Originally published 1/1/20211. I have some additional information at the end to bring it up to date.
Throughout the Agile movement, one acronym that has
The irony of Agile's (
This is not necessarily bad. It presents both opportunities and challenges. But the risk of using pre-determined roles is
The Lean/Kanban alternative is to first understand your current process and
I am not suggesting that BCUF is always bad. There are times I've used it when there is a
Bringing this blog up to date.
A few years after
First, let me start out with what I mean by “simple.” I view “simple” as being “fit for
So how does Lean and Flow Thinking make things more “fit for
While virtually all approaches have accepted that Lean and Flow thinking is useful, most still define themselves around a framework that has a core of immutable roles, events, artifacts and rules. These core concepts can’t
This is one
The bottom line is providing choice when it makes things fit for purpose simplifies things. Forcing people to work a particular way complicates things.
There are many ways to look at Lean. Many people have taken the principles they've seen in Lean manufacturing and directly translate them into the product development arena. But manufacturing is not like product development. In manufacturing we're trying to limit variation and the only discovery is how to improve the repeatable process. In product development, we're trying to discover what
What we want to do is to look at the principles underneath Lean-Thinking.
Last blog I posted DOWNTIME, a common way to look at waste in Lean-Thinking. Here it is again:
With a little reflection, it's clear that the O, T, I and M relate to manufacturing. Attempting to bridge Lean manufacturing to Lean product development is not as effective as looking at what the underlying principles to both are. I've converted this into waste of Lean Product Development.
Most introductions to Lean focus on a variety of principles such as the following from the Lean Enterprise Institute (note the acronym)
This is definitely a useful way of looking at Lean. But another way is to look at what these would suggest you look at, want to achieve and something you have to do to achieve it.
Attend to how workload relates to capacity. Workload should never exceed capacity. Doing so creates multi-tasking,
Assess the efficiency of your value streams. The people in most value streams are multi-tasking due to them being in multiple value streams. This causes delays and waste. Have people allocated to only one project as much as possible.
How large are your batches of work? As a rule, smaller increments that realize value is better. Do your work in small increments and use iterative development to discover what’s needed. Decompose strategies into initiatives into small business increments. See Minimum Business Increments for more.
Is collaboration taking place across the value stream? Teams should not be geared towards local optimization but should be looking at improving the effectiveness of the value stream as a whole. Create a common cadence for planning, coordination and synchronization. Institute DevOps or the equivalent across all value streams.
What is management’s role? Management needs to attend to improving the environment so that people can get their work done. Management must look up the value stream to see what the direction of the company is and then collaborate with those downstream to interactively build a great environment within which they can work.
How long are your planning cycles? Plan in short cycles. Work on removing impediments to shortening the cycle. Work should flow from initiatives to
What is the quality of your product? Quality includes both internal (how it’s
These suggestions are based around Inherent Simplicity. More on this at Dealing with Complexity by Creating a Bias For Simplicity