Karl Scotland – Using Agile to Deliver Value
A Kanban Sidebar
I was kindly asked by Rachel Davies and Liz Sedley to write a sidebar on kanban for their upcoming book on Agile Coaching (no links yet). Here’s what I put together:
An alternative approach to planning work in time-boxed iterations is to use a Kanban system.
A Kanban system uses physical tokens to limit work in progress and to pull work as single units. This helps create a one piece flow, where features of value move through the system individually, rather then being grouped into batches. Kanban is the Japanese word for “visual card”. When applying a Kanban system for software development the Kanban token can be an index card representing a user story.
A key characteristic of a Kanban system is that it limits the work in progress in order to improve cycle time, reduce investment in inventory and enhance teamwork. For example, if the team sets a limit of only three user stories being in progress at a time, the team can exclusively focus on those three stories, and defer analyzing and planning new stories until there’s space in their queue. Instead of having an iteration planning meeting, the team simply waits until they complete one of these three stories. Now they have the capacity to pull the next most important story, as prioritized by the customer.
Following this approach, task estimates are no longer necessary, and any task breakdown becomes a purely analysis and design activity. Releases can still happen early and often, but a kanban system allows the planning and release cadences to be de-coupled. The customer might prioritize user stories on a weekly basis but releases might only happen fortnightly, and releases contain whatever is ready, rather than a planned set of stories.
Instead of the team committing to deliver each feature within a time-box, the team commits to delivering features at an agreed throughput (rate of stories per release) and mean cycle time (how long each story takes to get done). These agreed metrics are arrived at by measuring the team’s performance over time.
Applying this approach with a team that was using Scrum, but struggling to deliver reliably, allowed a more natural process that enabled the team to improve and become more successful.
Related posts:
| Print article | This entry was posted by Karl Scotland on January 9, 2009 at 2:35 pm, and is filed under Agile. Follow any responses to this post through RSS 2.0. You can leave a response or trackback from your own site. |
No trackbacks yet.
Linking Flow, Value and Capability
about 3 weeks ago - 6 comments
I wrote recently that I have come to think about Flow, Value and Capability as the primary impacts I hope a Kanban System will have. Flow, Value and Capability are not independent entities, however, with Capability being the link between Flow and Value. We can think of Flow as “doing the thing right”, where good More >
What is Capability?
about 1 month ago - No comments
I recently gave talk at the London Scrum User Group (LSUG) describing Kanban Thinking and had a very interesting conversation about what I mean by the impact on capability. I realised I needed to think it through in a bit more detail, and this is an attempt to articulate it better. Defining Capability In his More >
Impact, Outcome and Output
about 1 month ago - No comments
As I alluded to in the previous post, one of the changes in thinking, and in particular language, for me recently is the idea of impact. Specifically that impact is different from outcome which is itself different from output. I’ve differentiated outcome from output for some time, as have others, but I believe impact is More >
Three Cynefin Ahas
about 2 months ago - 2 comments
Over the last year I’ve been increasingly influenced by ideas from Cynefin, created by Dave Snowden of Cognitive Edge. If you want a good introduction, Liz Keogh recently blogged a good explanation. I’ve realised that there are 3 key changes in my thinking, some completely new, and some reinforced by a better understanding of cognitive More >
Kanban Thinking on SPaMCAST
about 2 months ago - 1 comment
I recently gave an interview with Tom Cagley who puts together the Software Process and Measurement Cast, and talked about what I am calling Kanban Thinking. The result has just been published – have a listen and let me know what you think. SPaMCAST 174 – Karl Scotland, Kanban Thinking Related posts: Lean & Kanban: More >
The Science of Kanban – Conclusions
about 3 months ago - 11 comments
This is the final part of a write-up of a talk I gave at a number of conferences last year. The previous post was about the science of economics Scientific Management Revisited Is scientific management still relevant for product development then? As I have already said, I believe it is, with the following clarifications. I More >
The Science of Kanban – Economics
about 3 months ago - 2 comments
This is the fourth part of a write-up of a talk I gave at a number of conferences last year. The previous post was about the science of process Having a good understanding of how creative people can have an efficient process still isn’t enough however. As Russell Ackoff is often quoted as saying, “It’s More >
The Science of Kanban – Process
about 3 months ago - 1 comment
This is the third part of a write-up of a talk I gave at a number of conferences last year. The previous post was about the science of people. Even though a kanban system describes knowledge work, we can still apply formal sciences such as mathematics. Rather than applying them at a detailed, micro level, More >
The Science of Kanban – People
about 3 months ago - 3 comments
This is the second part of a write-up of a talk I gave at a number of conferences last year. The previous post was the Introduction. Software and systems development is acknowledged to be knowledge work, performed by people with skills and expertise. This is the basis for the Software Craftsmanship movement, who are focussing More >
The Science of Kanban – Introduction
about 3 months ago - 2 comments
This is a write-up of a talk I gave at a number of conferences last year. I have split it into 5 parts. Abstract Science is the building and organising of knowledge into testable explanations and predictions about the world. Kanban is an approach which leverages many scientific discoveries to enable improved flow, value and More >






about 3 years ago
Point of correction. It’s not flow if there is a queue waiting for the next step to draw from it, even if that queue has a limit.
Make one, move one, no delays.
about 3 years ago
Even saying “the goal is one piece flow” is questionable. Flow is a tool used to respond to a situation. The goal is Better Quality, Lower Cost, Shorter Lead Times, Higher Morale.
about 3 years ago
I’m on kanbandev but I’m usually very behind on mailing list mail. If you post something, I’ll participate.
about 3 years ago
Hi Jason,
Probably true. The queues help mange variation in size of the features.
Perhaps a better wording would be that the goal is one piece flow?
Karl
about 3 years ago
Those are the ultimate goals. Shorter lead times is achieved via one piece flow.
Are you on the kanbandev list? I’d love to discuss this there with the group.