Page 1
You can start me up
How to build a sequoiaDeliver value, be lean and agile, scale up if you must
Tom Heisterkamp
([email protected] )
https://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=41450043
https://plus.google.com/u/0/communities/107348094571122106502
Thursday, November 5, 2015
Page 2
Which team serves the customer?
Customer Y
needs
product or
feature x
?
Front
Office
Team
Back
Office
Team
Page 3
C1 C2 C3
C4 C5 C6
C7 C8 C9
Feature or component teams?
Requirements - BA
RA
Design - AR
Build - Bld
Test, QA - Tst
SIT
Acceptance - Sme
Operations - Ops
Feature
Feature X
Feature Y
PM
Feature Z - ..
Page 4
Maximize feature teams
C1
F7
F3
F8
F1
F6
F2
F5
F4
Advice:
- Maximize # feature teams
- external customer focus
- Component teams
acting as supporting
- (No code owners)
- Internal coordination
between PO’s
- Break up teams through
(area) PO’s e.g. on C1
- Create component
guardians
Page 5
Internal open source
Team Elm Team Oak
Henrik Kniberg
A B
System
Page 6
Organization x
Conway’s law (1968)
Customer Y
needsServes
user Y
Front
office
Mid
office
Back
OfficeSupport
“Any organization that designs a system (defined more broadly here
than just information systems) will inevitably produce a design whose
structure is a copy of the organization's communication structure.”
Value stream
Jan Vlietland
Page 7
Dunbar’s number
• Dunbar's number is a suggested cognitive limit to the number of
people with whom one can maintain stable social relationships;
• These are relationships in which an individual knows who each
person is and how each person relates to every other person;
• This number was first proposed by British anthropologist Robin
Dunbar, who found a correlation between primate brain size and
average social group size;
• By using the average human brain size and extrapolating from
the results of primates, he proposed that
humans can only comfortably maintain 150 stable relationships;
• Proponents assert that numbers larger than this generally
require more restrictive rules, laws, and enforced norms to
maintain a stable, cohesive group. It has been proposed to lie
between 100 and 230, with a commonly used value of 150.
Page 8
Back
office
Team
Front
office
Team
Mid
office
Team
… fixing multiple component teams ?
Integration
team
Design
team
Page 9
Team
Willow
Team
Elm
Team
Oak
… fixing multiple feature teams?
Integration
team
Design
team
Henrik KnibergLean from the trenches
Page 10
Traditional and Agile organizations
Ag
ilit
y
High
Low
SizeSmall large
C.
Agile
Start-up
A.
Traditional
Niche
B.
Traditional
Dinosaurs
D.
Agile
Giants
Page 12
Scaling starts with two teams …
Page 14
then eleven, first top level support
Page 15
more support, more teams (22)
Page 16
Division Red goes for it (44)
Page 17
Division Red infects the others …
Page 18
whole organization becomes agile.
Page 19
This is the end, my only friend the
end
The best moment to plant a tree was twenty years ago,
the second best moment is now.
(African proverb)