Kanban Results

2009 October 24
by dpjoyce

Over the past year our Kanban teams have been striving to reduce the following:

  • Lead Time – the time it takes from a customer request to when it is delivered
  • Development time – the time it takes from entering the Ready For Development queue to when it is handed off to QA
  • Engineering time – the time it takes from entering the Ready For Engineering queue to when it has passed QA, left Engineering, and is ready for UAT

Through various means; working on the system, talking about blockers first in the standup, actively assigning, escalating and removing blockers, recognising and reducing bottlenecks, retrospectives, improving our process by separating common cause problems from special cause problems, using MMFs and component stories and tasks, implementing Kaizen, implementing classes of service, highlighting items that have been on the board for too long, to name but a few, we have seen improved results which are depicted below in Statistical Process Control charts using data taken from our largest Kanban team.

Note the links in the above paragraph link to other areas of this blog that describe in more detail how each of these have been achieved. You can click on each of the charts below to see a larger version.

Lead Time

Lead time has reduced from a mean of 22 days to 14 days over the past year. There is a consistent downward trend with the majority of the most recent items under the mean. Each of the outliers were proved to be special cause. The periods on the charts have been split from 2008 until our financial year end (April 2009), and from July 2009 until October 2009.

Lead Time Oct 09

Development Time

Development time has reduced from a mean of 9 days to 3 days over the past year.There is a consistent downward trend. This portion of the value stream was directly under the team’s control and not subject to delays from 3rd parties or upstream or downstream parties. The major factor in reducing development time has been to limit work in process. The periods on the charts have been split from 2008 until our financial year end (April 2009), and from July 2009 until October 2009.

Dev Time Oct 09

Engineering Time

Engineering time has reduced from a mean of 11 days to 8 days over the past year. Once again there is a downward trend. However there are more outliers that required investigation. Some of the outliers were proved to be special cause, but the majority were down to waiting for 3rd parties to complete their development and QA, something the team actively worked on to reduce. The periods on the charts have been split from 2008 until our financial year end (April 2009), and from July 2009 until October 2009.

Engineering Time Oct 09

Throughput

We class throughput as the number of items released, and would expect an upward trend as the code base is decoupled, work items broken into MMFs, and cycle time reduces. The chart below shows this upward trend in the number of releases per month. Note that we are subject to release freezes hence the drop from December to February where the release freezes were imposed.

Releases Oct 09

Bugs Per Week

We need to ensure that the reduction in lead and cycle times, and increase in throughput are not at the expense of quality. The chart below shows that the number of live bugs is within statistical control, and since July we are actually seeing a reduction.

Bugs per week Oct 09

 

There are now several follow on posts from this original post

http://leanandkanban.wordpress.com/2009/10/25/kanban-results-feedback/

http://leanandkanban.wordpress.com/2009/10/26/kanban-results-part-2/

 

11 Responses leave one →
  1. 2009 October 26

    Interesting results!
    Bugs per Month chart would be even nicer to see. It seems there is a peak in March. Can it be caused by new practices adoption / storming-norming phases?

    • 2009 October 26
      dpjoyce permalink

      This peak was investigated and found to be due to load on our servers which legacy code was unable to cope with. The load was due to the start of the new financial year and post end of year lock down. It resulted in a number of Kaizen work items which have since resulted in a more robust legacy code base.

  2. 2009 November 5
    Prakash permalink

    Great post. But why does the SPC charts show “Trial Version” water mark? What software do you guys use for SPC charts?

    • 2009 November 5
      dpjoyce permalink

      I am using Vanguard’s Capchart. Still waiting for the license key.

  3. 2009 December 1

    I don’t see worker morale charted — what do you have on that?

    Thanks, Alistair.

    • 2009 December 2
      dpjoyce permalink

      Funny I have been asked the same thing by other people. Worker Morale isnt something that I believe should be charted. Indirectly the fact that the team have continuously improved their implementation of Kanban and now wear the reduction of waste almost as a badge of pride speaks volumes. The team never lost a member but did gain some new ones who quickly bought into the cycle of change. Measures relating to purpose (from a customer perspective) have been created by the team, and they judge their output based against these (in addition to internal measures such as lead time, cycle time and number of live defects). They are free to work by whatever method they feel appropriate to help achieve (and exceed) those measures set against the purpose.

Trackbacks & Pingbacks

  1. Synesthesia » Links roundup for 2009-10-25
  2. Kanban Results Feedback « Lean and Kanban
  3. Kanban Results – Part 3 – From Scrum to Kanban « Lean and Kanban
  4. Curious Cat Management Improvement Blog » Management Improvement Carnival #81
  5. Kanban results | limitedwipsociety.org

Leave a Reply

Note: You can use basic XHTML in your comments. Your email address will never be published.

Subscribe to this comment feed via RSS