Key Note - Lean Kanban France 2013 - Kanban Evolutionary Management

[email protected] @lkuceo

Presenter:David J. Anderson

Lean Kanban FranceParis

October 2013Release 1.0

Lessons we can learn from Bruce Lee’s journey in martial arts

Kanbanand Evolutionary Management


The End of Methodology


Is Kanban heralding in a new era?

* http://alistair.cockburn.us/The+end+of+methodology** Cockburn’s suggested name for this new class of methods

It’s the end of methodology!*

Reflective Improvement Frameworks** are the

future!

Alistair Cockburn

Kanban is such a Reflective Improvement Framework


A methodology defines behavior

• A software engineering methodology is a description of techniques– what to do– how to do it– When to do it - sequences or workflows– Who does what - definition of roles and

responsibilities• Ideally, a methodology should tell us why and

give us a context to define its appropriateness


Many styles of software engineering emerged over several decades

• Some just personal preferences in style (e.g. PSP versus XP), but others for specific contexts or risk profiles (e.g. the many risk profiles captured in a 2-dimensional grid in Cockburn's Crystal methods).

• Some styles came in schools or movements - such as the Agile movement

• While others came as large frameworks such as Rational Unified Process designed to be tailored to a context


Motivation for the Kanban Method


The Kanban Method was born out of frustration with these many styles

In 2002, I was questioning whether the specific methodology really

made that much differenceThe question wasn't whether a methodology worked or

not, or whether appropriateness of context had been assessed correctly or not, the problem was organizations were being seduced into pursuing changes that were too large and too ambitious. These change initiatives were beyond their capability and maturity to manage them


Managing change has greater leverage than picking the right methodology

Instead the bigger challenge with the greater leverage on outcome was learning to manage

change in the organization

I came to the conclusion (circa 2002) that the important issue in creative knowledge work wasn't the selection of the right methodology


Traditional Change is an A to B process

• A is where you are now. B is a destination.– B is either defined (from a methodology definition)– or designed (by tailoring a framework or using a model

based approach such as VSM* or TOC TP**)• To get from A to B, a change agency*** will guide a

transition initiative to install B into the organization

***either an internal process group or external consultants

CurrentProcess Future

Process

Defined

Designed

transition

* Value stream mapping, ** Theory of Constraints Thinking Processes


Change initiatives fail (even) more often than projects

Change initiatives often fail (aborted) or produce lack luster results

They fail to institutionalize resulting in regression back to old behavior


Daniel Kahneman has given us a simple model for how we process information

Daniel Kahneman

System 1Sensory PerceptionPattern Matching

System 2Logical Inference

Engine

Learning byExperience

Learning from theory

FASTBut slow to learn

SLOWBut fast to learn


How we process change…

Daniel Kahneman

Silicon-basedlife form

Carbon-basedlife form

I logically evaluate change using System 2

I adapt quickly

I feel change emotionally using System 1

I adapt slowly


Changing methodologies challenges people psychology & sociologically

• New roles (defined in a methodology) attack their identity• New responsibilities using new techniques & practices

threaten their self-esteem and put their social status at risk

• Most people resist most change because individually they have more to lose than to gain

• It is safer to be conservative and stick to current practices and avoid shaking up the current social hierarchy

• Only the brave, the reckless or the desperate will pursue grand changes


The Kanban Method…• Rejects the traditional

approach to change • Believes, it is better to avoid

resistance than to push harder against it – Don’t install a new methodology

• Is designed for carbon-based life forms - Evolutionary change that is humane


The Kanban Method…• Catalyzes improvement

through use of kanban systems and visual boards*

• Takes its name from the use of kanban but it is just a name

• Anyone who thinks Kanban is just about kanban (boards & systems) is truly mistaken

*also known as "kanban" in Chinese and in Japanese when written with Chinese characters


The Kanban Method is a new approach to improvement

Kanban is a

method

without methodology


Bruce Lee’s Journey in Martial Arts


Bruce Lee rejected traditional teaching and styles of Chinese martial arts

• There are some parallels in the story of Bruce Lee and the emergence of his approach to Kung Fu

• Lee rejected the idea of following a particular style of Chinese Martial Arts


Snake

Monkey

Mantis

Tiger

Kung Fu Panda simplified the art to only four styles


There are in fact very many styles…


“Dry land swimming” provides a false sense of capability

• The only way to learn is to train with a live opponent

• Lee rejected the many styles of martial arts for various reasons, mainly that they gave the practitioners a false sense of capability, putting them at risk in real combat situations

• He was against Kata (learning patterns without an opponent) and described them in derogatory terms such as "dry land swimming.“


Lee wanted to start from first principles and core concepts

Four ranges of combat• Kicking• Punching• Trapping• Grappling

*Apparently still called the Five Ways, there are actually now six **with the later inclusion of SAA**The fact that The Five Ways has six elements is evidence of evolution in action***Incorporated core ideas such as "center line" and single fluid motion from Wing Chun and parrying from Epee Fencing********Not a Chinese Martial Art and hence evidence of "no limitation as limitation"

Five* Ways of Attack***• Single Direct Attack (SDA)• Attack By Combination (ABC)• Progressive Indirect Attack

(PIA)• (Hand) Immobilization Attack

(HIA)• Attack by Drawing (ABD)• Single Angle Attack (SAA)


Lee’s approach still needed a name

• He named his approachJeet Kune Do - the way of the intercepting fist - after one of the practices taught in his method

• He was quick to point out that it was just a name, a way of communicating a set of ideas. He was passionate that practitioners shouldn't get hung up on the name or the inclusion of any one move or action.


Jeet Kune Do

Using no way as way

Having no limitation as limitation


Jeet Kune Do encourages development of a uniquely personal style

• a framework from which to pick & develop a personal style

• an evolutionary approach where adoption of maneuvers is learned & reinforced by training with an opponent

• Nothing was sacred

"absorb that which is useful“

discard the remainder


Training with an opponent provides the core feedback loop to drive adaptation

Lee pursued ever more elaborate approaches to protected real combat training to enable the closed loop learning that was core to the evolutionary nature of JKD


Kata are not adaptive

In comparison with JKD, patterned styles of martial arts taught with "kata" were open loop and not adaptive. There is no learning from practicing kata


Water flows around the rock

“be like water”

the rock represents resistance


The Kanban Method


Kanban should be like water*

In change management, resistance is from the people involvedand it is always emotional (system 1)

To flow around the rock, we must learn how to avoid emotional resistance

* http://joecampbell.wordpress.com/2009/05/13/be-like-water/


Principles of the Kanban Method

• Start with what you do now• Agree to pursue evolutionary change• Initially, respect roles, responsibilities and job

titles• Encourage acts of leadership at all levels

The first 3 principles were specifically chosen to address System 1 objections, to flow around the rock of emotional resistance in humans


Kanban’s Core Enabling Concepts

Kanban is based on some simple concepts for managing work• service-orientation • service delivery involves workflow• and work flows through a series of information

discovery activities

Kanban would be less applicable if a service-orientated view of work were difficult to conceive or the work was without a definable workflow


6 Practices Enable Process Evolution

The Kanban Method

VisualizeLimit Work-in-progressManage FlowMake Policies ExplicitImplement Feedback LoopsImprove Collaboratively, Evolve Experimentally

(using models & the scientific method)


Start with what you do now

• The Kanban Method evolved with the principle that it “should be like water” - enable change while avoiding sources of resistance

• With Kanban you start with what you do now, and "kanbanize" it, catalyzing the evolutionary process into action. Changes to processes in use will occur

• Evaluating whether a change is truly an improvement is done using fitness criteria that evaluate an external outcome


Fitness Criteria


Fitness criteria are metrics that measure observable external outcomes

• Fitness criteria are metrics that measure things customers or other external stakeholders value– Delivery time– Quality– Predictability– Safety (conformance to regulatory

requirements)• or metrics that value actual

outcomes such as– customer satisfaction– employee satisfaction


Net Promoter Score is a Fitness Evaluator but is it the only metric we need?

• Steve Denning has proposedthat Net Promoter Score(NPS) is the only metric thatbusiness should care about

• NPS is interesting becauseit is a fitness evaluator. Itwill indicate whether a business (or product) is likely to survive & thrive

• But is it the only metric we need?

Steve Denning


Net Promoter Score is a way of evaluating customer satisfaction

• In a general sense and at an abstract level NPS tells us whether customers like what we offer but we cannot know what they truly care about

• For the abstract problem of, “Can we measure customer satisfaction?” NPV is a reasonably good measure, if used properly


The problem with Net Promoter Score is that it doesn’t tell you what to do!

• Net Promoter Score (if used properly) will tell you whether your product or service is likely to continue selling

• However, it doesn’t give you any clues about what to do or how to improve

• If NPS is your only metric you’re left to randomly experiment to generate a higher score

• Like biological evolution, random mutation is expensive, takes a long time & involves luck


Can we be smarter by using better fitness criteria than NPS?

• If we have a service-oriented view of the world, and want to evaluate service delivery then we already know what customers care about– Lead time– Quality– Predictability– Safety (or conformance to regulatory reqs)


If we order a pizza we know what we care about…

• Fast delivery– lead time from order to

delivery• Accuracy and quality– Pepperoni not Hawaiian– Still warm on delivery

• Predictable Delivery– If they say “ready in 30

minutes”, we want delivery in 25-35 minutes


If we need a medical procedure…

• Short waiting time– Queuing time from diagnosis to procedure

• Short procedure & recovery time– Fast procedure, fast recovery time, implies minimally invasive

surgery and use of technology to reduce the craft input and eliminate variability

• Predictability of schedule & outcome– Procedure should proceed as scheduled– Outcome should have high probability of success

• Safe– Low risk of complications– Regulatory health & safety procedures followed


Don’t believe what people say. Observe what they do!

• Behavioral economics tells us it is better to observe what people do and derive models from actual behavior

• Pragmatic philosophy in action!• NPS would be a stronger metric if it asked,

“Did you recommend this product/service to a friend or colleague?” than “How likely are you to […] on a scale of 0 to 10?”


Validate Fitness Criteria with real customers

• It is necessary to keep checking that the fitness criteria we are measuring do indeed matter to customers.

• Variation in what matters provide the opportunity to segment demand and offer different classes of service within your kanban system

• Will you pay extra to have your pizza delivered faster?


Business Risks, Fitness Criteria & Classes of Service should all align

• If your kanban system is designed properly the classes of service you are offering should align with the true business risks in the domain

• And the metrics being used to evaluate system capability, should be fitness criteria that are derived from the business risk being managed

• For example, cost of delay requires us to measure lead time


Enabling Evolutionary Management


Institutionalize feedback systems to enable evolutionary change

OperationsReview

SystemCapability

Review

StandupMeeting

manager to subordinate(s) (both 1-1 and 1-team)


Business risks, fitness criteria & classes of service should be transparent

OperationsReview

SystemCapability

Review

StandupMeeting

manager to subordinate(s) (both 1-1 and 1-team)

Use the fitness criteria at all 3 levels of

feedback

Lead timeQualityPredictability




Other metrics should only be used as input to models to drive improvement

• Flow efficiency will help us identify wasteful delay

• Time blocked and blocker clustering will help identify wasteful delay from specific assignable causes such as vendor dependency

• Metrics like this help us focus improvement initiatives to improve the fitness criteria results – e.g. removing delay improves lead time


Know why you are using a metric!

• Is your metric a fitness criteria that assesses system capability and indicates fitness for purpose and likelihood of surviving and thriving by satisfying customers?

• Or, is your metric evaluating and guiding a specific change to improve fitness of the system?

• If neither, you don’t need it!


Adaptive capability enables sustainable competitiveness

• Kanban installs an adaptive capability in the organization– the style of working - the methodology - emerges

and evolves, adapting gracefully to changes in business conditions, risks and uncertainties

• Such an adaptive capability makes the organization robust and resilient and enables the possibility of continued sustainable long term competitiveness


ComparingKanban with Jeet Kune Do


Kanban is not “Jeet Kune Do” for software development or IT operations

• JKD contains a martial art framework. It contains a core set of principles based on an underlying theory of fighting and vulnerability of the human body: concepts such as "center line" from Wing Chun, for example.Center line


Kanban does offer us a framework for service-delivery management

• Kanban is really a management method. It directly addresses service delivery and (evolutionary) change management

• It creates a mechanism for framing operational decisions such as – Risk (or Value) trumps Flow, Flow trumps Waste Elimination– Use of pull systems and the consequent concept of deferred

commitment (real option theory)• Kanban does not contain a framework of concepts for

doing any specific types of work. There are no techniques for developing software or performing any other type of creative knowledge work.


Kanban may be analogous to JKD for Service Delivery Management

• Kanban provides a management framework for evolving uniquely tailored workflows for improved service delivery

• Kanban embraces the idea of “using no way as way” – evolving your own style of service delivery

• Kanban embraces the idea of “no limitation as limitation” by encouraging the use of models from many domains to improve workflows and service-delivery


More Evolutionary Management


The Kanban Method makes a business fitter for purpose

• The Kanban Method enables a business to improve its service delivery so that it is fitter for purpose and more likely to survive & thrive

• The Kanban Method enables an adaptive capability within the organization so that it can adapt to changing demands and other risks in the external environment


Lean Startup is another evolutionary approach

• Lean Startup focuses on validating assumptions about the fitness for purpose of a product or service offering

• It does this by “engaging the enemy” directly using techniques to create “safe-to-fail” experiments

• For example, “Fake a Feature”

Build-Measure-LearnCycle


Lean Startup makes a product or service fitter for purpose

• By use of techniques that validate assumptions early and quickly, Lean Startup enables a product or service offering to evolve quickly

• In doing so the product or service becomes fitter for purpose and is more likely to survive and thrive


Like Kanban, Lean Startup is a Pragmatic approach

• Lean Startup suggests that you don’t speculate about the future behavior of people, rather you set up experimental situations and observe what they actually do

• In this respect, Lean Startup is like behavioral economics applied to product or service design

• Like Lee’s philosophy in JKD, it engages the opponent (uncertainty) directly


Businesses need to do both – be adaptable and adapt their products

• Adaptive capability enables a business to insure it is doing things right and continuing to do them well in the face of a changing external environment

• Adaptive product or service design enables a business to insure it is doing the right thing and continuing to offer the right things to a fickle and evolving market


Together Kanban & Lean Startup bring the philosophy of JKD to modern

creative knowledge work industries

• Don’t adopt a methodology or patterned style• Engage the opponent (uncertainty & risk)

directly in a safe environment• Learn from fast feedback• Adapt a unique product, service or method of

service delivery that is fitter-for-purpose


Conclusion


The future of creative knowledge work should be inspired by Bruce Lee & JKD

• Our opponents are uncertainty & risk. Engage directly. Visualize & make them explicit

• Teach beginners to set up safe-to-fail, learning environments at the individual, workflow & business unit levels

• Evolutionary methods are required to help us manage in complex environments

• If humans are involved the environment is complex

• Fitness-for-purpose & sustainability come from developing strong adaptive capability

Train with live opponentsNo kata

No "dry land swimming“


Thank you!


David Anderson is a thought leader in managing creative knowledge workers. He leads a consulting, training, publishing and event planning business dedicated to developing, promoting and implementing sustainable evolutionary approaches for management in 21st Century industries.He has 30 years experience in the high technology industry starting with computer games in the early 1980’s. He has led software teams delivering superior productivity and quality using innovative methods at large companies such as Sprint and Motorola.

David is the pioneer of the Kanban Method an evolutionary approach to change and improved service delivery & business agility. His latest book is, Lessons in Agile Management – On the Road to Kanban.

David is a founder of the Lean Kanban University, a trade association dedicated to assuring quality Kanban training through a worldwide network of accredited trainers and defined, peer reviewed curriculum.

About


Joe Campbell first blogged about the similarity in philosophy between the Kanban Method and the teachings of Bruce Lee. He coined the phrase “Kanban should be like water”.

This presentation was inspired by Alistair Cockburn’s blog post “The End of Methodology”. My approach to change was influenced by an observation from Peter Senge, “People do not resist change, they resist being changed!” “Safe-to-fail Experiment” is a term used by Dave Snowden in his Cynefin framework. Steve Denning proposed NPS as the only metric a business needs in his book, Radical Management.

Acknowledgements
