 13. Assess the model<br />Capability Map gave us clarity on what the business did.<br />Assessing the model determined what was most important to the business.<br />The business was aligned with the outcome because they developed it.<br />
  14. 14. Approach: Business Objective<br />From our assessments we knew precisely what capabilities we needed to change and what processes and technology were employed in each capability<br />Our strategy was clear and there was a shared context within the business<br />How do we connect our strategic understanding to execution?<br />
  15. 15. Approach: Strategy to Execution<br />Bring together the Business and Technology in A3 efforts focusing on the leverage point capabilities<br />Facilitate discussion to align what we could rapidly deliver with needs of impacted management and performers<br />What is our target? What are the capability gaps relative to the strategy?<br />What is the root cause? Five why’s – not granular 6 Sigma effort.<br />Evaluate Solutions<br />High Level Deliverables on the Implementation Plan<br />Assign Owners and Target Due Dates<br />High level deliverables end up on the A3, with measurable outcomes, in the context of the strategy, and with the impacted capabilities clearly identified.<br />
  16. 16. An A3 Plan: Strategy to Execution<br />
  17. 17. Now the big challenge<br />Execute the Strategy<br />How can we get management to maintain focus?<br />Technology is a small component of the solution - how can we rapidly get stable process changes in place across HR, the field, accounting, and operations?<br />How can we get technology deployed so that the business realizes the value?<br />
  18. 18. Strategy Execution Kanban Board<br />Expand / collapse tasks from the plan in each column<br />WIP Limit is 3 projects<br /> Next Analyze Prepare Execute Measure<br />Expedite<br />AcceptanceCriteria<br />AcceptanceCriteria<br />AcceptanceCriteria<br />AcceptanceCriteria<br />Development is fed stories based on active tasks in the prepare column<br />
  19. 19. Strategy Execution Kanban<br />
  20. 20. Ceremonies<br />Walk the board with management once a week. <br />Blocked items are flagged with a red tab with a note of who needs to unblock it.<br />Management follows up (some actually do) with their line managers from their A3s.<br />There is a lot of focus on getting stories on the technology board through acceptance now. <br />We have an expedite column on the management board. We limit crisis to one at a time. Board ensures current projects maintain (regain) focus.<br />
  21. 21. Results<br />Achieved focus across the business<br />Reduction in the crisis management tendency<br />Technology deployed on time – continued to refine and deploy enhancements in flight<br />Delivered the performance based incentive model<br />Provide field management with real time status against their plan<br />Trust has been established between us (effectively the technology group and PMO) and the business<br />Strategy deployment model in place in the business<br />
  22. 22. Success Attributed To<br />Visual control of the Kanban board<br />Focus<br />Momentum<br />Shared Alignment<br />Visual nature of the strategy articulation<br />Decisions by developers and management are made in a shared strategic context<br />Collaborative nature of the capability map, A3, and the Kanban board<br />Shared understanding<br />Participative design<br />Accountability<br />Rapid maturing of the organization regarding strategy execution<br />Courage and commitment of the Beam Team leadership<br />
  23. 23. Improvements<br />Replace less effective legacy weekly management meetings – right now these are duplicate efforts<br />Track commitment dates of tasks on the board.<br /> Prioritize defects against the capability model. Not every fix is equally important – this is a hole in the process that permits gaming. <br />More sustained discipline around use of A3’s and the Kanban board.<br />Gather metrics and use them to improve the processes<br />
  24. 24. Time as a Strategic DifferentiatorThe new Bargain of Agility<br />The primary concept of the new Bargain of Agile is to expend the least resource possible to exploit the next most valuable opportunity.<br />Observe<br />Orient<br />Decide<br />Act<br />Unfolding circumstances<br />Implicit guidance and control<br />Implicit guidance and control<br />Understand<br />Culture<br />Tradition<br />New Information<br />Previous Experience<br />Synthesis<br />Action<br />(Test)<br />Observations<br />Feed<br />Forward<br />Feed<br />Forward<br />Decision<br />Feed<br />Forward<br />Outside information<br />Feedback<br />Unfolding interaction with the environment<br />
  25. 25. Questions<br />Reach out to Dennis Stevens<br />http://www.synaptus.com<br />dennis.stevens@synaptus.com<br />We offer<br />Agile Capability and Business Analysis<br />Strategic Project Execution<br />Kanban / Agile Project Management<br />Affiliations<br />Associate in David J Anderson and Associates<br />http://www.djandersonassociates.com/<br />Pillar Technologies for Agile Software Development<br />http://www.pillartechnologies.com<br />Matt-5:13<br />

×