Lean Kanban Lessons from a Software Developer

Business901 Podcast Transcription
Implementing Lean Marketing Systems

Lean Kanban Lessons from a Software Developer
Guest was Chris Hefley is President and Co-Founder Bandit Software
Related Podcast: Lean Kanban Lessons from a Software Developer

This is transcription of the Business901 Podcast with Chris Hefley,
President of Bandit Software. Chris offered a perspective from not
only a producer of a product for Kanban but as a software
developer himself. A fresh perspective of not only Kanban but
Lean in Software Development, this is not a consultant or an
author of a how to book but someone that is in the trenches
living it day and day out. Chris’s primary area of expertise is in
helping development teams implement processes that enable a
lean, continuous flow of work - focusing on the technical practices
that enable teams to deliver quickly, avoiding bottlenecks and
blockers.

Bandit Software, LLC. : Bandit Software was founded in May
2009 by Chris Hefley, Stephen Franklin, and
Daniel Norton. We all worked together once
upon a time at the Nashville-based
healthcare giant, HCA, Inc. We’d remained
friend for years, long after leaving to pursue
other opportunities, and one day we just
decided it was time. Time to strike out on
our own and “own the company we want to
work for.” So, one night back in May we gathered in Stephen’s
basement, and Bandit Software was born. Six months and many
sleepless nights later, we are on the verge of launching our first
product, LeanKit Kanban.

Chris Hefley can be found on Twitter at @indomitablehef

Copyright Business901

Joe Dager: Participating in the program today is Chris Hefley,
the president and a cofounder of Bandit Software, a maker of
electronic Kanban tools for Lean software and system
development teams called Lean Kit Kanban. Chris has been a
software developer, architect, and coach and has experience in
manufacturing, consulting, and healthcare. Chris, could you just
tell me where you came up then with the name Bandit and why
you named a company that?
Chris Hefley: That's a good question. We were struggling to find
a name, and Bandit is actually the name of the one of the
cofounder's dogs. He's a bloodhound dog called Bandit, so that's
what we came up with.
Joe: Now could you tell me how you first got exposed to Lean
and a little background about yourself?
Chris: Absolutely. When I first got out of college, or actually
even in college, I was a co-op student at a TRW plant and my
first exposure to Lean was actually in manufacturing. They had
set up a line that used work cells and were trying to implement
some Lean methodologies there in the plant. My first several
years out of college, I worked in various manufacturing plants, in
DuPont and Frigidaire and places like that, where there were Lean
and Six Sigma efforts going on. A lot of that was peripheral to
me.
About three or four years ago when software developers started
talking about Lean as something that would apply to the software
development process, the Mary and Tom Poppendieck book about
Lean software development came out. I really started getting
interested in it then. I was very much into the Agile software
development movement before that and started really seeing a
lot of value in applying Lean principles to software development
around that time.


Joe: The interesting thing to me is Kanban has really come up
very quickly here. There is more of an association with Lean than
maybe what Agile is, is that correct or not? Or how has that
worked?
Chris: Sure, absolutely. I think Kanban as we sort of define it in
software development is a little different than what it has
traditionally. It's taken on more meaning than it traditionally had
in Lean manufacturing. It's a more complex system with lots of
rules that we're sort of defining for ourselves using the basic
concept of a Kanban as it came out of manufacturing. A signaling
system, a visual signal, or when work is ready to be done or
when work is available to be done.
So I think Kanban as a tool has really taken off, maybe even
more than Lean in general in software, and I think there's some
dispute about how good that is. But I think it's a good gateway
into Lean principles for a lot of software development teams.
Kanban gives you a chance to start where you're at and begin to
make evolutionary changes as opposed to revolutionary changes
to get to improvements in your software process.
Along the way, as you start seeing the result of limiting your
working process and visualizing the working process, you start
being introduced to the Lean principles simply just by going
through the process.
Joe: How is Kanban distinctly different than other Agile
methods?
Chris: I think Agile methods are almost entirely based on
iterations. There are lots of technical practices that go with it, and
there are several different flavors of Agile. But we generally
basically see one month iterations or two week iterations or one
week iterations. It's still a schedule based kind of thing, so if you
batch up a batch of work and you try and complete that by the

end of the week or the end of the month. Kanban is different in
that we try to use it to get to a continuous flow of work so that
you eventually can get rid of iterations. Now you can do it in
combination with iterations as well. We'll talk about that more
later, but the key thing with Kanban is to learn to limit the
working process, to level that out with the actual capacity of the
system. So the less work you have going on at one time the
faster all of it can flow through the system.
So it shies away from the iterations, and it really focuses on
limiting the working process and living within the rules that that
kind of restraint puts on you. Like you say, it's an evolutionary
thing, too, whereas when you come in with Agile there's some
upheaval that has to happen in order to get everybody to agree
to do things a certain way.
With Kanban you can really start by and you should start really
by visualizing the work the way you already do work, visualizing
the way things are now and putting that up on the board. Once
you do that you start to notice things about your process. You
start to notice things stacking up and bottlenecks appearing and
baulkers.
When you start noticing that, it's easy to take that as evidence
and say, "Oh, we should change this." And you can start making
those continuous improvement kinds of changes, little small
incremental changes along the way to get to a better and better
process and again starting right from where you are now without
having to make a revolutionary upheaval.

Joe: Now when you talk about that it's different than the
iterations, but doesn't the iterations allow you to do better
planning or be able to do better estimation?

Chris: Sure. I'm not necessarily here to say anything bad about
iterations. I think one of the things that Kanban does, there's a

guy named Henrik Kniberg who wrote a book called "Kanban and
Scrum: Making the Most of Both." He talks about how basically
that you can do a lot of the same activities that you do in
iterations in a Kanban system. It's just that they're decoupled
from the iteration itself. So with Scrum for example, you end up
doing your planning and estimation, your development, your
testing, your deployment, and your retrospective all on the same
cycle. So every month you do all of those things. With Kanban
you can still do all of those things. They just don't all have to be
coupled to the iterations.
You can do your planning every week. You can do your estimation
every other week. You can do your testing every quarter, and you
can do your retrospectives on demand. You can still do a lot of
those things. They just don't have to be as rigidly structured with
the iteration.

Joe: I always think of software development as a fairly
sophisticated field, and a lot of technical things go into it. Then all
of a sudden I see Kanban taking hold in it where Kanban seems
like the simplest of all practices. It seems counterintuitive to me a
little bit there. Is that the secret to it? Is that why people are
using it?
Chris: Well, yeah. I think there's a lot to that. I think that as
sophisticated as our jobs maybe are, we often struggle I think as
software developers to be good at process. I think there's about a
30 or 40 year struggle that we can look back on, and nobody that
I know of is really quite satisfied with the way things are in terms
of process in software development. There are the people that
have their pet methodology that they push, but I think everybody
realizes that we have a long way to go to be able to say that we
do this effectively across the board

A lot of times software development teams don't have quite the


autonomy that they wish they had to define their own processes.
I think that's one of the reasons that Lean and Kanban are taking
hold in places where it was difficult for Agile to take hold.
Because Agile, in my estimation of it is basically the developer is
sort of rising up and saying, "We really need a better process to
do our work better and we're going to tell you the business what
that process should be." Where when Lean comes in, there's a
history there. There's a legacy of Lean. Business leaders
recognize the validity of it from its history.

When we start saying, "Instead of doing Agile things, we're going
to gradually start implementing Lean principles in our
organization to help us deliver software better," that's more easily
accepted at all levels of the business than some of the more
revolutionary Agile practices have been, I think. And I think
there's a lot of hope in that for us to apply that and get better at
it.
Joe: I have this feeling the reason I always thought Lean has
taken hold so much better than, let's say, like Six Sigma and
maybe like Agile as you described there a little bit is that the
stories are better. The people understand the stories when you're
sitting here talking about standard work or you're talking about
value stream mapping and you're doing things like that, people
understand the stories. They relate to it better, and that's what's
made it easier.
Chris: I think there's a lot to that, absolutely. And all the stories
from history and all the idioms from Japanese that have built into
it, I think there's a lot of knowledge bound up in all that.
Joe: Now why an electronic tool for Kanban? I mean Kanban; I
just put it up on the board, right? I stick the Post-it notes and I
might use different colored Post-it notes up there to signify
different things. Why an electronic tool?

Chris: Well, there are actually several reasons for that. When I
first started doing Kanban for my developer teams, we were
doing it on the board with index cards and tape. But we also had
developer in Nashville, Tennessee, in Italy, in the Bahamas, and
in the Ukraine. So every morning on our call, I would get up and
move their cards around, and they would tell me what it was.
They never got to see the board except for some snapshot
pictures that I sent them. So there's the working with distributed
teams.
One of our other cofounders works in a consulting firm here in
town and moves around to client sites a lot. They ended up
taking the science project boards, the folding cardboard things,
and that was where they put their Kanbans. They would tuck that
under their arm, load it in the back of the car, and take it with
them to the client site and back and forth to the office.

So the distributed team aspect of it is great, and the
communication you get from being able to interact with people on
different time zones and continents, even if it's just in different
rooms is good. The other thing is, as developers, I like low fidelity
tools. Most developers do. Scrum walls and card walls and just
stories, and those kinds of things.
Developers like that, but I have yet to meet a project manager
that does. A project manager or a functional manager usually
sees that as lost information that I can't write reports against. So
with an electronic Kanban tool, the reports about how the work is
going on is basically captured automatically as you move the
cards.
So you can get a lot of good information that's actually more
truthful than the information you get from a project management
system where developers are coming along and giving you
estimates and saying, "I'm 75 percent done, or I'm 95 percent


done, or I'm 80 percent done on this particular task." Because
the statistics about what's being done and how fast it's being
done are actually captured realistically.
I think we talk about project management systems being
repositories for lies because everybody [laughs] knows that last
10 percent of about 90 percent done is like the last minute of an
NBA basketball game. It can last a lot longer than you expect. So
doing away with some of the guessing involved and just capturing
the work as it actually moves, there's a lot of valuable statistics
you can gain from that.
That's one of the great things, too, about Kanban for software
development. I think we've pulled in a lot of interesting new
statistics and analytics tools into that methodology. Some of it
has probably come from Six Sigma. I'm not that familiar with Six
Sigma. But I think some of them do, like the statistical process
control charts and things like that.
But some really interesting metrics that are easily understandable
by everybody and really point out some really interesting things
about how work is being done--cumulative flow, looking at cycle
time and lead time, overall work in process, and how that
changes over time. So I think the statistics captured and the
distributed team aspects are probably the two biggest things.
Joe: Well, I think you bring up an interesting thing because
there is still a project manager that has to fulfill needs of other
people outside the team.
Chris: Absolutely.

Joe: And that seems to be a great reason for it. But what do you
lose by putting it on a screen? What do you lose by putting it into
software versus on the board?
Chris: I think the constant challenge is to not let the software

get in the way. With a board, anytime you want to add another
lane or draw a diagonal line across somewhere or do any kind of
change to your Kanban board that will help you get things done
better, it's as simple as walking up to the board and drawing that
line. With a Kanban tool, a web based tool, the constant challenge
for us is to keep it flexible enough that you could still do
everything or almost everything you would want to do on a
board. We think we're doing a pretty good job of that.
The only one as far as I know among our competitors that can do
things like horizontal lanes and splitting lanes vertically and
horizontally several levels deep so you can break things down and
do little sub-compartments in lanes, rolling the work in process
when it's up that chain, those kinds of things.
So that's something that you don't want to let the software get in
the way of making your continuous improvement efforts on your
Kanban board.
Joe: Corey Ladas said in his ScrumBan book, he's never drawn
the same Kanban system for anyone. He doesn't repeat it.
They're all somewhat a little different. And that customizable
aspect of it is you hate to hear the words. We've all heard these
words from software people when we call in with a problem or
something like that, "Well, the software doesn't allow me to do
that."
Chris: Absolutely.
Joe: And at any point all software has limitations, but it sounds
like what you're doing is that you can split it. You can change a
lot of things with your tool.

Chris: Our product roadmap is basically all about adding more
and more flexibility. There are tools out there that are more
opinionated than ours, that give -- that put more constraints on


you. And their simplicity, part of their goal is simplicity there, and
I think that that's a great goal for some segment of the market.
We're going after the people that are really wanting to do Kanban
and have the freedom to do all the things they can imagine doing.
We're working now on customizing the different card types, and
adding classes of service, and allowing you to switch.
Right now, the card color is what indicates which type of task it
is. Is it a "feature of" or a "task" or an "improvement?" We're
working on letting you switch that to a different field so you could
say card color could then communicate class or service, and a
little icon could indicate the card type.
Ongoing, that's what our product road map looks like is just
continuing to add more and more layers of flexibility.
Joe: Now how would you recommend someone getting started
with Kanban doing it with software or do you recommend putting
it up with post it notes and doing your own out there?

Chris: Well, if you've got everybody in the same room, put it up
in post it notes first. When you get to the point where you feel
like you been at it for a week or two and you want to start
collecting better statistics, then a Kanban tool is probably a pretty
good way to go. If you've got people in different places, then
you're going to want to move to a Kanban tool, probably faster.
But when you're actually sketching it out, probably, at least draw
it out on the board and see how that feels for a few days, or a
week or two, or a cycle or two before you get too deep into
choosing your tool, probably.
The other thing, too, though is ours, with a lot of the tools, and
ours included, are actually really simple to start, as well. I tell
people to start with three columns; To do, Doing, and Done. And
start splitting those out from there. Start figuring out how work
enters the system. At what point is customer value actually

realized, and so you basically start building your value stream
map and reflecting at least a section of that in your Kanban.

I'll also tell people it's good to try to do the mapping stream
exercise in great detail on a board somewhere, and then decide
what part of that actually goes on your Kanban board. I think the
tools are getting better in terms of the flexibility, so you could
very well start with the software. I just think that that initial brain
storming session where you're just trying to figure out "what is it
we actually do now" is still a good thing to do on a board.

Joe: Do you feel that Kanban is in its infancy, do you think
there's a long way for it to go?
Chris: I think there's a lot of adoption that's yet to happen. I
think that we're about to see a pretty significant surge in
adoption of Lean and Kanban in software development. I think it
addresses a need that has been nagging for a while, and it
addresses some of the need that Agile tried really hard to
address, but was not as successful in some areas as it could have
been. I think that a lot of the promises of Agile about being able
to react quickly and to turn things around fast and to be able to
actually make sure that we deliver customer value because we're
doing it in short cycles and getting the valuations. I think a lot of
the promises of Agile can be better realized in a system that
moves more towards Lean. I don't think we have to throw the
baby out with the bathwater but I think, like I said with Kanban,
it can be an evolutionary thing.
If you're already doing Agile, you can start adding elements of
Kanban and learning more about Lean and beginning to apply
some of those principles, basically from where you are. And I
think that you mentioned this before a lot books that basically
takes you from that progression where you start with Scrum and
you gradually introduces element of Kanban until what you have


is definitely a hybrid, and it's not much like Scrum anymore, it's
more of a Kanban system.

I think Dave Anderson's book on Kanban, Dave Anderson, as far
as I know, introduced the software world to Kanban as a tool.
He's definitely been a champion of the community for a long time
and his book is about to be published and I think a lot has gone
into finding what the steps are, what the principles are.
I think it's beginning to come into some level of maturity and
definition. I think there's definitely going to be some changes
along the way, but I think we're getting to the point where it's a
viable, robust body of knowledge that goes along with it. The
community has been really active in creating for the last three or
four years.
Joe: I see the different Post-it notes going across the board, can
you describe that note to me. Is there technical data within that
note? Does that note change as it goes through the system?

Chris: Well, on a physical board, it can be as much or as little as
you want to put on there. So a lot of times it's a user story card
in Agile teams, so it will have the user story like; As a "whatever
role I am, " I want to be able to "whatever function I want to
perform, " so that I can "achieve some business value, " form.
Maybe it'll have "acceptance test" written on it or those kinds of
things. An electronic tool, I'll just speak to ours specifically, it has
fields for describing it, and so you can put that user story stuff. It
has some things like "status" and "priority" and "class of service"
and "card type."
We also have a discussion form on each card. So each card, as it
moves around the board, as developers need to talk about it, it
actually starts to discuss the card right on the card and have a
threaded conversation about that. The history of the card is kept
there. As the card moves, every time something happens, we

capture an event and that can be seen on the card and later in
the aggregated statistics.

There's some effort to do some leveling I forget the Japanese; it's
one of the Japanese words that they use for that. But basically
things work really well if you can make some effort to make all
your cards of similar size, similar effort, and it can get easier to
decipher statistics if you don't have things that are vastly
different in size.
One thing that takes 700 hours is a card that moves really slowly
across the board and one thing is a bug fix that takes two hours
is a lot faster. Some effort to make the cards a similar size is
done in a Kanban system, but you can only do so much of that,
too. I think you have to mitigate that with some kind of size
information on the card.
Joe: So you actually very close to taking a story and developing
certain story points into it in your backlog there, let's say.

Chris: Sure, and we actually take out and break a story, too.
We'll have a horizontal swim lane that represents a feature, so
we'll have the first block in that will be a green feature card and
then within that it's almost like a board within a board. On our
tool, you have a "To Do, Doing, and Done," for that feature. We
break that card into... so maybe a feature that we break out into
user stories, or tasks. When you scroll the "To Do" column that's
next to that feature, and gradually move those things across the
lanes in the middle of the board until we're all over to "Done."
Then we move the main feature card over that and to the next
stage of testing and then to deployment.
So the cards can be all different kinds of, you can break out
sub-cards basically for a feature that needs task breakout. You
can track those on the board as well.


Joe: We always talk how Kanban sounds so simple. There are
three columns To do, Doing, and Done, but there are really
sophisticated processes out there. How large of a Kanban board
have you ever seen? As far as, let's say maybe different swim
lanes and different columns across?
Chris: Obviously, the physical ones, I've seen ones that fill an
entire wall, floor to ceiling, and have lots of different things going
on. I think there's some value in having a board for each team.
Not necessarily per project, or per whatever, because what you're
leveling things against, what you're limiting capacity or what
you're limiting your working process against, you're limiting
capacity of the team.
If the team is working on multiple projects, they need to be
represented somehow on the board, and horizontal lanes are a
good way to do that.
Our board, we thought, the board that we use internally for
development at Bandit Software, we thought it was pretty
complicated and sophisticated and we let some folks at the
development team for Canonical, the Linux distribution web
tracking system, started putting some boards up, and they really
got ambitious with their boards.
It can get very complex and lots of layers and levels, and we
have a zoom in and out feature on our tool, so you can actually
zoom out and see quite a lot of work on one screen. It gets really
tiny, but you can hover over things and see some descriptions
there.
I think there just needs to be some effort to chop things up into
manageable sized chunks, but you can definitely model a very
sophisticated and complicated process on a Kanban board, and
people are definitely, definitely doing that.


Joe: Do you think Kanban is being used by larger organizations,
more so than say smaller ones?

Chris: I think there's some of that's happened already in larger
organizations, like the BBC is a big Kanban shop, it's permeated
throughout lots of areas of that organization and there are other
examples of that. Some of our customers are large. We're not
filling the entire organization yet. Obviously, one at several large
companies but I think that... like I said with the Agile thing, the
Lean adoption in places that would have been resistant to Agile,
like large companies, will actually help Kanban adoption in that
area.
I think personal Kanban is definitely a growing thing, too. It's
very useful for limiting your own working process and for
somebody who lives and breathes Kanban night and day like I do;
I'm surprisingly not good at personal Kanban.
Chris: I'm not very good at limiting my own working process
and keeping things leveled out there, but I'm trying. I do have a
personal Kanban board that I use and try to use it every day. But
yeah, I think large companies are going to see a lot of value from
inputting Kanban and being able to see. Especially because it will
focus the Lean principle about "focus on customer value" and only
define value in terms of how the customer defines value.
That kind of insight in having people look closely at how our
process works and what steps is value adding and what steps we
should get rid of, and how in the end we create value for the
customer. I think large companies will definitely gravitate to that.
Joe: One of the things that you mention about Kanban is that it
helps with the continuous flow of work or avoiding bottlenecks
and blockers. Why does it do that?
Chris: Well, I don't know that in itself it does that, it points out


those things, right? The first principle in Kanban is to make the
work visible. When you throw the work up on the wall and you
say "Here's our development and testing and deployment. Here's
a stack of 35 cards that's waiting for testing." It's obvious that
there's a bottleneck at testing. Where the testing team doesn't
have the capacity or they're getting work in too big of a batch to
be able to clear it quickly, whatever that situation is. The Kanban
board and the visual nature of it help you see those problems
quickly. It's really easy to get organizational support to do
something about it when somebody can come and look at the
problem and see it visually on the board, as opposed to hearing a
developer complain about it, or a project manager complain
about it.
I think the principles then also involved in -- from there, the
principles that are built into the Kanban system and the Lean
principles will help you to address those bottlenecks as they
appear.
Just the same way they do in the manufacturing world where the
Eli Goldratt book talks about how every system has bottlenecks
and this is not good or bad, it just is. As you clear one bottleneck,
others will pop up, and you just have to deal with those as they
come up, but the Kanban system makes it really obvious where
those things are.
The continuous flow of work, and limiting the working process is,
again, is the second cornerstone to the Kanban system, at least
the way that we're defining it in the software world is limiting the
working process and not letting things backup. Placing limits on
how many items can go into this column or limits of how many
items of a certain type can go into this column can help you stop
those bottlenecks and backlogs from happening mid process and
keep the overall cycle time lower.


There's some information there about queuing theory and the
Little's Law, where they talk about the average cycle time of
items going through their system is directly proportional to the
overall number of items in that system. So the lower you can
keep that number over time, the faster things can move through
it.
Kanban and implementing the principles that go along with
managing this system and continuously improving it can help you
avoid bottlenecks and block through and managing a continuous
flow of work.
And a pull system, we talk about pull a lot and how instead of
batching up a set of work and pushing it into an iteration
schedule, we actually try and pull the next highest valued
customer valued item from the queue as the system has capacity
rather than pushing things in. Doing that pull, again, using
working process limits, to manage when capacity is available, can
make things go faster there, too. We talk about working process
limit as the lever that we apply to the Kanban system to get it to
behave the way that we want it to.
So there are almost all the things that we end up wanting to do
to improve the flow and reduce bottlenecks and that kind of
thing, involve, at some point the working process limiting on the
board.
Joe: We talk about Kanban and dealing with working process,
which I'm a big believer of that, even in sales and marketing. I
believe that people that many people keep working to fill up their
funnel but never do a good job of managing their prospects that
are in their funnel. To do that, and to manage a working process,
from the old troubleshooter side of me where I would take service
calls, I always would ask someone "What did you do right before
this problem took place? What did you do right before this


happened?" The problem typically was always the step before.

If Kanban really concentrates on working process, does it help to
manage the queue? Because isn't that where it's coming from?
Chris: That's absolutely a big issue, I think that one of the
principles that we talked about is to balance demand against
throughput. Once you've clearly stated and understand what the
actual capacity of your system is and you've placed intelligent
limits along the way, to keep you from pushing more into that
system that has to pass through whole. You can actually as
business leaders and as the people that are building that queue
and deciding what comes next you can make much more
intelligent informed decisions about the priority of things. So even
if you say you're going to push more work onto the development
team, they're not going to be able to get it all done. Things are
going to fall through the cracks, and the overall cycle time is
going to suffer.
But if you've limited it intelligently, you can actually look and go,
"I know the next time we have capacity, that this is the highest
priority item." And you don't have to guess and reprioritize over
and over again as things go through the system.
The limits, like you said, are the step before. The limits on the
board can limit how much work you push into the system to begin
with. And when you've limited that and it's clear what that limit
is, you can make really clear priority decisions about what comes
next.
Joe: I there something that you would like to add that maybe I
didn't ask that's about Kanban that you feel that's important?

Chris: Just one thing. One of the things that we've started
talking a lot about on our team and to some of our customers is
the importance of some technical practices. Lean and Kanban in


the software world don't come with technical practices like some
of the Agile methods do. But we feel like there are some technical
practices that development teams can follow that will aid them in
being able to produce that continuous flow of work and avoid
baulkers and avoid bottlenecks. There's not a lot of discussion
going on about that.
At least as the software developers talk amongst themselves
about how to improve the system, there's some things we can do
like branch per feature, source control strategies, release per
feature, and automated testing at the regression testing level and
acceptance testing level.
And getting to a place of where you can do things like continuous
deployment where you actually automate deployments to
production on a regular basis based on once you're comfortable
with your automated testing suite. So doing those kinds of things
as a development team can really help your ability to manage this
kind of system.

There's a big conference coming up here in a couple weeks. I'm
not sure when this will actually air, but the Lean Software and
Systems Conference in Atlanta on April the 21st that we're going
to be at, have a booth, and be showing off some new features of
the software to you.
Joe: I would like to thank you very much. I appreciate the
overview, Chris. It was very helpful to me in understanding that.
How can someone get a hold of you?
Chris: Chris.Hefley@BanditSoftware.com. Or the URL for our
software is LeanKitKanban.com, and you can send us an email
from there and take a demo. There's a free version of the
software. You can check it out there and a free trial for a larger
team.



Joseph T. Dager
Lean Six Sigma Black Belt
Ph: 260-438-0411 Fax: 260-818-2022
Email: jtdager@business901.com
Web/Blog: http://www.business901.com
Twitter: @business901
What others say: In the past 20 years, Joe and I
have collaborated on many difficult issues. Joe's
ability to combine his expertise with "out of the
box" thinking is unsurpassed. He has always
delivered quickly, cost effectively and with
ingenuity. A brilliant mind that is always a pleasure to work with." James R.

Joe Dager is President of Business901, a progressive company providing
direction in areas such as Lean Marketing, Product Marketing, Product
Launches and Re-Launches. As a Lean Six Sigma Black Belt,
Business901 provides and implements marketing, project and performance
planning methodologies in small businesses. The simplicity of a single
flexible model will create clarity for your staff and as a result better
execution. My goal is to allow you spend your time on the need versus the
plan.

An example of how we may work: Business901 could start with a
consulting style utilizing an individual from your organization or a virtual
assistance that is well versed in our principles. We have capabilities to
plug virtually any marketing function into your process immediately. As
proficiencies develop, Business901 moves into a coach’s role supporting the
process as needed. The goal of implementing a system is that the processes
will become a habit and not an event.

Business901 Podcast Opportunity Expert Status


Lean Kanban Lessons from a Software Developer

More Related Content

What's hot (7)

Similar to Lean Kanban Lessons from a Software Developer (20)

More from Business901 (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Lean Kanban Lessons from a Software Developer