Still the WIP limit is exceeded by far due to migration from non WIP limited approches. Hopefully we have sorted that out next week and gained flow. From next week I will start track the flow also.

Have also tried out a “shortcut” to pass the Design process step for maintenance work. Though – if it’s needed we use the Design step even inmaintenance.

The problem with “common” business processes, I think, is that they often disconnects business and therefor sub optimizes different parts of the organization. Another problem with common business processes is that they often only describe the workflow (the work to be committed) and sometimes input and output. Common process mapping also often is a “paper tiger” and a one timer.

Value stream mapping (or Lean) have another approach. Value streams describes workflow and value creation from a customers perspective – end to end (not disconnected and sub optimized orgnizational parts). The purpose is to define the steps in creating customer value, not only workflow.

When we have mapped the value stream we can measure the the value stream; cycle time, process time and lead time. When we got these measures we can work with with optimization in a much more efficient way. I.e. how do we reduce waste? How can we lower lead time? How can we decrease cycle cost but keep throughput? Where in the value stream does queues occur? Where should we invest to reduce bottlenecks and increase throughput?

Value stream mapping notation differs somewhat from standard process mapping notations such as UML activity diagrams, BPML and others. The notation maybe is not the most important thing to learn, but it supports value stream mapping in a greater way. A great book on the subject is “Value stream mapping for Lean development – A how to guide for streamlining to market”. This is not an “IT” book but it is sure very very useful anyway. When you have mapped your value stream(s) a Kanban system is a great tool for implementing value stream support.

I had a e-mail conversation with a former college of mine. He is really experienced in the system development field  and have worked a lot with RUP in a good interpretation of it. I think the discussion can add some “meat to the bones” of my drawing. I’m only copying my parts of the discussion.

From first e-mail:

These phases do not trigger any hand overs. They should be even not be seen as phases in RUP way, but parts in value stream / process. Backlog and Ready to process is really only lanes. The Design phase is a necessary step due to new complex architecture. The team is excellent but have not worked together as a team so much yet. We use the phase to inject quality early and to avoid technical debt. We also think that we can avoid planning in earlier stages and not invest in decomposition of requirements before they should be implemented and in that way avoid waste. The only “requirements” to be submitted is the user story from Ready to process to the Design phase.

From second e-mail:

We will use the tools needed (UML diagrams) for developers to understand what he/she will implement. We will use it to the extent that he/she understands – not more;) It is also the developer that pulls Kanbans into Design phase and is responsible for the fact that he understands. The work is performed together between requirements analysts / dev manager. User stories, GUI sketches and activity diagram are made on the initiative of requirements analysts / dev manager and other diagrams of developers. When the team and architecture has matured, we will, if possible,  remove both phases and artifacts. This,   however, will be done when we have achieved an even flow and some artifacts and phases have lost its value.

Here is a first draft of a new Kanban system. Please comment and give improvment suggestions.

Have started to implement it on the board. Going live in late August due vacations.

More images later on.

Therefor I decided make a really brief current state value stream map of my traveling to understand my own “travel to work” efficiency . It looked something like this:

Last month I have travel to work by car. Financially this is sort of OK (have a car that consumes 0,48 l/km) but off course it’s more expensive than riding the bus. The environmentally aspects bathers me a lot so I look into more factors to change back into public transportations.

Therefor I decided make a really brief current state value stream map of my traveling to understand my own “travel to work” efficiency . It looked something like this: