Skip to main content

The Starting Viewpoint of Kanban: The Lean Flow Paradigm

When you start using Kanban you need to change your viewpoint. Look at the world - in particular look at your work - through the prism of flow. It's amazing what you'll see.

Recently I've been looking for the shortest possible introduction for those starting Kanban. +David Anderson's foundational principles are a good candidate. Taking (I hope tolerable) liberties with the presentation of these, I summarise the principles as follows (please see "There are 3 ... Principles of Kanban" for what the "dot-dot-dots" stand for) :
  1. Start with what you do now ...
  2. Agree to pursue ... evolutionary change
  3. Encourage acts of leadership at all levels ...
It's a great starting point.

But I'm dissatisfied with this, because applying the principles alone is not enough to ensure people are doing Kanban. Everyone is where they are, and many want to change in an evolutionary way, while encouraging acts of leadership. Most of them however are not doing Kanban!

See the flow! One way to visualise work in progress
Simple you say - just adopt the principles and start doing the Kanban core practices (see "There are 6 core practices of Kanban"). But this is also unsatisfactory. The practices are not all followed by those who are doing Kanban. Not everyone uses a visual board (or other visualisation) yet. Not everyone has WIP limits yet. Not everyone has explicit policies yet. Unlike Scrum which says that if you are not doing all of Scrum you are not doing Scrum, Kanban describes itself as a way to improve from whatever you are doing now. As +David Anderson makes clear, even such "proto-kanban" implementations bring benefit, and these partial or shallow implementations of Kanban do fall under the banner of Kanban.

So how can we express the missing element to the foundational principles? I think the answer is to explain the starting viewpoint. Before applying the foundational principles of Kanban, and before you've started doing its core practices, change your viewpoint...

The Starting Viewpoint: Look at your work as Flow.

Notice this viewpoint statement isn't asking you to do anything yet, except look. Just look in a different way and you'll be amazed what you see. Seeing work as flow - items moving from an initial concept through one or more other stages to "done" may not seem that profound. Yet it opens up a completely different way to analyse and manage work. Furthermore as a starting point it means you can look back on work recently done and collect data relating to the flow, even before any aspect of the process has been changed. You can ask:
  1. How long did this item take from concept to delivery?
  2. How many items were completed in the period?
  3. How many items are currently being worked on?
  4. How long is the time between deliveries?
The answers to such questions are likely to highlight the issues the business cares about or is dissatisfied with. From there finding the insight to make improvements is a natural process. As I found recently with a team I am working with, there's usually data about the flow of work available from the recent or even distant past. Looking at that data again through the viewpoint of flow will show you what you can improve and importantly, whether you have improved once you have made changes.

I'm grateful to +Rodrigo Yoshima whose abstract for Lean Kanban North America 2013 on Management and Change used the phrase "Lean Flow Paradigm". It was the trigger for this post. His slide-share for the presentation is available here, and it's well worth a look for examples of how seeing work as flow helps teams and management to improve things.

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Does your Definition of Done allow known defects?

Is it just me or do you also find it odd that some teams have clauses like this in their definition of done (DoD)?
... the Story will contain defects of level 3 severity or less only ... Of course they don't mean you have to put minor bugs in your code - that really would be mad - but it does mean you can sign the Story off as "Done"if the bugs you discover in it are only minor (like spelling mistakes, graphical misalignment, faults with easy workarounds, etc.). I saw DoDs like this some time ago and was seriously puzzled by the madness of it. I was reminded of it again at a meet-up discussion recently - it's clearly a practice that's not uncommon.

Let's look at the consequences of this policy. 

Potentially for every User Story that is signed off as "Done" there could be several additional Defect Stories (of low priority) that will be created. It's possible that finishing a Story (with no additional user requirements) will result in an increase in…

"Plan of Intent" and "Plan of Record"

Ron Lichty is well known in the Software Engineering community on the West Coast as a practitioner, as a seasoned project manager of many successful ventures and in a number of SIGs and conferences in which he is active. In spite of knowing Ron by correspondence over a long period of time it was only at JavaOne this year that we finally got together and I'm very glad we did.

Ron wrote to me after our meeting:

I told a number of people later at JavaOne, and even later that evening at the Software Engineering Management SIG, about xProcess. It really looks good. A question came up: It's a common technique in large organizations to keep a "Plan of Intent" and a "Plan of Record" - to have two project plans, one for the business partners and boss, one you actually execute to. Any support for that in xProcess?

Good question! Here's my reply...

There is support in xProcess for an arbitrary number of target levels through what we call (in the process definitions) P…

Understanding Cost of Delay and its Use in Kanban

Cost of Delay (CoD) is a vital concept to understand in product development. It should be a guide to the ordering of work items, even if - as is often the case - estimating it quantitatively may be difficult or even impossible. Analysing Cost of Delay (even if done qualitatively) is important because it focuses on the business value of work items and how that value changes over time. An understanding of Cost of Delay is essential if you want to maximise the flow of value to your customers.

Don Reinertsen in his book Flow [1] has shown that, if you want to deliver the maximum business value with a given size team, you give the highest priority, not to the most valuable work items in your "pool of ideas," not even to the most urgent items (those whose business value decays at the fastest rate), nor to your smallest items. Rather you should prioritise those items with the highest value of urgency (or CoD) divided by the time taken to implement them. Reinertsen called this appro…