Mary Poppendieck: The Aware Organization - Lean IT Summit 2014

l e a n
software development
www.poppendieck.com
Mary Poppendieck
mary@poppendieck.com
The Aware Organization
Jidoka

l e a n
Toyota Production System
October 14
Copyright©2014 Poppendieck.LLC
2
Thoroughly Remove Waste
Just in Time
•Make only what, when and the amount needed
•Downstream process takes from upstream
Jidoka
•Processes detect errors and stop on their own
•Built in human intelligence
Flow
???

l e a n
What Makes a Winning Team?
October 14
3

l e a n
When it’s a Matter of Life and Death
High Reliability Organizations
Have more than their fair share of unexpected events
Have less than their fair share of accidents
Firefighters
Nuclear Power Plants
Power Grid Dispatching Centers
Hospital Emergency Rooms
Air Traffic Control
Aircraft Carriers
Common Characteristic
Mindfulness
October 14
4
Managing the Unexpected: Assuring High Performance in an Age of Complexity by Karl E. Weick and Kathleen M. Sutcliffe, 2001

l e a n
Mindfulness
Preoccupation with Failure
Reluctance to Simplify
Sensitivity to Operations
Commitment to Resilience
Deference to Expertise
October 14
5
Mindfulness
Exceptionally Safe, Reliable, World Class Organizations

l e a n
Mindfulness  Situational Awareness
Understand Command Intent Two Levels Up
Command Intent:
A concise expression of the purpose of the campaign, the desired results, and the expected team progress toward achieving the desired end state.
Maintain Situational Awareness One Level Up
1.Collaborative Planning
2.Situational awareness of progress of other platoons
3.Adapt to make sure the company reaches the end state
October 14
6

l e a n
Toyota Production System
October 14
7
Thoroughly Remove Waste
Just in Time
•Make only what, when and the amount needed
•Downstream process takes from upstream
Jidoka
•Processes detect errors and stop on their own
•Built in human intelligence
Flow
Mindfulness
/ Situational Awareness

l e a n
Mindfulness
October 14
8
Mindfulness

l e a n
Theory of Constraints
Every system has a bottleneck.
Value cannot flow through the system any faster than it flows through that bottleneck.
So the best way to improve the system flow is to improve the rate at which value flows through the bottleneck.
October 14
9

l e a n
When the Constraint is Technical
The Integration Problem
% of Release Cycle Spent “Hardening”
October 14
10
Typical: 30%
Sometimes: 50%
Top Companies: <10%
Release Cycle

l e a n
When the Constraint is
Knowing What to Build
Cost of Complexity
11 October 14 Copyright©2014 Poppendieck.LLC
The Biggest Waste in Software Development
Cost
Time
Features / Functions Used in a Typical System
Standish Group Study Reported at XP2002 by Jim Johnson, Chairman
Always 7%
Often 13%
Sometimes
16%
Rarely 19%
Never 45%
Rarely / Never
Used: 64%
Often / Always
Used: 20%

l e a n
Mindfulness
October 14
12
Mindfulness

l e a n
Who is Responsible for Delivering Value?
Delivery Organizations
“The Business”
“The Product Owner”
“The Contracting Party”
“The Outsourcing Company”
Product Organizations
“All of Us”
October 14
13
Shared Responsibility

l e a n
Shared Responsibility
Rich Objectives
October 14
14
1.Unifying Goal No team succeeds unless overall goal is met All teams understand the desired end state
2. Our Team’s Responsibility
We commit to do our part
We understand how our part contributes to overall success
3. What Our Team does to Make Sure Other Teams are Successful
We maintain awareness of the progress of other teams
We help other teams out as appropriate to achieve the overall goal

l e a n
Mindfulness
October 14
15
Mindfulness

l e a n
Who is Responsible for Deciding What to Build?
1.Control projects by quantified critical-few results. 1 page in total!
2.Make sure those results are business results, not technical.
3.Give the developers [technical team] the freedom to find out how to deliver those results.
4.Estimate the impacts of your designs on the quantified goals.
5.Select designs with the best value impacts for their costs, do them first.
6.Decompose the workflow into weekly (or 2% of budget) time boxes.
7.Change designs, based on quantified value and cost experience.
8.Change requirements, based on quantified value and cost experience.
9.Involve the stakeholders, every week, in setting quantified value goals.
10.Involve the stakeholders, every week, in actually using value increments.
October 14
16
From: Value-Driven Development Principles and Values by Tom Gilb, Agile Record, July 2010
Tom Gilb
Published 1988
19th Printing

l e a n
Mindfulness
October 14
17
Mindfulness

l e a n
The Next Generation Software Development Process
October 14
18
Acceptance test driven development process
Tight collaboration between business and delivery teams
Cross-functional teams include QA and operations
Automated build, testing, db migration, and deployment
Incremental development on mainline with continuous integration
Software always production ready
Releases tied to business needs, not operational constraints

l e a n
Mindfulness
October 14
19
Mindfulness

l e a n
Commitment to Learning
Mindfulness
October 14
20
Mindfulness

l e a n
Case Study: Government
Case: British National Health Service, Electronic Patient Records, 2002 – 2011, £10bn.
In Response: Gov.UK.
Governance Principles:
Don’t slow down delivery
Decisions when they’re needed, at the right level
Do it with the right people
Go see for yourself
Only do it if it adds value
Trust and verify
October 14
21
4-8 weeks
6-8 weeks
A few months, then iterate
See: https://www.gov.uk/transformation
Delivery team charter:
service vision
quantifiable goals [impacts]
key performance indicators [metrics] that show how they will meet user needs

l e a n
Impact-driven Development
October 14
22
Tom & Kai Gilb
1.Start with WHY – Purpose, Problem
2.Understand the desired impact:
a.Who cares about the impact of potential solutions?
b.How will these people measure the impact of outcomes?
c.What changes can create outcomes that move the metrics – in the right direction – enough to matter?
3.Experiment: Prototype the most promising changes.
4.Implement a change only if its impact is validated.
5.Iterate rapidly until the desired impact is achieved.
Working Backward from Impact

l e a n
A Company in Durban
October 14
23

l e a n
software development
www.poppendieck.com
Mary Poppendieck
mary@poppendieck.com
Thank You!
More Information: www.poppendieck.com

Mary Poppendieck: The Aware Organization - Lean IT Summit 2014

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to Mary Poppendieck: The Aware Organization - Lean IT Summit 2014

Similar to Mary Poppendieck: The Aware Organization - Lean IT Summit 2014 (20)

More from Institut Lean France

More from Institut Lean France (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Mary Poppendieck: The Aware Organization - Lean IT Summit 2014