Slides

Kanban

and evolu0onary management Presents

Lessons we can learn from Bruce Lee’s journey in mar4al arts Presenter David J. Anderson Lean Kanban Central Europe Hamburg November 2013 Release 1.0

[email protected] @lkuceo

Copyright Lean Kanban Inc.

Bruce Lee’s Journey in Mar0al Arts



Bruce Lee rejected tradi0onal teaching and styles of Chinese mar0al 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



Kung Fu Panda simplified the art to only four styles

Mantis

Snake

Tiger

Monkey [email protected] @lkuceo


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.“ [email protected] @lkuceo


Lee wanted to start from first principles and core concepts

Four ranges of combat •  •  •  • 

Kicking Punching Trapping Grappling

Five* Ways of AJack***

•  Single Direct AJack (SDA) •  AJack By Combina4on (ABC) •  Progressive Indirect AJack (PIA) •  (Hand) Immobiliza4on AJack (HIA) •  AJack by Drawing (ABD) •  Single Angle AJack (SAA)

*Apparently s4ll 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 evolu4on in ac4on ***Incorporated core ideas such as "center line" and single fluid mo4on from Wing Chun and parrying from Epee Fencing**** ****Not a Chinese Mar4al Art and hence evidence of "no limita4on as limita4on"



Lee’s approach s0ll needed a name •  He named his approach Jeet 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. [email protected] @lkuceo


Jeet Kune Do

Having no limita4on as limita4on [email protected] @lkuceo

Using no way as way Copyright Lean Kanban Inc.

Jeet Kune Do encourages development of a uniquely personal style

"absorb that which is useful“ discard the remainder [email protected] @lkuceo


•  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

Training with an opponent provides the core feedback loop to drive adapta0on 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 [email protected] @lkuceo


Kata are not adap0ve

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



Mar0al Arts viewed through a Cynefin* Lens Complex Jeet Kune Do Emergent Prac4ces

Complicated PaMerned Styles Good Prac4ces

Chao4c

Simple

Novel Prac4ces

Individual Best Prac4ce Kata

*hJp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cynefin [email protected] @lkuceo


Lee’s genius was recognizing hand-‐to-‐hand combat is an unordered problem •  Patterned styles are perfectly good for controlled circumstances such as competition •  Sporting combat is an ordered domain problem •  Street fighting is not orderly and therefore emergent practice is required •  Unordered problem required a new philosophy [email protected] @lkuceo


Mo0va0on for the Kanban Method



Tradi0onal Change is an A to B process Designed Current Process

Defined transition

Future 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 * Value stream mapping, ** Theory of Constraints Thinking Processes ***either an internal process group or external consultants [email protected] @lkuceo


Change ini0a0ves fail (even) more oSen than projects Change initiatives often fail (aborted) or produce lack luster results They fail to institutionalize resulting in regression back to old behavior [email protected] @lkuceo


Daniel Kahneman has given us a simple model for how we process informa0on Learning from theory

Learning by Experience

SLOW

FAST

But fast to learn

But slow to learn

System 1 Sensory Percep0on PaMern Matching [email protected] @lkuceo

Daniel Kahneman Copyright Lean Kanban Inc.

System 2 Logical Inference Engine

How we process change… I logically evaluate change using System 2 I adapt quickly

Silicon-‐based life form

I feel change emo0onally using System 1 I adapt slowly Daniel Kahneman



Carbon-‐based life form

Adop0ng new processes challenges people psychologically & sociologically •  New roles attack identity •  New responsibilities using new techniques & practices threaten self-esteem & social status •  Most people resist most change because individually they have more to lose than 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 [email protected] @lkuceo


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 new processes •  Don’t reorganize

•  Is designed for carbon-based life forms •  Evolutionary change that is humane [email protected] @lkuceo


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 wriJen with Chinese characters [email protected] @lkuceo


The Kanban Method is a new approach to improvement

Kanban is a method without methodology [email protected] @lkuceo


Water flows around the rock

“be like water”

the rock represents resistance [email protected] @lkuceo


The Kanban Method



Kanban should be like water* In change management, resistance is from the people involved and it is always emotional (system 1) To flow around the rock, we must learn how to avoid emotional resistance * hJp://joecampbell.wordpress.com/2009/05/13/be-‐like-‐water/ [email protected] @lkuceo


Principles behind 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 [email protected] @lkuceo


The Kanban Lens Kanban asks us to view the world of work through a new lens •  Creative work is service-oriented •  Service delivery involves workflow •  Workflow involves a series of knowledge discovery activities

Kanban would be less applicable if a serviceorientated view of work were difficult to conceive or the work was sufficiently new that a definable series of knowledge discovery activities had not emerged [email protected] @lkuceo


6 Prac0ces Enable Process Evolu0on The Kanban Method

Visualize Limit Work-‐in-‐progress Manage Flow Make Policies Explicit Implement Feedback Loops Improve Collabora4vely, Evolve Experimentally

(using models & the scien4fic 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 proposed that Net Promoter Score (NPS) is the only metric that business should care about •  NPS is interesting because it is a fitness evaluator. It will indicate whether a business (or product) is likely to survive & thrive •  But is it the only metric we need? [email protected] @lkuceo


Steve Denning

Net Promoter Score is a way of evalua0ng customer sa0sfac0on

•  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 beMer 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 [email protected] @lkuceo


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



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 to different customers provides the opportunity to segment demand and offer different classes of service within your kanban system •  e.g. Will you pay extra to have your pizza delivered faster?



Which system is fiMer? System B Mean 12 days

System A Mean 17 days 30

14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0

25 20 15 Frequency

10

Frequency

5 0 5

10 15 20 25 30 40 45 55 65 More

5

Lead Time (Days)

10

15

20

25

30

More

Lead Time in Days

We don’t know! System B is faster but without understanding customer expectations, both may be fit enough [email protected] @lkuceo


Measuring delivery against expecta0on System B Mean 12 days

System A Mean 17 days 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0

System B is clearly fiJer! System B delivers 5/7 within expecta4ons System A only delivers 3/7 within expecta4ons 30 25 20 15

Frequency

10

Frequency

5 0

5

10 15 20 25 30 40 45 55 65 More

5

10

15

Lead Time (Days)

20

25

30

More

Lead Time in Days

System B

System A 12

50

10

40

8

30

6 4

Frequency

20

Frequency

10

2 0

0 -‐25 -‐20 -‐5

0

5

10 20 30 35 40 More

-‐15 -‐10

Lead Time Expecta0on Spread (Days)


-‐5

0

5

10

15

20 More

Lead Time Expecta0on Spread (Days)


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



Assessing fitness to pursue a short Shelf-‐Life strategy Business Agility

Are our business agility High & predictability fitShort (days, weeks, enough for our strategy?

Frequent Short Frequent

Replenishment

Lead Time

Delivery

months)

Seldom

Long

Seldom

Predictability

If we plan to pursue short shelf-life opportunities, we must measure predictability, lead time, replenishment & delivery Medium frequency as fitness criteria. Expectations are set based on (months, our chosen strategy to pursue short shelf-life opportunities quarters, 1-2 years)

Long Low [email protected] @lkuceo

(years, decades)

Kanban Copyright system dynamics Lean Kanban Inc.

Evolu0onary change has no defined end point Initial Process

Evaluate Fitness Roll back

Evaluate Fitness Roll forward

We don’t know the end-‐point but we do know our emergent process is fiMer! Evaluate Fitness

Evaluate Fitness Evaluate Fitness

Evolving Process

Future process is emergent



Kanban viewed through a Cynefin* Lens Multiple work types

Kanban systems alone aren’t enough in the unordered domain

Multiple classes of service

Complex Kanban Method Emergent Prac4ces

Complicated Deep Kanban Good Prac4ces System Single work type Single class of service

Chao4c Novel Prac4ces

*hJp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cynefin [email protected] @lkuceo

Simple Simple Kanban Best Prac4ce System


Enabling Evolu0onary Management



Ins0tu0onalize feedback systems to enable evolu0onary change

Operations Review System Capability Review Standup Meeting

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



Disintermediate! Risks, fitness criteria & classes of service should be explicit & transparent Operations Review

Lead 4me Quality Predictability

Expose risk, classes of service & fitness criteria at all 3 levels of Lead 4me Quality feedback Predictability

System Capability Review

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


Standup Meeting


Lead 4me Quality Predictability

Is there room for improvement?

Ready For Delivery Delivered

Pool of Ideas

Testing Development Committed Flow efficiency measures the 3 ∞ percentage of total lead time ∞ 2 ∞ 3 is spent Verification Acceptance Ongoing Done actually adding value (or knowledge) versus waiting Flow efficiency% = Work Time x 100%

F Flow efficiencies ofD1-5% are CP1 commonly reported*, **

H

I

G

PB GY

Waiting

DE

Working

Lead Time

Multitasking means time spent in Eworking columns is often waiting time MN AB

Waiting

Working

Lead Time * Hakan Forss, Lean Kanban France, Oct 2013 ** 2% reported by Zsolt Fabok, Lean Kanban France, Oct 2012


A


Waiting

Waiting

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 hJp://www.klausleopold.com/2013/09/blocker-‐clusters-‐problems-‐are-‐not.html



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! •  Metrics guiding improvements should be temporary & discarded when no longer needed [email protected] @lkuceo


Comparing Kanban with Jeet Kune Do



Jeet Kune Do is a framework for figh0ng 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 is a framework for service-‐delivery management •  Kanban is 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 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 Evolu0onary Management



The Kanban Method makes a business fiMer 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 evolu0onary approach

Build-‐Measure-‐Learn Cycle


•  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-tofail” experiments •  For example, “Fake a Feature”


Lean Startup makes a product or service fiMer 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 Pragma9c 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 crea0ve 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 crea0ve knowledge work should be inspired by Bruce Lee & JKD Our opponents are uncertainty & risk. Engage directly Visualize & make them explicit throughout the workflow & at all 3 levels of reporting 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 Train with live opponents complex Fitness-for-purpose & sustainability come No k ata from developing strong adaptive capability

No "dry land swimming“



Thank you! [email protected] @lkuceo


About

[Replace with personal bio] David Anderson is a thought leader in managing effective software teams. He leads a training, consulting, publishing and event planning business dedicated to developing, promoting and implementing sustainable evolutionary… 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 agile methods at large companies such as Sprint and Motorola. David is the pioneer of the Kanban Method an agile and evolutionary approach to change. His latest book, published in June 2012, is, Lessons in Agile Management – On the Road to Kanban. David is a founder of the Lean Kanban Inc., a business dedicated to assuring quality of training in Lean and Kanban for knowledge workers throughout the world.



Acknowledgements Joe Cooper 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”. The data on slides 45 & 46 was provided by Raymond Keating of CME Group. 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 that matters in his book, “Radical Management.”



