There is now a definitive place to go for Featureban. Read all about it: Featureban’s new home (blog.agendashift.com)
October 9, 2015
August 29, 2015
I’m blogging here a little less frequently at the moment, but only because I’m busy on blog.agendashift.com and our Agendashift LinkedIn group, where I have been previewing new Agendashift functionality as it becomes available to its beta testers. I could easily have made this post there too, but there’s enough Kanban and Agile content here for me to show positiveincline.com some love. And why not!
This week I have been using Agendashift’s shiny new charting functionality to explore the results Depth of Kanbanland 2015 survey (which is still open if you want to give it a try — please do). I was very struck by this juxtaposition:
At the bottom of the transparency category we have one of the survey’s strongest responses right next to a much weaker one (easily the weakest of the category, though there are weaker scores to come in other categories). For frequent, progress-centric reviews — stand-up meetings and the like — we’re scoring between 3 (“getting there”) and 4 (“nailing it”). But for regular reviews of end-to-end effectiveness, the typical score is a 2 (“early gains”), with a significant number of 1’s (“barely started, if at all”). Hmmm.
Yes, the daily stand-up meeting is an agile practice I would wholeheartedly recommend, particularly when it takes a form that emphasises flow over activity. But how many organisations are struggling needlessly in both their delivery and change efforts as a consequence of their neglect of higher level feedback loops?
Even if you haven’t yet embraced the Kanban Method, David’s Kanban Cadences picture serves as a very useful checklist. For each of the feedback opportunities shown, do you have a good story? In our experience, grassroots adoptions of agile methods do often deliver early benefits, but quickly reach a plateau because there is only so much that a mainly team-centric approach can achieve. The Service Delivery Review meeting in the middle of the picture is a great way to break that constraint, providing as it does a fantastic opportunity to bring together data on effectiveness and progress on change and to share it with a wider audience that may include more senior leaders, outside colleagues, and customer representatives.
I know that I’m not alone among practitioners of Kanban and Lean/Agile methods in giving high priority to those bigger-picture feedback loops, but if the survey numbers are to be believed, we must be in the minority. I’d love to help change that!
July 29, 2015
Earlier this month I spent a very productive week in Singapore. Our client (a significant player in Asia’s financial sector) added two extended lunchtime speaking opportunities to my agenda, each 2 hours long with time for food and networking. The first was on the Monday, a great opportunity to get introduced to people for the first time. The second was on my last day, a nice way to sign off and a chance to present to some more senior managers from both technology and business.
Adding a mid-week meetup (a evening event that included pizza, a talk, and a couple of rounds of Featureban), that’s a lot of speaking for one business trip!
If you’re thinking of bringing me into your business, this is a really good pattern to follow. There is double benefit: it maximises exposure internally, and it gives you a chance to do something good for your local Lean/Kanban/Agile community also.
At very short notice I am very happy to do any/all of:
- A Scrumban case study (this was my introduction)
- Agile leadership with Kanban (my Singapore signoff)
- Are we there yet? (my current keynote)
If there’s anything in my back catalogue that you think might be more relevant to your current situation, let me dust it down and bring it up to date.
Further to that last talk, I really should mention:
- Agendashift, the 1-day class — Values-based change with Agendashift and the Kanban Method. Get it from the source!
- The Depth of Kanbanland 2015 survey, a free taste of some of the values-based change management tools I’m making available through the Agendashift platform
With thanks to my client and to Valtech for creating the opportunity!
July 21, 2015
For this 23rd and final installment of excerpts from my book I have chosen a very short extract. I chose it not because it summarises the chapter (it doesn’t) or the book as a whole (it certainly doesn’t do that) but because it helps explain some of what I have been doing since publication. Agendashift (tagline: “values-based change for the evolving organisation“) provides tool support for the change management process described in this chapter. The existing work hasn’t stood still either; you can now access an online realisation of a much-improved version of chapter 23’s checklist by participating in our Depth of Kanbanland 2015 survey. And please do!
I find it useful to think of Kanban implementation as a three-stage process:
- Planning the engagement: preparation in terms of participants, venues, tools, supporting material, and so on
- Shaping the agenda: approaching STATIK with the explicit aim of producing a compelling set of agreed upon priorities, goals, and actions
- Pulling change through the system: maintaining momentum into the future, ensuring that progress will continue to be both visible and meaningful
This structure can be applied regardless of whether your aim is to build a stand-alone kanban system, to introduce the Kanban Method for the first time, or to reinvigorate fresh cycles of change. You can even use it retrospectively, helping you to think constructively about an implementation that needs a stronger connection with its host organization.
I hope to show that there is no contradiction between introducing Kanban impactfully and remaining true to its humane ethos. Toward the end of this chapter we review the role that the values can play in motivating an implementation.
My book Kanban from the Inside was published in September 2014 by Blue Hole Press, publishers of David Anderson’s Kanban book, aka the “blue book”. Complete with an awesome foreword by Luke Hohmann, it is available in paperback and Kindle at amazon.com, amazon.co.uk, amazon.de and amazon.fr and (no doubt) other amazons also. A PDF e-book is available via the djaa.com store also.
June 26, 2015
It’s about time I posted the notes I email to people who ask about facilitating Featureban, so here goes…
Here’s a link to the latest powerpoint: (withheld – I’m happy to share but do please email me for this)
You might find it helpful to take a look at the slideshare embedded in Are we there yet?. Take advantage of the Creative Commons licensing and make your own customisations or translations! The checklists shown in the deck are now available via Agendashift in the Values-based Delivery assessment template, the basis for the Depth of Kanbanland 2015 survey.
Time priorities depend very much on needs, goals and audience. Typically I do either:
- Rounds 1 and 2 and a “here’s one I prepared earlier” on round 3, plus lots of time for Q&A on all things Kanban and Agile (the sessions I’m running at my current client are positioned as Agile training)
- All three rounds with a few minutes debrief for each
In the last meetup I did, I achieved #1 above in about 75 minutes. Your mileage may vary. The job of the debrief is to let people make the connection with the workplace.
There is now an fourth round which I use only when I have a couple of hours available (eg in a workshop). One option is to discuss this round without actually trying it.
I make a point of comparing the rules of round 1 and round 2; everyone should agree before playing round 2 that the only change is the WIP limit. I’m careful not to use the word “collaboration” myself until participants make the key observation that this improves significantly in round 2.
Stop round 1 as soon as most teams have delivered a couple of items. Most teams will have lots of WIP in the 2nd column. DO NOT reset boards between rounds 1 & 2. Advise teams to hold replenishment events when their backlogs become depleted. In later rounds, they might reuse “done” tickets to save time.
A WIP limit of 3 in round 2 works well. The fact that the limit is imposed by the facilitator rather than proposed by the team can be discussed later when you get to “improve experimentally, evolve collaboratively” (CP6) in the debrief.
One other tip I heard first from a couple of other facilitators and have now tested myself: the atmosphere and interaction around the game is improved if the board is mounted vertically (eg using a flipchart or taped to a wall). It means there’s less time staring down at a table!
May 16, 2015
[Update: Now cross-posted to Agendashift’s new blog. View on blog.agendashift.com]
Imagine a change process based on choice and collaboration:
- You (an individual or team) take an assessment of your choosing, invite a coach to facilitate one with you, or opt to participate in a survey
- You explore online an analysis of your own inputs and the aggregated inputs of your colleagues, identifying strengths, weaknesses, leading and lagging areas
- You identify the prompts or categories that best describe your collective agenda for change
- You track actions through to completion until it’s clear that they have taken hold and are delivering the benefits expected
No emailing of spreadsheet-based questionnaires. No being left wondering what’s happening to your inputs. No imposition of priorities from on high. No failure of ownership and follow-through. These are my “itches to scratch”. Whether you’re a consultant, a client, or managing without external support, Agendashift can help you too.
Right there are Agendashift’s four A’s: Assessment, Analysis, Agenda and Action. Of course it doesn’t have to be as linear as that: given time, Action should dominate, kept on track with periodic recalibrations from the other three.
You’ll see a free version launched in the next few weeks that anyone can try without obligation. A little after that, paid accounts will bring the ability to design new assessment templates and to manage client/team workspaces.
Agendashift will launch with a “Values-based delivery” template adapted for public consumption from my book with the help of some much-appreciated collaboration. If you have ideas for other templates (your own practice’s tools perhaps, or more specifically Agile or Lean than mine), do get in touch.
April 22, 2015
As seems to be the tradition, I was the opening speaker at Monday’s London Lean Kanban Day 2015, organised by Jose Casal and hosted by the BCS in London. My talk gathers together a few strands that appear on positiveincline.com from time to time:
- Depth assessments – evolved quite a bit (with help) since this post
- Four of the nine values – transparency, balance, flow, and collaboration
- The book – chapter 23 in particular (still a few weeks away if you’re following the series of short extracts)
Chapter 23 describes a process I’m now calling “Agendashift”. The deck (below) is I think its first public outing:
June 3, 2014
[Update 1: do read this post in conjunction with the previous one—Pulling change through the system—I don’t make it clear enough here that the purpose of the assessment is to help generate priorities for change]
[Update 2: the assessment tool has come a long, long way since the version still downloadable from here. Do yourself a favour and go to agendashift.com to use the latest version online.]
It’s fair to say that I have a complicated relationship with the Kanban Depth Assessment tool. With some excitement, I tweeted this picture from the 2102 Kanban Leadership retreat:
— Mike Burrows (@asplake) June 22, 2012
A few months after that tweet, I blogged How Deep is “How Deep is Your Kanban”?. Fortunately, I was able to channel my frustrations into something positive, and the eventual result was Introducing Kanban Through its Values.
Meanwhile, I find the tool useful in practice, even if flawed. That’s awkward!
Two years on from the Mayrhofen retreat we’re in Cascais, Portugal for this year’s retreat (#klrpt), and I have the opportunity to test a values-based realisation of our original idea, which I drafted only last week for the final chapter of my book (yay!).
Focusing on outcomes more than benefits, I asked participants to identify and categorise aspects or features of systems they would expect to see in mature Kanban implementations. This picture shows just a small selection:
(I should explain that “Leadership & the Leadership Disciplines” pragmatically lumps together leadership, understanding, agreement, and respect. I was actually rather gratified that Pawel Brodzinski expressed the concern that I didn’t give them sufficient individual prominence.)
Now for the measurement part. Sebastian Sanitz presented the Agile Fluency Model (Diana Larsen and James Shore), which uses a simple four-point measurement scale; Sebastian used the metaphor of learning a new language to explain what the different points on the scale feel like.
Since this morning’s workshop I have replaced my prototype’s ten-point scale with this more well-defined four point scale:
- Our system exhibits this aspect barely, if at all
- Our system is somewhat capable of exhibiting this aspect
- Our system exhibits this aspect convincingly, for the most part
- Our system departs from this only very exceptionally, understanding and managing the consequence when it does
These are applied per aspect; there are typically half a dozen or so of these per value category. I aggregate results within each category using a geometric mean (compared with a simple arithmetic mean, this gives more weight to lower/weaker scores, ie the aspects likely to be in most need of attention).
You can download the spreadsheet here: values-based depth assessment.xlsx. Some screenshots of the assessment worksheet and the radar chart visualisation are shown below. For the book, I will incorporate a time-based view from Ruben Olsen.
I honestly believe this to be an improvement on the old tool, but I know that there will be those that would still prefer to see it based on a checklist of low-level practices. I’m afraid to say that you’re unlikely to get that from me! Still, I’d be grateful for feedback, soon enough that I can accommodate it before the book’s publication (September, fingers crossed). If it takes additional work to separate the tool from the book—context matters, after all—that’s fine.