download - sepg north america 2013

[email protected] @lkuceo

Presenter: David J. Anderson

SEPG North America

Pittsburgh October 2013

Release 1.0

Lessons we can learn from Bruce Lee’s journey in martial arts

Kanban and the End of Methodology


The End of Methodology


Is Kanban heralding in a new era?

* http://alistair.cockburn.us/The+end+of+methodology ** Cockburn’s suggested name for this new class of methods

It’s the end of methodology!*

Reflective Improvement Frameworks** are the

future!

Alistair Cockburn

Kanban is such a Reflective Improvement Framework


A methodology defines behavior

• A software engineering methodology is a description of techniques – what to do

– how to do it

– When to do it - sequences or workflows

– Who does what - definition of roles and responsibilities

• Ideally, a methodology should tell us why and give us a context to define its appropriateness


Many styles of software engineering emerged over several decades

• Some just personal preferences in style (e.g. PSP versus XP), but others for specific contexts or risk profiles (e.g. the many risk profiles captured in a 2-dimensional grid in Cockburn's Crystal methods).

• Some styles came in schools or movements - such as the Agile movement

• While others came as large frameworks such as Rational Unified Process designed to be tailored to a context*

*CMMI ML3 includes specific practices for process definition & tailoring


The Kanban Method was born out of frustration with these many styles

In 2002, I was questioning whether the specific methodology really made that much difference The question wasn't whether a methodology worked or not, or whether appropriateness of context had been assessed correctly or not, the problem was organizations were being seduced into pursuing changes that were too large and too ambitious. These change initiatives were beyond their capability and maturity to manage them


CMMI has a bl nd sp t!

• While CMMI is all about improvement - there is no process area(s) for change management

• IMO a flaw in the model that inhibits success


Change to mature or mature to change?

It's chicken and egg - a causality dilemma!

In order to improve capability and maturity, you have to be able to manage change. In order to manage change, you have to first improve capability and maturity


Managing change has greater leverage than picking the right methodology

Instead the bigger challenge with the greater leverage on outcome was learning to

manage change in the organization

I came to the conclusion (circa 2002) that the important issue in creative knowledge work wasn't the selection of the right methodology


Traditional Change is an A to B 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)

• To get from A to B, a change agency* will guide a transition initiative to install destination B into the organization

*either an internal SEPG or external consultants

Current Process Future

Process

Defined

Designed

transition


Change initiatives fail (even) more often than projects

Change initiatives often fail (aborted) or produce lack luster results They fail to institutionalize resulting in regression back to old behavior (and lower maturity levels)


How we process change…

Daniel Kahneman

Silicon-based life form

Carbon-based life form

I logically evaluate change using System 2

I feel change emotionally using System 1


Methodologies challenge people psychology & sociologically

• New roles (defined in a methodology) attack their identity

• New responsibilities using new techniques & practices threaten their self-esteem and put their social status at risk

• Most people resist most change because individually they have more to lose than to 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


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 a new methodology

• Is designed for carbon-based life forms - Evolutionary change that is humane


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 written with Chinese characters


The Kanban Method is a new approach to improvement

Kanban is a method without methodology


Bruce Lee’s Journey in Martial Arts


Bruce Lee rejected traditional teaching and styles of Chinese martial 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


Python

Monkey

Mantis

Tiger

Kung Fu Panda simplified the art to only four styles


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.“


Lee wanted to start from first principles and core concepts

Four ranges of combat

• Kicking

• Punching

• Trapping

• Grappling

*Apparently still 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 evolution in action ***Incorporated core ideas such as "center line" and single fluid motion from Wing Chun and parrying from Epee Fencing**** ****Not a Chinese Martial Art and hence evidence of "no limitation as limitation"

Five* Ways of Attack*** • Single Direct Attack (SDA) • Attack By Combination (ABC) • Progressive Indirect Attack

(PIA) • (Hand) Immobilization Attack

(HIA) • Attack by Drawing (ABD) • Single Angle Attack (SAA)


Lee’s approach still needed a name

• He named his approach Jeet Kune Do - the way of the intercepting fist - after one of the principles 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.


Jeet Kune Do

Using no way as way

Having no limitation as limitation


Jeet Kune Do encourages development of a uniquely personal style

• 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

"absorb that which is useful“

discard the remainder


Training with an opponent provides the core feedback loop to drive adaptation

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


Kata are not adaptive

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


Water flows around the rock

“be like water”

the rock represents resistance


The Kanban Method


Kanban should be like water*

In change management, resistance is from the people involved and it is always emotional

To flow around the rock, we must learn how to avoid emotional resistance

* http://joecampbell.wordpress.com/2009/05/13/be-like-water/


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 are metrics that measure observable external outcomes

• Fitness criteria are metrics that measure things customers or other external stakeholders value – delivery time – Quality – Predictability – conformance to regulatory

requirements

• or metrics that value actual outcomes such as – customer satisfaction – employee satisfaction


Institutionalize feedback systems to enable evolutionary change

Operations Review

System Capability Review

Standup Meeting

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


Adaptive capability enables sustainable competitiveness

• Kanban installs an adaptive capability in the organization

– the style of working - the methodology - emerges and evolves, adapting gracefully to changes in business conditions, risks and uncertainties

• Such an adaptive capability makes the organization robust and resilient and enables the possibility of continued sustainable long term competitiveness


Kanban’s Core Enabling Concepts

Kanban is based on some simple concepts for managing work

• service-orientation

• service delivery involves workflow

• and work flows through a series of information discovery activities

Kanban would be less applicable if a service-orientated view of work were difficult to conceive or the work was without a definable workflow


6 Practices Enable Process Evolution

The Kanban Method Visualize Limit Work-in-progress Manage Flow Make Policies Explicit Implement Feedback Loops Improve Collaboratively, Evolve Experimentally

(using models & the scientific method)


So, are we at the “end of methodology?”


So does the arrival of Kanban represent the end of methodologies?

* http://alistair.cockburn.us/The+end+of+methodology ** Cockburn’s suggested name for this new class of methods

No! We still need methodologies

There is still a need to know what to do, how to do it, when to do it and

who should perform specific activities.

Alistair Cockburn


Perhaps methodologies should be dead?

• Do we need to define roles and force people to fit their definitions? Is it better to let an individual's identity evolve and emerge in the context of a given organization?

• Transitioning methodologies is not compatible with humans

I don’t want to change.

I do want to grow


Give Permission for personal & organizational styles to emerge

• Give permission for personal and organizational styles of software engineering to emerge naturally rather than promoting methodology and adoption of defined methods

• Promote known good practices coupled with fast feedback mechanisms to encourage learning & adaptation

• Modern approaches to software architecture, design, programming and deployment all encourage fast feedback and short cycle times to encourage learning.

• Trends with communities of technical practice seem to indicate growing disillusionment with methodologies


The future of creative knowledge work should be inspired by Bruce Lee & JKD

• Our opponents are uncertainty & risk. Engage directly. Validate speculation quickly

• Teach beginners to set up safe-to-fail, learning environments at the individual, team and project level

• Validate assumptions early and quickly, deploy fake, prototype or real code to gain knowledge of what works and what doesn't

• Use modern technical practices inside an evolutionary framework

Train with live opponents No kata

No "dry land swimming“


To get beyond Agile we must embrace the “end of methodology”

• Perhaps now it is finally time to let go of methodology and embrace a whole new way of teaching and performing software engineering?

• The Agile Software Development movement has taken us some way down this path already. It encouraged the use of feedback loops and emergence of modern technical practices. Now we must complete the job and let go of Agile methodologies altogether!


Implications for CMMI


What does this mean for the CMMI?

• CMMI is methodology agnostic. A CMMI appraisal could be performed on an organization with a uniquely evolved software engineering method, utilizing evolutionary frameworks such as Lean Startup & Kanban

• There are implications for the CMMI model, though…


CMMI Model requires a defined process

• Do we still expect a defined process? If so why? Is this just bureaucratic overhead?

• Bruce Lee would have viewed a defined process as a patterned style - dead, without learning or evolutionary capability

• Would it be better to modify the model to look for safe-to-fail learning environments within the organization rather than defined processes?


The “end of methodology” may represent a punctuation point in the

evolution of management

• Evolution progresses through a series of punctuated equilibriums

• The “end of methodology” is an opportunity for an explosion of new management thinking in creative knowledge worker industries

• And an opportunity to give the CMMI new relevance!


Will the "end of methodology" trigger a new wave of innovation in the CMMI?

• Will the model evolve to reflect recent understanding in complexity science and the need for reflective, adaptive organizations that are robust & resilient in the presence of uncertain, changing external conditions?


Thank you!


David Anderson is a thought leader in managing effective software teams. He leads a consulting, training, publishing and event planning business dedicated to developing, promoting and implementing sustainable evolutionary approaches for management of knowledge workers.

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 methods at large companies such as Sprint and Motorola.

David was a co-author of the SEI Technical Note, “Agile & CMMI: Why not embrace both!” He is the pioneer of the Kanban Method an evolutionary approach to change and improved business agility. His latest book is, Lessons in Agile Management – On the Road to Kanban.

David is a founder of the Lean Kanban University, a trade association dedicated to assuring quality of Kanban training through a network for member companies throughout the world.

About


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”. “Safe-to-fail Experiment” is a term used by Dave Snowden in his Cynefin framework for comprehending complexity and managing in complex domain problems. This presentation was inspired by Alistair Cockburn’s blog post “The End of Methodology” and a quote from Peter Senge, “People do not resist change, they resist being changed!”

Acknowledgements

download - sepg north america 2013

Documents