Driving a Kaizen Culture using regular Operations Reviews GOTO - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
driving a kaizen culture
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Driving a Kaizen Culture using regular Operations Reviews GOTO - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Jul 13, 2023 142 likes •638 views

Driving a Kaizen Culture using regular Operations Reviews GOTO Copenhagen May 2011 David J. Anderson Agile Management Book What brought us to Kanban is described in this first book And New Kanban Book Detail information about Kanban

slide-1
SLIDE 1

David J. Anderson

GOTO Copenhagen May 2011

Driving a Kaizen Culture

using regular Operations Reviews

slide-2
SLIDE 2

Agile Management Book

What brought us to Kanban is described in this first book

slide-3
SLIDE 3

And New Kanban Book

Detail information about Kanban can be found in this new book

slide-4
SLIDE 4

http://www.limitedwipsociety.org

Yahoo! Groups: kanbandev Yahoo! Groups: kanbanops

http://leankanbanuniversity.com

slide-5
SLIDE 5

Like this… Want to see more? European Lean & Kanban Events October 2011

slide-6
SLIDE 6

Kanban Training

  • With David J. Anderson
  • http://www.trifork.com
  • 30-31 May, 2011
slide-7
SLIDE 7

Simplified enterprise org structure for a telecom-like technology business

Platform Development

App Dev 1 App Dev 2

UI Design

Customers

Demand Demand Service

Product Strategy

Demand

Support DBA

Infrastructure Architecture

Shared Services

slide-8
SLIDE 8

Feedback Loops

slide-9
SLIDE 9
slide-10
SLIDE 10

Daily standup meeting becomes a central enabler of a Kaizen culture

In this example more than 40 people attend a standup for a large project with 6 concurrent development

  • teams. The meeting is usually

completed in approximately 10

  • minutes. Never more than 15.
slide-11
SLIDE 11

Spontaneous Quality Circles form after the standup to focus on immediate process issues

  • Kanban board gives visibility into process issues – ragged

flow, transaction costs of releases or transfers through stages in process, bottlenecks

  • Daily standup provides forum for spontaneous association

to attack process issues affecting productivity and lead time

  • For example, 3 day freeze on test environment was a

transaction cost on release that caused a bottleneck at “build” state. This was reduced to 24 hours after a 3 person quality circle formed to investigate the policies behind the

  • freeze. Result was improved smoother flow resulting in

higher throughput and shorter lead time

slide-12
SLIDE 12

Monthly Operations Review is used to reflect on quantitative objective performance measures

slide-13
SLIDE 13

Why monthly?

  • More often is too much overhead

– Preparing data – Expensive meeting (lots of people) – 2.5 hours is a lot of time – Need enough time & data to show trends

  • Quarterly is not frequent enough

– No one can remember events from 3 months ago – Learning value is undermined – Too much data

slide-14
SLIDE 14

Lead off with finances – you are running a business

slide-15
SLIDE 15

Guest speaker from another business unit worked well

slide-16
SLIDE 16

Managers & team leads present department demand & capability

slide-17
SLIDE 17

Discussion items scribed on a flip chart

slide-18
SLIDE 18

Improvement opportunities assigned to managers as last agenda item

slide-19
SLIDE 19

Managers are held accountable for kaizen

  • pportunities. Team learns how

managers can add value for them

slide-20
SLIDE 20

Ops Review & Metrics

slide-21
SLIDE 21

Metrics to start off with

  • Quality (defect/rate)
  • WIP (work-in-progress)
  • Cycle Time (day deployed – day ready = cycle time)
  • Throughput (velocity)
  • Issues & Blocked Work

 Across these:  Trend  Variation

Report Capability

slide-22
SLIDE 22

Issue Management Cumulative Flow

slide-23
SLIDE 23

Executive Dashboard

slide-24
SLIDE 24

Mean Lead Time Trend

0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Days CRs Bugs Combo

SLA

slide-25
SLIDE 25

Due Date Performance Detail

Lead Time Distribution

0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 1 6 11 16 21 26 31 36 41 46 51 56 61 66 71 76 81 86 91 96 101 106 Days # CRs

MARCH

Lead Time Distribution

0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 1 8 15 22 29 36 43 50 57 64 71 78 85 92 99 106 113 120 127 134 141 148 Days CRs & Bugs

APRIL Outliers

Majority of CRs range 30 -> 55

slide-26
SLIDE 26

Control Charts supported natively in Silver Catalyst

slide-27
SLIDE 27

And also in LeanKit Kanban

slide-28
SLIDE 28

BBC Worldwide Bug Rates

slide-29
SLIDE 29

BBC Worldwide Days Blocked

slide-30
SLIDE 30

2011-05-13 Mattias Skarin

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

DBA Team Velocity

Total Velocity Small support tasks (not included in total velocity)

slide-31
SLIDE 31

Velocity Control Charts

UCL 29.2 CL 7.206896552 LCL

  • 14.8
  • 20
  • 10

10 20 30 40

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

Completion Velocity Date

Completion Velocity Chart

Completion Velocity UCL +2 Sigma +1 Sigma

slide-32
SLIDE 32

Velocity Range Chart

Completion Velocity Range

27.0 RUCL CL 8.3 5 10 15 20 25 30

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

Date Completion Velocity Range

Range UCL +2 Sigma +1 Sigma #DIV/0!

  • 1 Sigma
  • 2 Sigma

LCL

slide-33
SLIDE 33

Iteration 1 Cumulative Flow

slide-34
SLIDE 34

Automated reporting out of TFS

slide-35
SLIDE 35

Builds don’t take that long

Outliers caused by design and code errors

slide-36
SLIDE 36

Data center outage SQLServer services errors SAN disk failures

slide-37
SLIDE 37
slide-38
SLIDE 38
slide-39
SLIDE 39

Configuration issue in web.config

slide-40
SLIDE 40

Throughput example showing trend of releases Delivered monthly. Sept sustainment release stuck waiting on major release. Code branching strategy prevented check-ins.

slide-41
SLIDE 41

Automated testing was seen as too expensive

Demonstrate vs. rant

slide-42
SLIDE 42

Continuous Integration reporting

slide-43
SLIDE 43
slide-44
SLIDE 44
slide-45
SLIDE 45

So why is hardly anyone doing Operations Reviews?

slide-46
SLIDE 46

Let’s make a list

slide-47
SLIDE 47

Here is one I prepared earlier…

  • Requires management support
  • Spans across teams and requires middle-

management participation

  • Some middle-managers fear transparency
  • Fear of showing “bad” results / lack of

capability

  • Requires management discipline to collect

data

  • Expensive meeting
slide-48
SLIDE 48

Thank you!

dja@djandersonassociates.com http://djandersonassociates.com/

slide-49
SLIDE 49

About…

David Anderson is a thought leader in managing effective software teams. He leads a consulting firm dedicated to improving economic performance of knowledge worker businesses – improving agility, reducing cycle times, improving productivity and efficiency in technology development. He has 25+ years experience in the software industry starting with computer games in the early 1980’s. He has led software teams delivering superior productivity and quality using innovative agile methods. He developed MSF for CMMI Process Improvement for Microsoft. He is a co-author of the SEI Technical Note, CMMI and Agile: Why not embrace both! David is the author of 2 books, Agile Management for Software Engineering – Applying the Theory of Constraints for Business Results, and Kanban – Successful Evolutionary Change for your Technology Business. David is Vice President of the Lean Software & Systems Consortium, a not for profit dedicated to promoting greater professionalism and better economic outcomes in our industry. Email… dja@djandersonassociates.com