Tag Archives: agile

  • -

What do you know about speed 1/5? Boeing 737 Final Assembly

Tags : 

How long does it take to do the final assembly of a Boeing 737? Final assembly includes wings, tail, wheels, engines, interiors, wiring, cockpit controls and flight systems.

The Boeing 737 is assembled in one plant in Renton Washington near Seattle. Since implementing Lean thinking and continuous improvement monthly output of 737s from Boeing’s Renton plant has tripled:
1999  11
2005  21
2014  42
2017  47
2018  52

As of April 2015 the two 737 production lines produce 42 planes per month, or 2 planes per day. It takes 9 days from the time an empty shell arrives at the factory until a completed plane roles out the door ready to fly to the paint shop.

Interested in learning how to speed up your projects? Innovel offers Certified Scrum Master and Lean and Agile for Managers courses to show you how to speed up your IT, Marketing, and Development projects. Contact us for training and coaching in Lean, Agile and Scrum.

A timelapse of a Boeing 737 being assembled.


  • -

New ebook, Agile Advice

Tags : 

book coverMy colleague Mishkin Berteig started his Agile Advice blog in 2005 when we were both doing Agile coaching for teams at Capital One. His blog was one of my favorite Agile blogs, he was getting out the lessons we were learning and providing smart succinct advice. In many ways Mishkin’s blog was ahead of its time, offering sage advice to issues and situations that many people had yet to come across. Mishkin has taken his blog content, tuned it up and added additional interesting stories in his new ebook Agile Advice. You can check out the blog for many great ideas, while the ebook is a more convenient format for those looking to improve their coaching and Agile transition knowledge.


  • -

How Healthcare.gov could have saved billions of dollars and been delivered in 1/2 the time.

Tags : 

By September 2014 spending on the 15 state health insurance exchanges and healthcare.gov will climb to over $8 Billion dollars*. This huge expenditure for health insurance shopping sites could have been avoided if the federal and state governments had mandated and followed modern software development practices.

onebillionincash

$1 Billon USD. We’ll need eight for healthcare shopping sites.

How did the governments, on something as high profile as healthcare reform, decide to use a risky 40 year old process to manage the delivery of the health insurance exchanges?

Comparisons were made between healthcare.gov and amazon.com, yet the way in which these two websites are developed could not be more different. Healthcare.gov used the phased or waterfall approach with 55 different contractors responsible for different aspects, and no one responsible for delivering finished product. Amazon.com uses Scrum, an Agile approach that emphasizes small cross functional teams who deliver working tested features every 2 weeks.

To understand how a website like healthcare.gov could have been delivered using the Amazon.com approach, I created a short illustrated video. This video demonstrates, in a simple way, how to deliver a site like a health insurance exchange using a fraction of the budget in about half the time. These techniques are very similar to how companies like Spotify, Google, Square, Valve, Salesforce, Amazon and many others manage getting software development done.

Got a few minutes to save billions of dollars on software development?

I hope you like this talk, please subscribe on youtube if you are interested in future videos. If you are looking for in person training for yourself or help for your organization, please contact me:

http://www.innovel.net or http://www.scrumtraining.com

Cheers
Robin Dymond, CST

*Health and Human Services data

*Report by Jay Angoff on Health Exchange enrollment costs per state


  • -

Expert Reviews of the Scaled Agile Framework (SAFe) Training

Tags : 

Reviews of SAFe Program Consultant (SPC) training on the Scaled Agile Framework (SAFe), from Agile and Scrum experts


I have been following with interest the Scaled Agile Framework and its increasing popularity. There have been a number of reviews of the training to become an SPC or SAFe Process Consultant. I am also interested because SAFe came out of work done by Dean Leffingwell and other consultants at NAVTEQ in the US in 2010-2011. At the time I was providing Certified Scrum training to NAVTEQ subsidiaries in Germany who were implementing Scrum. I did not work with the US groups, however I am familiar with what was happening at NAVTEQ at the time. So I think any review of SAFe should include how it helped or did not help NAVTEQ be more successful as an organization. In the last few years since implementing SAFe, NAVTEQ has gone through a major downsizing, been acquired by Nokia, and then shrank some more. Speaking with a former Director from NAVTEQ now at another GIS client of mine, the automotive division is doing OK, but the rest of the company struggling and shrinking in the face of competition from Google and others. There are many reasons why companies fail, and we cannot blame SAFe for the shortcomings of NAVTEQ’s organizational culture and business model. However we can and should ask: how did SAFe help NAVTEQ?

In reviews the Scaled Agile Framework and SPC training, a number of experts Agile and Scrum have commented on their experience in the training, the training style, and the substance of the ideas in SAFe. Below are links to expert reviews of SAFe and SPC training.

Agile experts Ron Jeffries and Chet Hendrickson who are authors on extreme programming and Scrum, consultants and trainers recently took the SPC training in Washington DC. Ron’s review takes the stance that SAFe has some good things that Scrum or XP do not address, and he goes through those points in detail. Ron is an excellent writer and thinker, and I enjoyed his analysis of SAFe and the training. I think this is the best review so far.
Scaled Agile Framework. SAFe: Good but not good enough.

Peter Saddington, a fellow Scrum trainer and consultant based in the DC area recently took the SPC course in Washington DC. Peter gives a balanced review of what he sees as the pros and cons of SAFe. While he likes Lean aspects SAFe has borrowed, he thinks the recommended “one week” roll out period carries significant risk. Peter strives to be open to the ideas that are contrary to some of the core principles and values of Agile. His highest praise is for SAFe’s marketing.
Review of the Scaled Agile Framework SAFe SPC training and ideas

Scrum trainer Daniel Gullo recently took the Scaled Agile Framework and SPC training and reflected on the ideas and how they compared to his experiences working on Agile adoptions in large organizations. Daniel was also a agile consultant at NAVTEQ helping them adopt Scrum while the Scaled Agile Framework was first being implemented at NAVTEQ. “As long as I am able to work with a client implementing “SAFe” and we are allowed to tailor it to include the helpful parts and throw out the harmful parts, I don’t see anything really evil or wrong with SAFe here. What we are left with is doing precisely what I have already been doing for the last 8 years: looking for how to instill the values and principles Agile and Lean in the culture of an organization so that a paradigm shift happens.”
Review of the Scaled Agile Framework SAFe SPC training and reflection on SAFe compared to Agile Coaching experiences

David Snowden, creator of the Cynefin (pronounced Kan av in) framework, a practical application of complexity theory to management science, recently weighed in on SAFe. In Dave’s post he weighs in on SAFe’s linear model and one size fits all approach. Snowden’s background is in complexity theory, and he knows that simple linear approaches fail to solve complex problems. Dave’s evaluation of SAFe is that it is not Agile.
SAFe: the infantilism of management

Enjoy the reviews of the Scaled Agile Framework and SPC training. I will post more reviews from experienced Agilists on SAFe and the SPC training.


  • 1

Eli Goldratt, a brilliant contributor to making work and life better. 1947 – 2011

Tags : 

“I smile and start to count on my fingers: One, people are good. Two, every conflict can be removed. Three, every situation, no matter how complex it initially looks, is exceedingly simple. Four, every situation can be substantially improved; even the sky is not the limit. Five, every person can reach a full life. Six, there is always a win-win solution. Shall I continue to count?”

Dr. Eliyahu M. Goldratt 1947- 2011


Eli Goldratt When I first read Eli Goldratt’s book The Goal, it was in 2005. I had been using XP and Scrum for 3 years and understood the value of good process improvement ideas. I was stunned after reading it. Not only was the book fantastic, I was shocked: this book had been written in 1986?!?! I felt embarrassed that I had never known about these ideas. In 1986 I was still in engineering and these ideas were cutting edge at that time. Is Theory of Constraints taught in engineering schools 25 years years later? A search of goldrattschools.org reveals 9 affiliated universities, and google searches are not filled with education institutions teaching Theory of Constraints (TOC). It seems most people learn about Theory of Constraints through direct efforts of Goldratt’s various institutes, the Goal and subsequent books, and word of mouth. I have told many people about and given away copies of the Goal, creating numerous converts to Theory of Constraints thinking. Goldratt’s ideas provided many insights into systems thinking and process improvement. As a software development manager who had already transitioned from more traditional management to Scrum and Extreme programming, I found TOC provided another set of thinking tools to analyze a work system. These tools complimented Lean and Agile without reducing their value or conflicting with those ideas. For example Theory of Constraints provides a way to prioritize process changes found using Lean tools or impediments found by the team using Scrum. However the biggest change was that TOC made me think differently. It changed my perspective on systems, on software development and work in general. Like Lean thinking, TOC colors my thinking about any system and gives me greater insight into the natural properties of systems.

Ours and future generations are indebted to Goldratt’s ideas and his insights into people and systems. His ability to write about these ideas using non-technical stories was almost as important as the ideas themselves. His writing allowed many people to pickup his books and within a few hours understand the core concepts of Theory of Constraints. The appeal of TOC ideas caused them to look for ways to apply TOC to their work, while his easy and accessible style created powerful incentives for people to learn more.

I am truly sorry to hear that a genius such as Eli Goldratt has passed away at the relatively young age of 64. I am grateful to have been a student of his ideas and hope to carry on the work of spreading the ideas of TOC and its applications in software development and knowledge work.

From the Goldratt Schools website:

Dr. Eliyahu M. Goldratt spent his entire adult life fighting to show that it is possible to make this world a better place. We must have the honesty to see reality as it is, we must have the courage to challenge assumptions, and above all, we must use the gift of thinking. Having applied these principles to various management fields, he created the Theory of Constraints. His concepts and teachings have expanded beyond management and are being used in healthcare, education, counseling, government, agriculture and personal growth – to name a few fields using TOC. His legacy is invaluable. On June 11th, 2011 at noon, Eli Goldratt passed away at his home in Israel in company of his family and close friends.

The strength and passion of Eli allowed him to spend his last days sharing and delivering his latest insights and breakthroughs to a group of people who have committed to transfer this knowledge to the TOC Community during the upcoming Theory of Constraints International Certification Organization Conference in New York. It was Eli’s last wish to take TOC to the next level – truly standing on the shoulders of the Giant he is.

Robin Dymond


  • 1

Wall Street Journal? New York Times? Why is Lean and Agile not a story?

Tags : 

Over the last 2 years we’ve seen some pretty hard times in economies in Europe and especially the USA. Financial services and lending business were in an state of near collapse. With each day companies were announcing job cuts. Job losses in the US are higher than they have been in 30 years. Now that the economy has stopped shrinking, and markets are starting to improve, companies are facing a much more difficult business situation. Stock prices and profits have recovered in some sectors, however most companies face slow growth, and systemic changes in their marketplaces. The US consumer has lost a substantial amount of net worth. That group is not coming roaring back to consume like they have in the past. Many of the businesses that cut staff will not be hiring them back, either because they don’t need the capacity, are doing something different, or are out of business.

Many State and local governments are facing heavy shortfalls in revenue. One important reason for declining tax revenue is property taxes. Property taxes are hard to collect when the property is in foreclosure. Commercial properties are also strapped as their clients break leases or only make limited payments. These losses often result in commercial property owners going out of business. The commercial property failures significantly lag consumer mortgage foreclosures, since commercial properties are not affected until their clients start going out of business. Booming government deficits, high unemployment, slow growth, and increased competition in a global marketplace.

As bad as the economy is now, I am sure it is not as bad as Japan’s collapsed economy just after World War Two. That is when Toyota decided to enter the automotive business. 60 years later Toyota leads the industry by most benchmarks, and are more profitable then the next 4 automotive companies combined. During this recession GM and Chrysler collapsed, and all three big auto companies required billions of taxpayer dollars just to survive as much smaller companies. At the same time Toyota took thousands of idled workers and launched retraining programs so they would be ready for the next generation of manufacturing, new assembly systems, and upcoming products.

The great recession of 2008/9 was bad for airlines, many shrank 10 to 15% and some went bankrupt. During this same recession Southwest Airlines managed to grow by 1%, while paying its pilots more than any other US Carrier. Southwest has been profitable for 36 years straight.

There is a major story that is being completely overlooked by the American Media. That story is how some companies have found a way to gain not one or two years of competitive advantage, but 10-20 years competitive advantage. How some companies consistently innovate and thrive, while others consistently fail to meet the expectations of their customers, employees, investors, and the public. These under-performing companies may have survived the recession, however unlike GM and the banks, there is no bailout coming from cash strapped governments to save them.

What do successful companies like Toyota and Southwest airlines do differently? Can they provide a road map for other organizations? What stopped GM from changing and how to recognize those patterns in other companies?

The New York Times and Wall Street Journal are missing the boat for their readers. There is an important story that European and American business leaders are largely clueless on. I know because of the conversations I have with their VPs, managers and staff. The executives running those companies have a fiduciary duty to get up to speed and start to redesign their organizations so that their companies stop surviving and start thriving.

Dilbert.com


  • -

Lean Six Sigma: Are DMAIC Demons Possessing Lean?

Tags : 

Halloween is a few weeks away, and the strange world of the dead, undead, partially dead, or dead fashion is inhabiting the shopping malls. Over the last two years I’ve watched another kind of possession has happened in business thinking. Once the darling of Motorola, GE, Bank of America and others Six Sigma has been falling out of favor. Six Sigma’s DMAIC model, its emphasis on gathering statistical data and focus on elimination of variation has floundered in knowledge work. Knowledge work has at its heart, people. There is no machine stamping parts. In knowledge work, the work being done is continuously varying in size and complexity. The work of problem solving is done in people’s brains, and the effective flow of information in the work system controls errors. All of the variation in these complex adaptive systems means trying to eliminate variation is a zombie’s errand. Lean and the Toyota Production System are principles based. Many of the ideas in Lean can be applied to Knowledge Work. Ideas like Respect for people, Pull, Flow, Visual Management, Value Stream Mapping, Systems Thinking and Continuous improvement all make sense in Knowledge Work. These Lean and TPS ideas can be used with systems that adapt and change based on the variation inherent in the work.

Over the last few years Six Sigma consultants have started to re-brand themselves as Lean Six Sigma consultants. The adoption of Lean onto their business cards is partly a survival strategy. If Six Sigma’s not selling and Lean is, then let’s “do” Lean too. The problem is that Lean and TPS come from a very different perspective on work than Six Sigma. For example Six Sigma’s DMAIC process is:

  • Define the problem, the voice of the customer, and the project goals, specifically.
  • Measure key aspects of the current process and collect relevant data.
  • Analyze the data to investigate and verify cause-and-effect relationships. Determine what the relationships are, and attempt to ensure that all factors have been considered.
  • Improve or optimize the current process based upon data analysis using techniques such as design of experiments, poka yoke or mistake proofing, and standard work to create a new, future state process. Set up pilot runs to establish process capability.
  • Control the future state process to ensure that any deviations from target are corrected before they result in defects.

There are some major problems with the DMAIC approach when dealing with knowledge work:

  • Defining the problem with voice of the customer is great. However what if the customer can’t articulate what they want? Every software customer I have worked with did not have a functional crystal ball. They can often describe at a high level their needs, but they do not yet have enough information. The only certainty is that they won’t have enough information. Neither do developers.
  • The underlying assumption of Six Sigma is that the process under study is a repeatable process producing the same type of work product and subject to some statistically relevant variance. Measuring aspects of the process gives data to better understand where variation occurs. In Knowledge Work such as software development or marketing campaign creation the work is continuously varying so the measurements measure a complex adaptive system, not a repeatable process.
  • Analyzing the data gathered will provide some insights. Let’s say that data reveals a problem and a solution is found. Putting an improvement in place will definitely help. We may rarely do that type of work again. What happens when down the line a different problem occurs that we have never seen and do not have a measurement for?
  • How do we know we have the most correct process just from analyzing work in our current process? In Knowledge work, the work itself often impacts the process.

Six Sigma’s underlying assumptions fail to account for complex adaptive work systems that rely on people to do the problem solving and rely on information flow to do error correction. So why do people apply Six Sigma processes to knowledge work and what happens when they do? More on this later…. time to catch a plane.


  • -

Kangaroo boxing: Scrum vs. Kanban.

Tags : 

Software development has its trends and its innovations. The term Agile came about because people practicing different iterative workstyles decided to come together and develop a brand, Agile, that represents their common principles and values. Agile workstyles include Scrum, eXtreme Programming (XP), Crystal Clear, Feature Driven Development (FDD), and Dynamic Systems Development Method DSDM. Then people like Mary and Tom Poppendeick recognized that Agile software development could benefit from the ideas of the Toyota Production System, also called Lean for western implementations. Now some of the proponents of Lean, many of them from the Agile community, have been attacking Agile methods like Scrum, claiming that Lean is “better.” To me this doesn’t make sense. Agile and Lean ideas are complementary. Ideas from Lean come from manufacturing, so applying them to software development requires care and understanding of how software is different, and why. More importantly however, the conflict goes against the spirit of Agile, and does not do the software development community any good. It drives a wedge and a barrier where there should be none. It causes proponents of either camp to ignore or resist good ideas from the other. Primarily this conflict seems driven by personalities in the community who see personal gain and status with attacking another’s work. The idea that in a community of thinkers one can gain reputation by putting down other proven and legitimate ideas is false. Gaining reputation in a community of thinkers such as software development requires that you show leadership in new ideas AND in integrating new ideas with proven ideas already in place. The battle of Scrum vs. Kanban reminds me of kangaroo boxing… Richard Attenborough narrates…