3 ms·
So, I've had the opposite experience: lean-type incremental process enhancement has had dramatic improvements on the end-to-end results of more than one compan
by parasubvert 13y ago
So, I've had the opposite experience: lean-type incremental process enhancement has had dramatic improvements on the end-to-end results of more than one company I've been involved with.
I look at a book like The Phoenix Project, written by some fairly respected software industry folks like Gene Kim, and they also recommend the opposite: that software development and IT operations actually are a lot like an industrial shop floor and benefit from being organized in an end-to-end pull flow like Kanban.
I look at Four Steps to the Epiphany by Steve Blank, or Lean Startup by Eric Ries, while they aren't specifically dictating a Kanban board in their work, they're clearly philosophically in the camp of a pull-based approach to organizing work and limiting work-in-progress.
So, what I haven't determined from your article is, what specifically is flawed with these authors views and my experiences? Am I being over-broad in their inclusion? My interprtation of your article this far is a well-meaning but under-argued philosophical aversion to being lumped in with other industrial engineering practices.
Edit: clarity
- bdehaaff 13y agoFrom my experience and from what I am hearing it (meaning Kanban) does not work for most folks or companies. That's it. It might work well for you and that's great too. I don't think Kanban and Agile philosophies are the same though - but that's at least another long blog post.
- parasubvert 13y agoFair ball. I'd say if its being latched onto as a panacea, almost all approaches to process will fail if you lack the basics: a good market, an insightful product owner/manager, good engineers, and at least an adequate morale in the company. I've seen companies/projects with all of those things still fail because of a poor process. This is where something like Kanban can help, IMO. Not trivial to implement though.