Skip to main content

The Zero WIP Moment: Achieving the Point of Maximum Agility?

Recently, I asked myself, "What does it mean for a company to be agile?" and came to the conclusion that "Agility is the ability to change your mind intelligently, based on new information."

Why is the Waterfall so cumbersome, so un-agile, and why are companies stuck in the waterfall? One reason is Work in Progress. Let's take the example of a large services company which provides its services to other large, institutional customers. A typical such organization might have:
  • Sales Department - they sell service contracts
  • Pre-Sales/Engineering Department - they determine the business requirements and write specifications for custom development
  • Software Development Department - they write the software
  • Quality Assurance Department - they protect the company from disaster
  • Operations Department - they deploy, uh, working software (and Development babysits the system until it really works).
Sales is selling services which the development team will work on, say, a year from now. Pre-Sales is writing specs for software which the development team will work on in 6 months. The development is working now to satisfy contracts that were signed over a year ago. And the QA is working on software that the development team "finished" 3 to 6 months ago and for which the contracts were signed as long as two years ago.

The pipeline is permanently full, it takes a long time to for wishes to be transformed into working features, and there is constant pressure to keep the flow moving (just like in fluid dynamics!). So the company has great difficulties changing priorities, because that means throwing away vast amounts of unfinished work, and that can be expensive!

So if WIP creates inertia which makes a company cumbersome, stiff, inflexible or worse, what would be the state of perfect corporate agility? Having no work in progress at all.

At the end of every sprint, a Scrum team should have no work in progress. The software is (potentially) shippable.  If the Scrum Team has done its job well, all backlog items are "done", there is no undone work, and there is nothing preventing the product owner from requesting a shipment. This is a natural point for changing priorities and direction.

As I understand Kanban, it emphasizes limiting WIP to improve flow. But the pipeline is never empty. The pressure is limited, but there is no point where there is zero WIP. Scrum provides natural points to set entirely new priorities: the planning for the new sprint.

Is Zero WIP something that customers value? One concrete expression of the Zero WIP approach is the "Money for Nothing, Changes for Free" contract. Since the project has Zero WIP the end of each sprint, there is no reasons not to accept changes in the product backlog, or for a fee, the cancellation of the rest of the project.

Are moments of Zero-WIP a desirable goal?  Does this offer an important advantage to Scrum which is not achieved by the flow optimizing Kanban?

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Sample Definition of Done

Why does Scrum have a Definition of Done? Simple, everyone involved in the project needs to know and understand what Done means. Furthermore, Done should be really done, as in, 'there is nothing stopping us from earning value with this function, except maybe the go-ahead from the Product Owner. Consider the alternative:
Project Manager: Is this function done?
Developer: Yes
Project Manager: So we can ship it?
Developer: Well, No. It needs to be tested, and I need to write some documentation, but the code works, really. I tested it... (pause) ...on my machine. What's wrong with this exchange? To the developer and to the project manager, "done" means something rather different. To the developer in this case, done means: "I don't have to work on this piece of code any more (unless the tester tells me something is wrong)." The project leader is looking for a statement that the code is ready to ship.

At its most basic level, a definition of Done creates a sh…

Scaling Scrum: SAFe, DAD, or LeSS?

Participants in last week's Scrum MasterClass wanted to evaluate approaches to scaling Scrum and Agile for their large enterprise. So I set out to review the available frameworks. Which one is best for your situation?

Recently a number of approaches have started gaining attention, including the Scaled Agile Framework ("SAFe") by Dean Leffingwell, Disciplined Agile Development (DAD), by Scott Ambler, and Large Scale Scrum (LeSS), by Craig Larman and Bas Vodde. (Follow the links for white papers or overviews of each approach).

How to compare these approaches? My starting point is Scrum in the team. Scrum has proven very effective at helping teams perform, even though it does not directly address the issues surrounding larger organizations and teams. An approach to scaling Scrum should not be inconsistent with Scrum itself.

Scrum implements a small number of principles and constraints: Inspect and Adapt. An interdisciplinary Team solves the problem. Deliver something of va…

Explaining Story Points to Management

During the February Scrum Breakfast in Zurich, the question arised, "How do I explain Story Points to Management?" A good question, and in all honesty, developers can be an even more critical audience than managers.

Traditional estimates attempt to answer the question, "how long will it take to develop X?" I could ask you a similar question, "How long does it take to get the nearest train station?

The answer, measured in time, depends on two things, the distance and the speed. Depending on whether I plan to go by car, by foot, by bicycle or (my personal favorite for short distances) trottinette, the answer can vary dramatically. So it is with software development. The productivity of a developer can vary dramatically, both as a function of innate ability and whether the task at hand plays to his strong points, so the time to produce a piece of software can vary dramatically. But the complexity of the problem doesn't depend on the person solving it, just …