distribution final uas inozu - hannan 2016 (1)

ÜAS 2016, Istanbul, 14 October 2016

2

High Performers

Project Success

8 % 9 % ? %

62 % 64 % 64 %64 %

2012 2013 2014 2015

? %

Copyright © 2016 FortezzaConsulting, LLC

The Standish Group’s CHAOS Report:

3 Copyright © 2016 FortezzaConsulting, LLC

Most approaches focus on “fixing inputs,” such as PM training and process maturity, and hope that results will follow.

Traditional emphasis is on binary “success/failure” metrics, as opposed to ROI-maximization metrics.

What’s needed is an approach specifically designed to improve the 4 key ROI-maximization drivers of project portfolio performance:◦ Project Selection: How to pick the highest-

impact projects, with “Effective ROI” estimates◦ Portfolio Throughput: How to maximize

the number of project completions◦ Portfolio Reliability: How to optimize the

project success rate across the portfolio◦ ROI Engineering: How to engineer the maximum

ROI—for both individual projects and for the portfolioas a whole—during execution.

Expose Hidden Capacity

Avoid Failures

Get More “Juice for

the Squeeze”

4

Invest More Intelligently



Technique Origin(s) Primary Purpose

Project Staggering Critical Chain Project Management (CCPM)

• Expose Hidden Capacity• Expose Resource

BottlenecksACCLAIM Single-TaskingMethod™

Lean, Agile,TOC, Psych,

• Expose Hidden Capacity• Improve Project Reliability

Project Buffering CCPM, Agile, Others • Improve Project Reliability

Portfolio Buffer Balancing CCPM • Improve Portfolio Reliability

Buffer-type Flexibility• Improve Portfolio Reliability• “Best Tool for the Job”

Flexibility (Agile/Traditional)

Any approach to pursuing highly productive work must be technically sound, and must integrate well together…but that’s only the beginning.

No organization will ever achieve enduring performance excellence unless it also adheres to two Guiding Principles:

6

◦ Communities of Trust—Does our approach foster trust among all stakeholder communities?

◦ Unity of Purpose—Does our approach enhance the sense of shared purposeas we perform our work?


Technique1 Program/Project Staggering


Three types of tasks, requiring three different resources: A – Planning, Scoping,

Prioritizing B – Architecting, Developing,

Integrating, System Testing C – User Acceptance Testing

The sooner we start ….

Three simple projects

Seven weeks each

8 Copyright © 2016 NOVACES

Delay Delay Delay

High resource utilization

Delay

9 Copyright © 2016 NOVACES

10

P4

86

4

Simultaneous Projects

Staggered Projects

Copyright © 2016 NOVACES

Typically exposes 20-40% additional capacity Agile tenets are consistent with staggering, but staggering is

not an Agile requirement; the organization must apply the necessary discipline and tools to implement staggering

Executive stakeholders must be convinced that a project start date weeks or months in the future will result in an earlier finish.

Staggering helps expose hidden resource bottlenecks, identifying opportunities for resource balancing

Individual efficiency must be subordinated to the goal of maximizing throughput


Technique 2 Task-flow maximization using the ACCLAIM™ Single-Tasking Method


Round # 1 Round # 2

13

TASK SWITCHING

14

Dat

a po

ints

First round results with task

switching

Second round results with

focus

Time to complete

Almost twice as fast!

30 60 90 120 150

2σ ~ 90% 2σ ~ 60%

180

15

Theory of Constraints, Psychology– Single-tasking is a highly effective way to minimize lead times for human-

centric tasks– Maximizing flow across an end-to-end process (system) can only be done once

the system constraint is identified Lean/Kanban

− Visualizing the actual flow of work—especially for workflows that aren’t inherently visual—is critical for team members to identify impediments and to experiment with improvement ideas.

− Enabling the system to “pull” work, vs. having work assigned or “pushed,” tends to improve flow while empowering teams.

− Minimizing batch sizes—ideally down to a batch size of one, or “single-piece flow”—can generate impressive flow improvements

− In general, the less “work in process” (or WIP) in the system, the faster and more efficient the system

Agile/Scrum, Psychology− The team knows how to be more productive than the sum of its members− The team is much more motivated when working under a disciplined

framework designed to foster team autonomy.

If the team can break tasks on the project plan into fine-grained subtasks that take less than a week, and ideally about a day…

If the team can maintain a readysupply of these fine-grained tasksfor all team members…

If these fine-grained tasks are visible, and can be pulled for execution by any team member, one at a time, without concern for sequence…

If the end-to-end bottleneck can beidentified, and the flow organized to minimize end-to-end WIP…

16

Ease the Flow

Feed the Machine

Visual Mgmt + Pull System +

Single-piece Flow

Focus on “Resource B”

Then I have maximized flow, strengthened team autonomy, aligned team behavior with portfolio-level objectives, and

achieved single-task execution, all at the same time.

Number of Task Owners

8

Ensure that this number…

6

…is always slightly lower than this

number

Previous productivity level

Impediments; lapsesin single-tasking

Improved single-task

disciplineOver 2X!

2 months

2015 average tasks in progress per developer:

2015 task completion per developer per week

13

1.5

2016 average tasks in progress per developer:

2016 average task completions per developer per week

1.4

8.3

Technique 3 Buffering


In order to buffer against project uncertainty, the Triple Constraint Rule says that we can hold fixed at most two of the three standard project constraints:

$


A traditional “waterfall” project typically has a schedule buffer at the end of the project

Phase 1

Phase 2

Phase 3

Schedule Buffer

Project Due Date


Agile projects serve as a good example here—they typically have “backlogs” of tasks that include lesser-priority software features that users would like to have, but can live without.

Sprint 1

Sprint 2

Sprint 3

Sprint 4

“Must Have” Features

“Nice-to-Have” Features

Project Due Date


This is what I call the “Olympic Stadium” type of project◦ The due date is absolutely fixed, and the most

optimistic task-duration estimates alreadyconsume the entire schedule

◦ The scope is almost absolutely fixed◦ Budget is the only available buffer

Task 1

Task 2

Task 3

Project Due Date


Technique 4 Portfolio Buffer Balancing

26

Project A

Project BProject C


15 Days10 Days 15 Days10 Days10 Days 10 Days

15 Days10 Days 15 Days10 Days 15 Days10 Days10 Days 10 Days 10 Days

Project A

Project B

Today

Two identical tasks, only one person (or team) with the required skill

Project Buffer

Project Buffer

27

A

B


AB


Technique 5 Buffer-type Flexibility


Project managers tend to prefer a schedule view—such as a Gantt chart—to depict a logical flow of execution over a defined project duration

Project managers intuitively know howto translate between budget, scope, and schedule◦ For example, we might “buy schedule” by

increasing budget or sacrificing scope Why not do the same with budget, scope, and schedule

buffers?


Task 1

Task 2

Task 3

Schedule BufferSprint 1

Sprint 2

Sprint 3

Sprint 4Scope BufferTask 1

Task 2

Task 3

Project Due Date

Budget Buffer


Michael HannanFounder & Principal ConsultantFORTEZZA CONSULTING(301) [email protected]

Bahadir Inozu, Ph.D.Chairman and Co-FounderNOVACES International Ltd.+1 (504) [email protected]

distribution final uas inozu - hannan 2016 (1)

Documents