64. Customer Enters Bug to Executive
Emails Rep Tracker Review
65. Customer Enters Bug to Executive
Emails Rep Tracker Review
Assigned Fix
in Version
66. Customer Enters Bug to Executive
Emails Rep Tracker Review
Assigned Fix Assigned to
in Version Dev Team
67. Customer Enters Bug to Executive
Emails Rep Tracker Review
Assigned Fix Assigned to
Coded
in Version Dev Team
68. Customer Enters Bug to Executive
Emails Rep Tracker Review
Assigned Fix Assigned to
Coded
in Version Dev Team
Assigned to
Test Team
69. Customer Enters Bug to Executive
Emails Rep Tracker Review
Assigned Fix Assigned to
Coded
in Version Dev Team
Assigned to
Tested
Test Team
70. Customer Enters Bug to Executive
Emails Rep Tracker Review
Assigned Fix Assigned to
Coded
in Version Dev Team
Assigned to Release
Tested
Test Team Planning
71. Customer Enters Bug to Executive
Emails Rep Tracker Review
Assigned Fix Assigned to
Coded
in Version Dev Team
Assigned to Release
Tested
Test Team Planning
Deploy to
Beta Site
72. Customer Enters Bug to Executive
Emails Rep Tracker Review
Assigned Fix Assigned to
Coded
in Version Dev Team
Assigned to Release
Tested
Test Team Planning
Deploy to
Tested
Beta Site
73. Customer Enters Bug to Executive
Emails Rep Tracker Review
Assigned Fix Assigned to
Coded
in Version Dev Team
Assigned to Release
Tested
Test Team Planning
Deploy to Deploy to
Tested
Beta Site Production
74. Customer 1 Enters Bug to 1-2 Executive
Months
Emails Rep Week Tracker Review
1 Day
Assigned Fix 3 Assigned to 2
Weeks Weeks Coded
in Version Dev Team
1 Day
Assigned to 1 4 Release
Week Tested Weeks
Test Team Planning
2 Days
Deploy to 1 1 Deploy to
Week Tested Week
Beta Site Production
75. Customer 1 Enters Bug to 1-2 Executive
Months
Emails Rep Week Tracker Review
1 Day
Assigned Fix 3 Assigned to 2
Weeks Weeks Coded
in Version Dev Team
1 Day
Assigned to 1 4 Release
Week Tested Weeks
Test Team Planning
2 Days
Deploy to 1 1 Deploy to
Week Tested Week
Beta Site Production
116. •Cory Foy
•Slides at: http://coryfoy.com
•Email: foyc at cory foy dot com
•Twitter: @cory_foy
Notas do Editor
I’m Cory Foy. Agile Coach, consultant and developer. You can find me at http://www.coryfoy.com, or on Twitter as @cory_foy.
We’re going to cover two main concepts. Lean
and Kanban, all within the context of delivering software faster. But to talk about Lean and Kanban, we need to first talk about some Models of Software Development.
True waterfall, everything flows downwards. If you are going back up, you are either doing it wrong. Or Salmon. Possibly salmon.
True waterfall, everything flows downwards. If you are going back up, you are either doing it wrong. Or Salmon. Possibly salmon.
True waterfall, everything flows downwards. If you are going back up, you are either doing it wrong. Or Salmon. Possibly salmon.
True waterfall, everything flows downwards. If you are going back up, you are either doing it wrong. Or Salmon. Possibly salmon.
True waterfall, everything flows downwards. If you are going back up, you are either doing it wrong. Or Salmon. Possibly salmon.
True waterfall, everything flows downwards. If you are going back up, you are either doing it wrong. Or Salmon. Possibly salmon.
True waterfall, everything flows downwards. If you are going back up, you are either doing it wrong. Or Salmon. Possibly salmon.
True waterfall, everything flows downwards. If you are going back up, you are either doing it wrong. Or Salmon. Possibly salmon.
True waterfall, everything flows downwards. If you are going back up, you are either doing it wrong. Or Salmon. Possibly salmon.
True waterfall, everything flows downwards. If you are going back up, you are either doing it wrong. Or Salmon. Possibly salmon.
True waterfall, everything flows downwards. If you are going back up, you are either doing it wrong. Or Salmon. Possibly salmon.
True waterfall, everything flows downwards. If you are going back up, you are either doing it wrong. Or Salmon. Possibly salmon.
True waterfall, everything flows downwards. If you are going back up, you are either doing it wrong. Or Salmon. Possibly salmon.
True waterfall, everything flows downwards. If you are going back up, you are either doing it wrong. Or Salmon. Possibly salmon.
Goal behind agile methods is a collaborative environment that gets us to market faster, so we can make money faster
Goal behind agile methods is a collaborative environment that gets us to market faster, so we can make money faster
Goal behind agile methods is a collaborative environment that gets us to market faster, so we can make money faster
Scrum is best known methodology. But when you look at the burndown chart, you can see a pattern suspiciously similar to what we saw in waterfall. But worse - we have a gap. And it’s caused by something interesting
Scrum is best known methodology. But when you look at the burndown chart, you can see a pattern suspiciously similar to what we saw in waterfall. But worse - we have a gap. And it’s caused by something interesting
Scrum is best known methodology. But when you look at the burndown chart, you can see a pattern suspiciously similar to what we saw in waterfall. But worse - we have a gap. And it’s caused by something interesting
Scrum is best known methodology. But when you look at the burndown chart, you can see a pattern suspiciously similar to what we saw in waterfall. But worse - we have a gap. And it’s caused by something interesting
Scrum is best known methodology. But when you look at the burndown chart, you can see a pattern suspiciously similar to what we saw in waterfall. But worse - we have a gap. And it’s caused by something interesting
Scrum is best known methodology. But when you look at the burndown chart, you can see a pattern suspiciously similar to what we saw in waterfall. But worse - we have a gap. And it’s caused by something interesting
Scrum is best known methodology. But when you look at the burndown chart, you can see a pattern suspiciously similar to what we saw in waterfall. But worse - we have a gap. And it’s caused by something interesting
Scrum is best known methodology. But when you look at the burndown chart, you can see a pattern suspiciously similar to what we saw in waterfall. But worse - we have a gap. And it’s caused by something interesting
Scrum is best known methodology. But when you look at the burndown chart, you can see a pattern suspiciously similar to what we saw in waterfall. But worse - we have a gap. And it’s caused by something interesting
Scrum is best known methodology. But when you look at the burndown chart, you can see a pattern suspiciously similar to what we saw in waterfall. But worse - we have a gap. And it’s caused by something interesting
You might ask yourself how productivity would cause us to *not* deliver. Ask audience to define productivity.
Productivity is defined by how we are paid
And then you end up with Happy Developers
And then you end up with Happy Developers
And then you end up with Happy Developers
And then you end up with Happy Developers
And then you end up with Happy Developers
And then you end up with Happy Developers
And then you end up with Happy Developers
And then you end up with Happy Developers
And then you end up with Happy Developers
And then you end up with Happy Developers
And then you end up with Happy Developers
64-Bit Testing occupying QA. Devs keep working. Push completed work to QA queue. So they can be “productive”. But, is this productive? Heck, no! We’re not shipping anything. Unverified Expectations
64-Bit Testing occupying QA. Devs keep working. Push completed work to QA queue. So they can be “productive”. But, is this productive? Heck, no! We’re not shipping anything. Unverified Expectations
64-Bit Testing occupying QA. Devs keep working. Push completed work to QA queue. So they can be “productive”. But, is this productive? Heck, no! We’re not shipping anything. Unverified Expectations
64-Bit Testing occupying QA. Devs keep working. Push completed work to QA queue. So they can be “productive”. But, is this productive? Heck, no! We’re not shipping anything. Unverified Expectations
64-Bit Testing occupying QA. Devs keep working. Push completed work to QA queue. So they can be “productive”. But, is this productive? Heck, no! We’re not shipping anything. Unverified Expectations
64-Bit Testing occupying QA. Devs keep working. Push completed work to QA queue. So they can be “productive”. But, is this productive? Heck, no! We’re not shipping anything. Unverified Expectations
64-Bit Testing occupying QA. Devs keep working. Push completed work to QA queue. So they can be “productive”. But, is this productive? Heck, no! We’re not shipping anything. Unverified Expectations
64-Bit Testing occupying QA. Devs keep working. Push completed work to QA queue. So they can be “productive”. But, is this productive? Heck, no! We’re not shipping anything. Unverified Expectations
64-Bit Testing occupying QA. Devs keep working. Push completed work to QA queue. So they can be “productive”. But, is this productive? Heck, no! We’re not shipping anything. Unverified Expectations
64-Bit Testing occupying QA. Devs keep working. Push completed work to QA queue. So they can be “productive”. But, is this productive? Heck, no! We’re not shipping anything. Unverified Expectations
64-Bit Testing occupying QA. Devs keep working. Push completed work to QA queue. So they can be “productive”. But, is this productive? Heck, no! We’re not shipping anything. Unverified Expectations
64-Bit Testing occupying QA. Devs keep working. Push completed work to QA queue. So they can be “productive”. But, is this productive? Heck, no! We’re not shipping anything. Unverified Expectations
64-Bit Testing occupying QA. Devs keep working. Push completed work to QA queue. So they can be “productive”. But, is this productive? Heck, no! We’re not shipping anything. Unverified Expectations
One def of Kanban: A team has a capacity and is willing to set limits
When the Dev and Test queues are full, the dev team could go home, or work to clear the queues. Not pull from the waiting queue for the sake of “productivity”
When the Dev and Test queues are full, the dev team could go home, or work to clear the queues. Not pull from the waiting queue for the sake of “productivity”
When the Dev and Test queues are full, the dev team could go home, or work to clear the queues. Not pull from the waiting queue for the sake of “productivity”
When the Dev and Test queues are full, the dev team could go home, or work to clear the queues. Not pull from the waiting queue for the sake of “productivity”
When the Dev and Test queues are full, the dev team could go home, or work to clear the queues. Not pull from the waiting queue for the sake of “productivity”
When the Dev and Test queues are full, the dev team could go home, or work to clear the queues. Not pull from the waiting queue for the sake of “productivity”
This concept of looking at the whole is one of the fundamental tenants of Lean Software. Lean Software Development: An Agile Toolkit
10% Efficiency Rate
10% Efficiency Rate
10% Efficiency Rate
10% Efficiency Rate
10% Efficiency Rate
10% Efficiency Rate
10% Efficiency Rate
10% Efficiency Rate
10% Efficiency Rate
10% Efficiency Rate
10% Efficiency Rate
10% Efficiency Rate
10% Efficiency Rate
10% Efficiency Rate
10% Efficiency Rate
10% Efficiency Rate
10% Efficiency Rate
10% Efficiency Rate
10% Efficiency Rate
10% Efficiency Rate
10% Efficiency Rate
10% Efficiency Rate
10% Efficiency Rate
If you have 5 half-done novels, you ain’t got nothin’ to sell.
Clearing a bottleneck reveals the next bottleneck in the stream
100% Utilization is not ideal
The amount of time it takes for a work item from entering the system to exiting the system