Notes on stuff
Started to work through Lean Software Development by Mary & Tom Poppendieck.
Chapter 1 – Eliminate Waste
waste = non-value added activity
value = customer perception
Tool 1 = seeing waste
* Partially Done Work
* Extra Processes
* Extra Features
* Task Switching
* Waiting
* Motion
* Defects
Tool 2 – Value Chain mapping
* Map process flow
* Value-added
* Non-value-added
* Prioritise improvements
* Repeat
Cite as:
Elve, J. E. (Oct 06, 2003). Study notes – “Lean Software Development” Chapter 1. Synesthesia. Retrieved Sep 08, 2010 from http://www.synesthesia.co.uk/blog/archives/2003/10/06/study-notes-lean-software-development-chapter-1/
Unless otherwise expressly stated, all original material of whatever nature created by Julian Elve and included in this weblog and any related pages is licensed under a Creative Commons License.
Unless otherwise expressly stated, all original material of whatever nature created by Julian Elve
and included in this weblog and any related pages
is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike License.
For further details see http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/deed.en_GB
October 16th, 2003 at 07:00
One problem with “customer visibility = value;” most plumbing and housekeeping is horrible to explain in plain language. So much goes into making indirect value instead of hotlist features: reliability, maintainability, administrative functions, availability, speed, ease of use, scalability, security, etc. They all require work and rework but they’re nearly impossible to quantify let alone explain.
October 16th, 2003 at 08:51
Thanks for your comment Phil.
You are right it can be difficult to excite the end users about those essential “plumbing” features, so a key part of deciding what is important in the project is recognising the whole voice of the customer. For a bespoke or tailored system then the purchaser will have several voices – the end users, the business funders and the “informed purchaser” (typically the customer’s IT management) – certainly as such an “informed purchaser” (I use the phrase slightly ironically!) I try to balance all of those factors into the brief I give to suppliers. I guess that with COTS applications the equivalent would be the vendor’s product management team who are trying to create a longer lifecycle for the product.
In both cases it’s a matter of extending people’s time horizons to look beyond the here/now (e.g. bells and whistles) to think about what they might want to do in the future, or painting scenarios of differing levels of availability to help them understand the importance of the plumbing…