Folks,

You have just over one more week to make your submission to Lean Kanban
Netherlands taking place in Utrecht on October 25-26.

Submit now...
http://www.leankanban.nl/cfp/

Early submission will gain you feedback from the program committee reviewers -
Olav Maassen, Patrick Steyaert, Maarten Hoppen, Lilian Nijboer, and me.
Selection preference will be shown to early submissions that respond to feedback
and submit material that is on-topic for a Lean Kanban event.

[Hint: So far I've been disappointed by a number of submission that talk only of
Agile methods and provide no hook to Lean or Kanban at all.]

Best wishes,
David

Hi,
does anyone know if the LKU official approved curriculum is publicly
available, or will be?

Cheers,

Kurt

Hi Kurt,

Mike Burrows has been working on this. It is the intent of LKU to publish the
official curriculum. This is behind schedule. Due to the recent cut backs in LKU
administrative costs, it is likely publication of the curriculum will be further
delayed. There is no conspiracy it is merely a matter of priorities.

I believe Mike is on vacation. Perhaps when he returns he'll be able to comment
further.

David
CEO of Lean Kanban University
http://leankanbanuniversity.com/

--- In kanbandev@yahoogroups.com, Kurt Häusler <kurt.haeusler@...> wrote:
>
> Hi,
> does anyone know if the LKU official approved curriculum is publicly
> available, or will be?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Kurt
>

Contact me off list. Thanks

--- In kanbandev@yahoogroups.com, Tony Lew <sankwon@...> wrote:
>
> David,
>
> I meant to reply back to this sooner, but just got derailed.
>
> I think this is an exercise that can be done very easily using surveys, and
then show the results in graphical form for three main reasons:
> - It's a lot easier for each group to create their version of data, if someone
does it for them. Each survey taker will get an identifier so they can see
which graph is for them. 
>
> - Since it's easier to do, we will be able to gather as much data as possible
this way in a consistent matter.  
> - We can also categorize data based on industry, team size, number of years
doing Kanban, etc.  We can then show averages per industry etc.  
>
> None of this data will be very accurate, but it will be good estimates for us
to get a better understanding of the landscape.  
>
> I can get started on creating a survey monkey type survey for this, and then
show the final data in the radar graph format.  However, I need some help from
you and/or anyone else in coming up with really good survey questions that will
help teams figure out the right level they are in.   I may also need help in
determining what is the proper sample size we should aim for to be statistically
significant. 
>
>
> Let me know if this sounds like something that could work.
>
> Tony
>  
> Sankwon Lew (Tony)
> (703) 304-7707
>
>
> ________________________________
>  From: David Anderson <netherby_uk@...>
> To: kanbandev@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Saturday, July 14, 2012 4:28 PM
> Subject: [kanbandev] Re: Assessing Depth of a Kanban Implementation
>
>
>  
> Tony,
>
> I accept that we can even up the scales on the axes. I am very afraid of
people calculating "overall scores." I am not convinced this is a useful idea
and I am afraid it will lead to undesirable behavior. Perhaps we need to see an
experiment and perhaps you are the guy to try it and report back to us?
>
> David
>
> --- In kanbandev@yahoogroups.com, "Tony Lew" <sankwon@> wrote:
> >
> > For 3 kanban kata, instead of 1, 2, 3, you. Have 1, 3, 7.  If there are more
than 7 things to track, have distribute the weight evenly.  So if 14 things,
each thing scores .5 instead of 1.  There are ways to make it work, if needed.
> >
> > I have seen benchmarking tools that give out overall scores, in which case
having same scale points could be also helpful (you then also need to have
weights on which is more imporant) but I'm sure the mere suggestion of having
scores will make me a lynching target in this community. :)
> >
> > Tony
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: "David Anderson" <netherby_uk@>
> > Sender: kanbandev@yahoogroups.com
> > Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2012 20:07:29
> > To: <kanbandev@yahoogroups.com>
> > Reply-To: kanbandev@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: [kanbandev] Re: Assessing Depth of a Kanban Implementation
> >
> > I think this is very dangerous. I want the scales to qualitative in nature
and use taxonomies. I fear that the graphing tool will dictate the solution and
it will damage the usefulness of the assessment approach. For example, how do
you make a 7 point scale out of the 3 Kanban Kata, or a 7 point scale from the
15 or more possible aspects of visualization that we've identified as common?
> >
> > --- In kanbandev@yahoogroups.com, "Tony Lew" <sankwon@> wrote:
> > >
> > > I'm not sure if they can do multiple scales in Excel but it might make
sense to standarize the scales across all dimensions for simplicity anyway.  You
could have max 7 points for all dimensions, for example.
> > >
> > >
> >
>

Folks,

Those who followed the Boston conference will know that I gave a main stage
presentation, on behalf of Lean Kanban University, presenting the development of
the market for Kanban, and concluding that in some parts of the world it had
entered the period known as "Moore's Chasm".

One indicator of the chasm effect is the reduced growth in membership of this
list. The number of new members joining has certainly slowed.

Our approach to growing adoption of Kanban has primarily been a community led
strategy. Lists like this have helped a healthy community thrive and grow.

It is now clear to me from talking with training and consulting firms and kanban
software tool vendors that growing the market further requires us to reach out
to a wider market. This wider market isn't enthusiastic about process and method
nor does the community (or tribe) of Kanban appeal to these people. They are
looking for pragmatic solutions to real problems and lots of reassurance before
making a decision.

A number of us in the community are finding we need new language to talk to this
wider audience. You cannot lead with "Kanban". You can't even suggest a problem
- lack of transparency, invisible work, lack of alignment, overburdening,
resistance to managed change initiatives, and so forth, and then lead with
Kanban as the answer. People assume you are offering them yet another
pre-packaged process solution and the brand name and jingoist nature of
buzzwords make them suspicious. In other words, aspects that made Kanban
successful and sticky in the first place - it is "surprising" and the name is
distinctive - have become a limit to future growth.

So my question to you all is, what language are you using to introduce and gain
traction for Kanban with your mainstream audience? Examples I have seen include
"Flow", "Visual Management" and "Evolutionary capability as a response to
managing complexity". Please share your own experience and advice on introducing
Kanban to a mainstream market audience!

Thanks
David
http://djaa.com/

Jay,

LKU member firms offer accredited training given my an accredited instructor.
The training must meet a rigorous standard against a defined curriculum.
Currently a 2-day pratitioner-level training is offered. Currently there are
very few LKU member firms operating in the USA. My own firm, Net Objectives,
Corporate Kanban and Valueinnova, as far as I know.

Participants in these 2-day classes receive a certificate of completion stating
that they completed the practitioner level training. There is currently no
professional designation that goes with this.

Currently, Lean Kanban University has a committee of advisory board members
investigating the implementation of a practitioner level designation. They are
due to report their findings at the advisory board meeting in at the end of
October. Some public announcement may follow in winter 2013.

I hope this helps. We would certainly like to see more USA-based member firms in
LKU and more accredited Kanban classes being offered here.

Regards,
David
CEO, Lean Kanban University
http://leankanbanuniversity.com/

--- In kanbandev@yahoogroups.com, Jay Paulson <paulsjv@...> wrote:
>
> My organization will pay for certifications and I was wondering if there
> were any LKU certifications going on in the US sometime the rest of this
> year?
>
> I was looking at the LKU web site and found a couple but not sure what I
> should take starting off.  Any advice would be greatly appreciated!
>

 

Folks,

Those who followed the Boston conference will know that I gave a main stage presentation, on behalf of Lean Kanban University, presenting the development of the market for Kanban, and concluding that in some parts of the world it had entered the period known as "Moore's Chasm".

One indicator of the chasm effect is the reduced growth in membership of this list. The number of new members joining has certainly slowed.

Our approach to growing adoption of Kanban has primarily been a community led strategy. Lists like this have helped a healthy community thrive and grow.

It is now clear to me from talking with training and consulting firms and kanban software tool vendors that growing the market further requires us to reach out to a wider market. This wider market isn't enthusiastic about process and method nor does the community (or tribe) of Kanban appeal to these people. They are looking for pragmatic solutions to real problems and lots of reassurance before making a decision.

A number of us in the community are finding we need new language to talk to this wider audience. You cannot lead with "Kanban". You can't even suggest a problem - lack of transparency, invisible work, lack of alignment, overburdening, resistance to managed change initiatives, and so forth, and then lead with Kanban as the answer. People assume you are offering them yet another pre-packaged process solution and the brand name and jingoist nature of buzzwords make them suspicious. In other words, aspects that made Kanban successful and sticky in the first place - it is "surprising" and the name is distinctive - have become a limit to future growth.

So my question to you all is, what language are you using to introduce and gain traction for Kanban with your mainstream audience? Examples I have seen include "Flow", "Visual Management" and "Evolutionary capability as a response to managing complexity". Please share your own experience and advice on introducing Kanban to a mainstream market audience!

Thanks
David
http://djaa.com/

Thanks Dave for reminding me about your Dallas office. My apologies. ;-)

--- In kanbandev@yahoogroups.com, Dave White <dmhwhite@...> wrote:
>
> Hello everyone,
>
> I'd like to add Imaginet to the list of North American LKU Accredited
> Training Partners. With an training facility in Dallas and trainers who
> travel to deliver on-site courses, we are able to deliver Accredited Kanban
> courses anywhere in North America.
>
> If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me ( dwhite at
> imaginet dot com ) with any questions you might have.
>
> Cheers,
> Dave
>
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 1:45 PM, David Anderson <netherby_uk@...>wrote:
>
> > **
> >
> >
> > Jay,
> >
> > LKU member firms offer accredited training given my an accredited
> > instructor. The training must meet a rigorous standard against a defined
> > curriculum. Currently a 2-day pratitioner-level training is offered.
> > Currently there are very few LKU member firms operating in the USA. My own
> > firm, Net Objectives, Corporate Kanban and Valueinnova, as far as I know.
> >
> > Participants in these 2-day classes receive a certificate of completion
> > stating that they completed the practitioner level training. There is
> > currently no professional designation that goes with this.
> >
> > Currently, Lean Kanban University has a committee of advisory board
> > members investigating the implementation of a practitioner level
> > designation. They are due to report their findings at the advisory board
> > meeting in at the end of October. Some public announcement may follow in
> > winter 2013.
> >
> > I hope this helps. We would certainly like to see more USA-based member
> > firms in LKU and more accredited Kanban classes being offered here.
> >
> > Regards,
> > David
> > CEO, Lean Kanban University
> > http://leankanbanuniversity.com/
> >
> >
> > --- In kanbandev@yahoogroups.com, Jay Paulson <paulsjv@> wrote:
> > >
> > > My organization will pay for certifications and I was wondering if there
> > > were any LKU certifications going on in the US sometime the rest of this
> > > year?
> > >
> > > I was looking at the LKU web site and found a couple but not sure what I
> > > should take starting off. Any advice would be greatly appreciated!
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>

For example, naming a conference Lean Kanban 2013 communicates a tribal message
and while it encourages certain attendance it limits attendance from those that
we might want to encourage to attend.

If for example we held...

Performance 2013
Risk Management 2013
Change Agent 2013
Knowledge Work 2013

these names communicate a wider message but they don't represent a movement or a
solution to a known problem that a community can rally around. Conference
attendance is related to identity and affinity.

Kanban is actually a powerful swiss army knife like tool - it addresses many
problems. It can be offered as the solution to many organizational dysfunctions.
Strangely this broad usefulness presents challenges in growing awareness with an
audience who can really make a difference, and in bringing together
professionals from diverse fields of expertise who together can really change
large scale systems for the better.

The message for senior managers needs to be different from the message for
varieties of middle-managers and having several constituencies to address means
we need multiple messages. The danger is in mixing them. Equally multiple
messages can't be used for a single event such as a conference. So unifying the
different groups under the one roof is a challenge.

David

--- In kanbandev@yahoogroups.com, Hillel Glazer <agilecmmi@...> wrote:
>
> Excellent observations.
>
> Much of the discussion really hinges on who the audience is and what we as
> a tribe are trying/hoping to do for them.
>
> In my business, which, for those who know how I've made a living can
> understand some of the challenges, I've been determined to steer clear of
> named anythings and for more than two years I've stuck to the one attribute
> that my audience (executives) respond to: Performance.
>
> Even if/when a prospective client comes our way asking for CMMI or
> "AgileCMMI", I redirect the conversation to performance.  If they don't
> have performance aspirations, I don't want to spend any more time with them.
>
> Therein lies the conundrum:  Not using a "named" something-or-other makes
> awareness, marketing and traction much more challenging.  Leading with
> improved performance (without any prior relationship) is a message buried
> in a lot of market noise.  On the other hand, leading with some named idea,
> such as Kanban, brings up the issues David has so well articulated.
>
> Still, if an entire tribe starts beating the same drum (whether
> "performance" or otherwise), it could have the needed effect to make
> leading with that less noise and more signal.
>
>
> Be Clear & Unlimited!
>
> Hillel Glazer, Principal & CEO
> Entinex, Inc.
> Powerful results for high performance operations.
> +1.410.814.7513
>
> Author: *High Performance Operations:
> Leverage Compliance to Lower Costs, Raise Profits, and Gain Competitive
> Advantage*
>
> http://twitter.com/hi11e1
>
> I don't always check email immediately, if you need my attention now,
> please go to http://awayfind.com/entinex
> O-
>
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 4:47 PM, Richard Hensley <hensley99@...> wrote:
>
> > **
> >
> >
> > I introduce lean practices by talking about a mission I want them to join
> > me in.
> >
> > Business and Technology aligned and co-delivering value optimally.
> >
> > I find that has enough grounding in buzzwords my audience understands that
> > I can open their minds. Generally, I work with general managers, VP's of
> > Product Management, and VP's of Engineering, so I have a pretty high level
> > audience. Asking them to join me on the mission, and then asking them to
> > fill in their personal story of the mission generally gives me enough of a
> > framework to introduce the principles and practices of lean and Kanban.
> >
> > From this mission, the most common stories I hear are about lack of
> > alignment, and lack of collaboration. So, generally, I start with
> > visualization of the current system and move on from there introducing
> > practices at a regular pace.
> >
> > Richard
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 1:24 PM, Tony Lew <sankwon@...> wrote:
> >
> >> **
> >>
> >>
> >> Great topic.
> >>
> >> I don't have a substitute word for Kanban.   But what I do is I usually
> >> lead with mentioning that we/you need some process to track work. Sometimes
> >> I get stuck here, but if they agree, then I tell them, there are many
> >> methods out there, such as Scrum, waterfall, XP etc, but Kanban is one
> >> method that I found that is lightweight enough and can be implemented right
> >> away with big benefit of visualizing the process.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>   ------------------------------
> >> *From:* David Anderson <netherby_uk@...>
> >> *To:* kanbandev@yahoogroups.com
> >> *Sent:* Wednesday, August 8, 2012 3:14 PM
> >> *Subject:* [kanbandev] Messaging a mainstream market
> >>
> >>
> >> Folks,
> >>
> >> Those who followed the Boston conference will know that I gave a main
> >> stage presentation, on behalf of Lean Kanban University, presenting the
> >> development of the market for Kanban, and concluding that in some parts of
> >> the world it had entered the period known as "Moore's Chasm".
> >>
> >> One indicator of the chasm effect is the reduced growth in membership of
> >> this list. The number of new members joining has certainly slowed.
> >>
> >> Our approach to growing adoption of Kanban has primarily been a community
> >> led strategy. Lists like this have helped a healthy community thrive and
> >> grow.
> >>
> >> It is now clear to me from talking with training and consulting firms and
> >> kanban software tool vendors that growing the market further requires us to
> >> reach out to a wider market. This wider market isn't enthusiastic about
> >> process and method nor does the community (or tribe) of Kanban appeal to
> >> these people. They are looking for pragmatic solutions to real problems and
> >> lots of reassurance before making a decision.
> >>
> >> A number of us in the community are finding we need new language to talk
> >> to this wider audience. You cannot lead with "Kanban". You can't even
> >> suggest a problem - lack of transparency, invisible work, lack of
> >> alignment, overburdening, resistance to managed change initiatives, and so
> >> forth, and then lead with Kanban as the answer. People assume you are
> >> offering them yet another pre-packaged process solution and the brand name
> >> and jingoist nature of buzzwords make them suspicious. In other words,
> >> aspects that made Kanban successful and sticky in the first place - it is
> >> "surprising" and the name is distinctive - have become a limit to future
> >> growth.
> >>
> >> So my question to you all is, what language are you using to introduce
> >> and gain traction for Kanban with your mainstream audience? Examples I have
> >> seen include "Flow", "Visual Management" and "Evolutionary capability as a
> >> response to managing complexity". Please share your own experience and
> >> advice on introducing Kanban to a mainstream market audience!
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >> David
> >> http://djaa.com/
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>

We use the Weighted Shortest Job First (WSJF) which is based on Cost of Delay. 
Its simple and what I like is that it is all relative and sensitive to job size
which encourages teams to break items into smaller units.  Smaller work packages
go through faster and gets prioritised higher.

More info on WSJF - http://scaledagileframework.com/wsjf/


Chris Chan
==========
Twitter: @c2reflexions
Blog: http://c2reflexions.com/

Did you check it out?

"The company used Scrum from 2007 to autumn 2010, at which point they
changed to Kanban. By using Kanban instead of Scrum, the company
almost halved the lead time, reduced the number of weighted bugs by
10%, improved productivity by 21% for PBIs, and reduced productivity
by 11% for bugs. Consequently, Kanban seems to outperform Scrum in
this company."

Dag Sj�berg, University of Oslo , Oslo
Anders Johnsen, Software Innovation, Oslo
J�rgen Solberg, Software Innovation, Oslo

http://www.computer.org/portal/web/csdl/doi/10.1109/MS.2012.110

--
Rodrigo Yoshima
www.ASPERCOM.com.br
(11) 2309-1868 | (11) 9747-0250

Hi Jay,

We at Corporate Kanban have an LKU accredited class taking place in LA next
month (September).  We will also be announcing other classes for this year next
week (potentially in locations like NYC, Richmond/DC area, Kansas City,
Philadelphia, Denver, Omaha, etc.)

As others have mentioned, we also do onsite private training. The advantage of
the onsite classes is that we have some opportunity to potentially customize the
session for your specific context but still offer the standard LKU accredited
curriculum.  That could be a better option for you depending on how many
attendees you were planning to send.

Continually checking LKU's site is a great place to start for any classes posted
by all accredited firms or you visit our site at http://www.corporatekanban.com
and contact us directly as well.

Thanks!

Dan V.


--- In kanbandev@yahoogroups.com, Jay Paulson <paulsjv@...> wrote:
>
> My organization will pay for certifications and I was wondering if there
> were any LKU certifications going on in the US sometime the rest of this
> year?
>
> I was looking at the LKU web site and found a couple but not sure what I
> should take starting off.  Any advice would be greatly appreciated!
>

This approach - building out more niches for the market - where each is at the
enthusiast or early adopter stage is another approach. It isn't crossing the
chasm but sustaining the business while the mainstream waits.

This has occurred to me and I intend to look into some areas such as web design,
human resources / recruiting, legal and other professional firms such as
architects. However, building these niches will require credibility and
evangelists from within those fields.

--- In kanbandev@yahoogroups.com, Kurt H�usler <kurt.haeusler@...> wrote:
>
> Hmm, I attended an event called the Stoos Stampede recently. RE:THINK is
coming up in Belgium...
>
> I don't think the "mainstream" audience is where we will find the next bunch
of Kanban users. They are still attending "Scrum for the enterprise" type events
and are mostly concerned with not losing control or their place in the
hierarchy.
>

We already have this. We've had it for years. For example, IEEE Software has
been sitting on an article by Peter Middleton and David Joyce with hard data
from the BBC. Getting stuff published is the challenge.

--- In kanbandev@yahoogroups.com, Curt Hibbs <curt.hibbs@...> wrote:
>
> I don't think there's anything wrong with the name Kanban, except perhaps
> to more consistently link it with Lean as in "Lean-Kanban" or "Lean Kanban".
>
> What's really needed to cross the chasm is hard data on the performance
> improvements seen on real teams (even better if they are large teams).
>

It puzzles me that IEEE Software has published this case study when they've sat
on the academic quality paper from Peter Middleton and David Joyce for well over
a year. :-/

However, I am delighted to see this being published and it will definitely help.
The lead time improvement is probably most impressive.

The fact that they positioned it as "Kanban improves Scrum" is certainly a
message that will help :-)

David

--- In kanbandev@yahoogroups.com, Rodrigo Yoshima <rodrigoy@...> wrote:
>
> Did you check it out?
>
> "The company used Scrum from 2007 to autumn 2010, at which point they
> changed to Kanban. By using Kanban instead of Scrum, the company
> almost halved the lead time, reduced the number of weighted bugs by
> 10%, improved productivity by 21% for PBIs, and reduced productivity
> by 11% for bugs. Consequently, Kanban seems to outperform Scrum in
> this company."
>
> Dag Sj�berg, University of Oslo , Oslo
> Anders Johnsen, Software Innovation, Oslo
> J�rgen Solberg, Software Innovation, Oslo
>
> http://www.computer.org/portal/web/csdl/doi/10.1109/MS.2012.110
>
> --
> Rodrigo Yoshima
> www.ASPERCOM.com.br
> (11) 2309-1868 | (11) 9747-0250
>

David,

I don't see that the article states "Kanban improves Scrum"!

I read "at which point they **changed** to Kanban. By using Kanban **instead**
of Scrum" as a direct and complete contradiction to you statements from e.g. Oct
11, 2010 http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/kanbandev/message/9260 where you
explicitly stated (among other things):
"You apply a kanban system to an existing software development process [...] "
and elaborate on the misconception people undergo if they "[...]talk about doing
Kanban in preference to Scrum[...]"

Does your current stance imply that your position has changed?

Regards
    Michael

On Aug 9, 2012, at 17:30 , David Anderson wrote:

> It puzzles me that IEEE Software has published this case study when they've
sat on the academic quality paper from Peter Middleton and David Joyce for well
over a year. :-/
>
> However, I am delighted to see this being published and it will definitely
help. The lead time improvement is probably most impressive.
>
> The fact that they positioned it as "Kanban improves Scrum" is certainly a
message that will help :-)
>
> David
>
> --- In kanbandev@yahoogroups.com, Rodrigo Yoshima <rodrigoy@...> wrote:
>>
>> Did you check it out?
>>
>> "The company used Scrum from 2007 to autumn 2010, at which point they
>> changed to Kanban. By using Kanban instead of Scrum, the company
>> almost halved the lead time, reduced the number of weighted bugs by
>> 10%, improved productivity by 21% for PBIs, and reduced productivity
>> by 11% for bugs. Consequently, Kanban seems to outperform Scrum in
>> this company."
>>
>> Dag Sj�berg, University of Oslo , Oslo
>> Anders Johnsen, Software Innovation, Oslo
>> J�rgen Solberg, Software Innovation, Oslo
>>
>> http://www.computer.org/portal/web/csdl/doi/10.1109/MS.2012.110
>>
>> --
>> Rodrigo Yoshima
>> www.ASPERCOM.com.br
>> (11) 2309-1868 | (11) 9747-0250
>>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>