Dennis Stevens - Using Agile and Lean to Lead Business Transformation
âąAls PPTX, PDF herunterladenâą
2 gefĂ€llt mirâą988 views
presented at Southern Fried Agile 2010. southernfriedagile.com
Empfohlen
Empfohlen
Weitere Àhnliche Inhalte
Was ist angesagt?
Was ist angesagt? (20)
Ăhnlich wie Dennis Stevens - Using Agile and Lean to Lead Business Transformation
Ăhnlich wie Dennis Stevens - Using Agile and Lean to Lead Business Transformation (20)
Mehr von SFA
Mehr von SFA (6)
KĂŒrzlich hochgeladen
KĂŒrzlich hochgeladen (20)
Dennis Stevens - Using Agile and Lean to Lead Business Transformation
- 1. Executing Strategy as a Competitive Advantage:Beam Team Case Study Using Lean and Agile to Lead An Organizational Transformation
- 2. Dennis StevensEnterprise Agile Coach Contributed / Featured Portfolio, Program, Project PMI: OPM3 Aligning Technology with the Business ModelThe Next Revolution in Productivity web: http://www.synaptus.com blog: http://www.dennisstevens.com twitter: @dennisstevens email: dennis.stevens@synaptus.com Scaling Agile Development Rethinking the Agile Enterprise Cost Cutting and Innovation re-th!nk
- 3. Organizational Transformation âIn the long history of humankind (and animal kind, too) those who learned to collaborate and improvise most effectively have prevailedâ â Charles Darwin
- 4. Organizational Transformation Why is organizational transformation difficult? Differentiate between all the âimprovementâ requirements to move the company towards itâs strategy? How do I solve problems in complex situations? How do I keep everyone focused on making progress? Case Study â The Beam Team
- 5. Different Perspectives â Competing Concerns The Blind Men and The Elephant
- 7. Unsuitable Problem Solving Approach Customers People Process Business Technology Whose job will this be? Where should we put the servers? What is needed to achieve our business goals? What are the business rules? How will we validate everything? What is the right process? How will we account for this? What do the customers and end-users want? How does this interact with the other parts of the system? Conversation
- 9. Case Study: Situation $100 million retail service provider The economy and regulatory changes has drastically reduced core business They have just acquired a company of equivalent size The entire business focus was in an area that is not traditionally profitable â and the business processes and technology were not optimized to perform resets
- 10. Initial Findings: Organization Owners: Entrepreneurs â Six Brothers Management: Tactically Focused â Rose through the ranks Back office: Hardworking and committed Overall: Not a demonstrated history of getting ideas from concept to implementation
- 11. Initial Findings: Technology 40% of technology developed over four years had not been deployed in the business Swivel Chair Integration Little useful management information Turmoil in technology organization
- 12. Approach Two prong approach Get development under control Identify and deploy a focused set of changes in the business Deliver results really fast so company survives
- 13. Approach: Get Technology Under Control Established Kanban board for development - visualized their process and all the existing work Established three classes of service based on source of funding Explicitly limited WIP Major bottleneck was in customer acceptance Next Analysis Development Acceptance âDone-Doneâ NPD Enhance Core System Enhancex of 40
- 14. Refactoring the Development Board
- 15. Approach: Business Differentiate between all the âimprovementâ requirements to move the company towards itâs strategy We needed to create alignment and focus in a time of rapid shift, turmoil, and duress
- 16. Approach: Business Analyze business model to identify capabilities
- 17. Approach: Business Facilitated Strategy Articulation based on Strategic Goals, COGS model and SWOT analysis
- 18. Approach: Business Assess the Capabilities Value (border) How strongly does this affect focusing objectives? How strongly does this affect standard operating objectives? Is this value-added?Supporting? Controlling? Performance (fill) How is this capability performing today? Would a small improvement here improve BT bottom line performance? Do we understand how to improve performance? Risk (dot) How difficult is this capability to scale (for CR1)? Is this constrained by Customer (HD) policy? Is the process complex? Highly dependent on other capabilities? Subject to compliance issues? Verb Noun(Action â Entity) KEY High Value Medium Value Low Value Low Performing Medium Performing High Performing High Risk Moderate Risk Low Risk
- 19. Capability Value Performance Map
- 20. Assess the model Capability Map gave us clarity on what the business did. Assessing the model determined what was most important to the business. The business was aligned with the outcome because they developed it.
- 21. Approach: Business Performed information flow analysis against current systems and processes Six systems and over a dozen spreadsheets Swivel Chair Integration
- 22. Approach From our assessments we knew precisely what capabilities we needed to change and what processes and technology were employed in each capability Our strategy was clear and there was a shared context within the business Have combined different perspectives and competing concerns Have a clear near term road-map
- 23. Approach: Strategy to Execution Bring together the Business and Technology in A3 efforts focusing on the leverage point capabilities Facilitate discussion to align what we could rapidly deliver with needs of impacted management and performers What is our target? What are the capability gaps relative to the strategy? What is the root cause? Five whyâs â not granular 6 Sigma effort. Evaluate Solutions High Level Deliverables on the Implementation Plan Assign Owners and Target Due Dates High level deliverables end up on the A3, with measurable outcomes, in the context of the strategy, and with the impacted capabilities clearly identified.
- 24. An A3 Plan: Strategy to Execution
- 25. An A3 Plan: Strategy to Execution
- 26. An A3 Plan: Strategy to Execution
- 27. An A3 Plan: Strategy to Execution
- 28. Now the big challenge Execute the Strategy How can we get management to maintain focus? 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? How can we get technology deployed so that the business realizes the value?
- 29. Strategy Execution Kanban Board Expand / collapse tasks from the plan in each column Next Analyze Prepare Execute Measure Expedite AcceptanceCriteria AcceptanceCriteria AcceptanceCriteria AcceptanceCriteria Development is fed stories based on active tasks in the prepare column
- 31. Ceremonies Walk the board with management once a week. Blocked items are flagged with a red tab with a note of who needs to unblock it. Management follows up (some actually do) with their line managers from their A3s. There is a lot of focus on getting stories on the technology board through acceptance now. We have an expedite column on the management board. We limit crisis to one at a time. Board ensures current projects maintain (regain) focus.
- 32. Results Achieved focus across the business Reduction in the crisis management tendency Technology deployed on time â continued to refine and deploy enhancements in flight Delivered the performance based incentive model Provide field management with real time status against their plan Trust has been established between us (effectively the technology group and PMO) and the business Strategy deployment model in place in the business
- 33. Success Attributed To Visual control of the Kanban board Focus Momentum Shared Alignment Visual nature of the strategy articulation Decisions by developers and management are made in a shared strategic context Collaborative nature of the capability map, A3, and the Kanban board Shared understanding Participative design Accountability Rapid maturing of the organization regarding strategy execution Courage and commitment of the Beam Team leadership
- 34. Improvements Replace less effective legacy weekly management meetings â right now these are duplicate efforts Track commitment dates of tasks on the board. Prioritize defects against the capability model. Not every fix is equally important â this is a hole in the process that permits gaming. More sustained discipline around use of A3âs and the Kanban board. Gather metrics and use them to improve the processes
- 35. Time as a Strategic DifferentiatorThe new Bargain of Agility The primary concept of the new Bargain of Agile is to expend the least resource possible to exploit the next most valuable opportunity. Observe Orient Decide Act Unfolding circumstances Implicit guidance and control Implicit guidance and control Understand Culture Tradition New Information Previous Experience Synthesis Action (Test) Observations Feed Forward Feed Forward Decision Feed Forward Outside information Feedback Unfolding interaction with the environment
- 36. Questions Reach out to Dennis Stevens http://www.synaptus.com dennis.stevens@synaptus.com Twitter: dennisstevens Blog: www.dennisstevens.com We offer Strategic Project Execution Value Stream Mapping for Knowledge Work Agile Enterprise Transformation Kanban / Agile Project Management Strategic Backlog Management Affiliations Associate in David J Anderson and Associates http://www.djandersonassociates.com/ Pillar Technologies for Agile Software Development http://www.pillartechnologies.com Matt-5:13
Hinweis der Redaktion
- IntroductionSituationInitial AssessmentIntroducing Kanban to the development organizationApproach to Achieving the Business ObjectiveIntroducing Kanban at the strategy execution levelCeremonies for the Strategy Execution KanbanResults of our effortApplication of Boydâs O-O-D-A
- merchandising offering went back in-house due to customer margin pressure and conflict of interest concerns; Remodeling and Construction were significantly down due to lack of investment by customers; leaving resets as the core business
- Owners: Very successful entrepreneurs with deep understanding of the industry â innovative and strategic thinkersManagement: Tactically focused, in transition, stretched very thinLack clear line of site to their costs or economic drivers in this new business modelOut of necessity run the business on intuition and response to crisis Back office: Very hard working knowledgeable peopleOverall: Not a demonstrated history of getting ideas from concept to implementation
- NPD has since moved to an online board â not visible on our board anymore.Switched payment for Defects from hours committed to hours moved to Done-DoneCore system WIP is limited from the strategy board â thatâs nextBy the time the developers delivered anything â the business had moved on. Either solving it with a spreadsheet or deciding it wasnât actually that important to fix. The problems would then reemerge later â repeating the same crisis over and over.
- Create motivation for business to prioritize customer acceptance
- Everything needed to be fixed. Within the timeframe we couldnât fix the entire system â we need to focus on just the areas that we could change to achieve the strategy.
- Notice the result of the A3 shows three key standards to get work done.Outcome â Deliverables in the context of the problem & prioritized (isnât this what we want from the business?)Sequence â what order do they need to be doneTiming â When will it be done (can be assigned at the last responsible moment)Owner - Coordination
- Notice the result of the A3 shows three key standards to get work done.Outcome â Deliverables in the context of the problem & prioritized (isnât this what we want from the business?)Sequence â what order do they need to be doneTiming â When will it be done (can be assigned at the last responsible moment)Owner - Coordination
- Notice the result of the A3 shows three key standards to get work done.Outcome â Deliverables in the context of the problem & prioritized (isnât this what we want from the business?)Sequence â what order do they need to be doneTiming â When will it be done (can be assigned at the last responsible moment)Owner - Coordination
- Notice the result of the A3 shows three key standards to get work done.Outcome â Deliverables in the context of the problem & prioritized (isnât this what we want from the business?)Sequence â what order do they need to be doneTiming â When will it be done (can be assigned at the last responsible moment)Owner - Coordination
- Today, the line managers are more interested because they need to move their card to execution â defects often still linger in acceptance.
- Development and deployment was iterative. Basics in place at kick off. Continued to refine and deploy enhancements in flight. Despite lack solid engineering practices. Aggressively followed up daily on use of the system.The engagement has been extended and the contingency will be paid
- We use social pressure to move work â and this is an improvement â but explicit commitments would be better.One department snuck in an enhancement as a bug fix that impaired our ability to get management information. We still have to reel in the business owners from time to time â old habits die hard.
- OODAMilitary strategist Colonel John Boyd described the OODA loop for fighter pilots. It has since been applied to define the Marine Corps Doctrine in Maneuver warfare. Chet Richards applies it business strategy in Certain To Win. The primary concept is to expend the least resource to accomplish the next objective and to operate at a decision cycle faster than your competition can achieve. This allows you to go farther and faster than your competition.Unfortunately, it can not as simple as âobserve, then orient, then decide, then act.â In fact such a sequential model would be very ponderous and would not well describe how successful competitors operate.The key to quickness turns out to be the two âimplicit guidance and controlâ arrows at the top. In other words, most of the time people and groups do not employ the explicit, sequential O-to-O-to-D-to-A mechanism. Most of the time, they simply observe, orient, and act. There is data coming out to support this (see Gary Kleinâs book, Sources of Power.)The question, of course, is, âWhat action?â A thinking opponent doesnât provide us with a laundry list of his tactics so we can work out responses in advance. The mechanism which handles this uncertainty and makes the loop function in a real world situation is âOrientation.âAs we suck in information via the âObserveâ gateway, it may happen that we notice mismatches between our orientation and what weâre observing in the real world. If we donât spot these mismatches and correct our orientation, the actions that flow from it may not be as effective as we intend. This can open up opportunities for our opponents. Boydâs concept of strategy places heavy emphasis on attacking the other sideâs orientation to open up just these kinds of opportunities, and he suggests many ways to do this.Note that âOODAâ speed is quite different from the speed of our actions. Doing something dumb or irrelevant, but doing it at high speed, may not provide much of a competitive advantage.The âDecision/hypothesisâ block is the learning part of the loop, where we experiment and in the process add new actions to the Implicit Guidance and Control link. You can also think of it as programming orientation for future intuitive actions.