Agile Implementation

A Case Study in Using Agile for Process Improvement Initiatives

Written by: Casey Jenkins, Owner of Eight Twenty-Eight Consulting LLC

Introduction & Organizational Background

I undertook a project for a company that remains one of my most memorable experiences. For privacy and proprietary reasons, I’ll refer to this company as Supply Corporation.

Supply Corporation is a renowned provider of specialized industrial equipment and supplies, serving a variety of sectors. Founded in the early 1900s, the company originally focused on essential manufacturing tools and supplies. Over time, it expanded its product range and geographical reach, becoming a prominent name in the industrial supply sector. The location I worked with was a major distribution hub, handling bulk shipments to various clients nationwide. Supply Corporation also provided items for new industrial builds and refurbishments, from small tools to large custom equipment. Known for its comprehensive product range, industry expertise, and commitment to customer service, Supply Corporation grew to serve not only manufacturing, but also sectors like warehousing, healthcare, and corporate facilities. The company also offered design and consulting for new industrial builds, along with installation and maintenance services for large pieces of equipment.

Because of their longstanding history, it was a very traditional organization with a standard hierarchical structure. Project managers were assigned to oversee new builds, refurbishments, and special projects, all executed using a waterfall approach. However, project managers primarily solely focused on external projects, leaving operational and internal projects to the functional areas. The functional areas that were present in this organization were purchasing/procurement, logistics and transportation, warehousing, customer service, accounting, and sales/account management. The processes within the organization were antiquated, relying heavily on paper and with minimal use of technology or automation. This did include project executions, which followed the entrenched culture of the organization, making it difficult to introduce new ideas or methods due to an unwillingness to change.

When I began working with Supply Corporation, I was responsible for improving the logistics, transportation, and reverse logistics processes. While this project was internal operationally focused and not within the scope of the other project managers, it exemplified how agile methodologies could have enhanced the project execution itself, organizational processes, and how the project managers executed their projects as well.

?

Project Background

?As mentioned, Supply Corporation offered a wide array of products for both individual and chain clients. For chain clients, there was often a predefined list of products that were regularly reordered. For individual sites or customized items, customer specifications were gathered to place orders. These orders were placed with various suppliers and either directly shipped to the customer or sent to the warehouse before local delivery.

Occasionally, products needed to be returned due to quality issues, damage, incorrect products, or not meeting the customer’s specifications. The typical first step was that the customer would request the return. This could come via email or via the account manager/salesman writing a return order (on paper). Following the return request, a return material authorization (RMA) would be requested from the supplier or vendor (phone or email). In some cases, while the RMA was being requested, the product would be picked up from the customer and returned back to the warehouse to be held until the RMA was received. The holding area was an individual aisle that held all returns, regardless of reason. Items were slotted where there was space, and that slot was notated on the paperwork. In most cases, it was sought to receive the RMA and drop ship the item back to the supplier/vendor without passing through the warehouse. In either case, if the item was a stock item (that was full case quantity and no damages), the goal was always to return it to the supplier and receive credit back. Meanwhile, credit was always issued to the customer right away. In the instances of customized equipment or items, they would be returned to the warehouse, slotted in the returns aisle, and held as special inventory to be sold at a discounted rate. This was also the case for broken cases, split cases, or slightly damaged items (minimal damage, but product was still usable). Throughout this process, all activities were recorded on paper and passed from one department to the next.

When I came to the returns process, it became clear that credit memos were not being received from suppliers for various reasons: items weren’t actually being returned and were lost in the warehouse, items were failing to be picked up from the customers, RMAs were not requested, and there was no follow-up to ensure the returned product was received back at the supplier/vendor. While the customers were always receiving their credits, the organization was not recouping credit from suppliers/vendors. The goal of the project was to streamline the returns process to reduce these losses. Prior to the project the company recouped less than $300,000 in credit memos annually. Following the implementation of the new process, the organization recouped over $1M in credit memos annually. ?

?

Team Background

?Supply Corporation maintained a traditional organizational structure and culture, characterized by a standard hierarchy, departmental silos, and resistance to change. When project managers executed new builds, team members from various departments facilitated tasks within their functional areas. However, for the project I led, I didn’t have a dedicated team. Instead, I was the sole individual driving the change, collaborating closely with departmental leaders. I met with them to understand their roles and tasks in the process, used that information to develop a new streamlined process, and then trained and educated them on their new responsibilities. They were, in turn, responsible for training their respective teams. Knowing that I was the sole change agent, driving change in an organization resistant was going to be a challenge.?

?

Tools and Technology Background

Supply Corporation’s traditional structure and siloed teams relied heavily on antiquated, paper-driven processes, which contributed to inefficiencies, especially within the returns process. This reliance on paper led to frequent losses of important documents, and the organization lacked the knowledge or ability to transition to more advanced technological solutions. Given the limited tools available at the time, I worked within these constraints and actually leveraged them to create a solution that worked for where the organization was at. I managed to shift the process into Excel from a data flow standpoint, creating a collaborative document that enabled all parties involved to contribute to and access the same information. This transition to a shared digital format by no means was the end all be all or most optimal solution. However, it allowed improved visibility and coordination, addressing the breakdowns caused by the paper-based system.

??

Agile Project Management Framework & Practices within The Project

Agile project management (APM) is a new project planning framework that places flexibility and evolving customer requirements at the forefront of the development process (Pinto, 410). “Agile PM recognizes the importance of these evolving customer needs and allows for an incremental, iterative planning process – one that stays connected to clients across the project life cycle (Pinto, 410).” The approach utilized with the project I executed to streamline the returns process was an agile approach in itself, but the organization and other projects also could have greatly benefited from agile. The reason that agile was not introduced within this project is due to the core competencies and knowledge of the organization at the time. It was important to take incremental steps forward that leveraged the constraints of the organization and fit into the culture that was present. However, that did not mean that I personally did not take an agile approach in execution. Through my use of agile, the benefits of an agile implementation can be seen within this organization.

Supply Corporation operated with a traditional, siloed structure, resistant to change, and did not utilize agile methodologies. It’s important to highlight that the project I was executing was not within the realm of the project managers within the organization. However, project managers executing new builds were utilizing a traditional waterfall approach, and not implementing any agile practices. In looking at the organization, their processes, their technology, their capabilities, and their culture, an implementation of a hybrid agile approach would have been suitable for both my project and the organization’s recurring projects. “A hybrid Agile approach is one that blends plan-driven principles and practices with Agile (adaptive) principles and practices in the right proportions to fit a given situation (Cob, 217).” Of course, hybrid approaches allow flexibility and can incorporate different tools or methods for various projects or phases. For this organization, a general hybrid approach would effectively manage the projects while setting the stage for a gradual transition to agile.

For the returns process optimization project, a hybrid approach would fit well with the organization’s structure, culture, and core competencies and knowledge. Since the project was low risk, it aimed to deliver improvements through an iterative process. With an initial diving into the problem and potential ways to solve it, I had to work closely with the team in a collaborative manner to understand what tasks and activities they were performing and how those fed into the process itself. I quickly realized that implementing an overly advanced change wouldn’t be effective. Instead, approaching with a baseline output that could be evolved as adapting to change was welcome would be more effective for iteration to the process long-term. This approach fits with the agile principles of welcoming change, delivering a working product, and sustainable development (Cob, 33-39).

The hybrid approach also would support the existing organizational structure and culture. Given the resistance to change and departmental silos, a classical plan driven approach (waterfall) would help to provide the definition and structure that the organization was accustomed to while also introducing flexibility. In other words, slow evolution where agile concepts are introduced without having to overhaul the organizational structure. A full shift to agile within this project would not have been feasible, but using a well-defined project structure with high-level milestones would manage project tasks and keep the project on scope. Along with that, it would allow for flexibility in how those milestones were achieved based upon how the resources and stakeholders involved were receptive to the changes being made. Monitoring change and how resources adapt to that change throughout the project in a hybrid approach is still feasible if the traditional side of the framework has a level of agility.

In traditional environments, projects can be seen as cumbersome or as extra work added on to daily tasks. Often times, this is why buy-in and contribution can be lacking. However, the hybrid approach for this organization would convey a more collaborative environment where cross functional insights can be shared, while still maintaining structure. When I approached the project execution, I was sure to allow the department leaders to convey what they do for the current process, but also what they would like to see, what would help them with their tasks, and how the process could be improved from their perspective. This allowed the project to not feel like extra work, but instead a contribution. By maintaining the high-level plan with key milestones, flexibility was allowed within execution so team members could collaborate more effectively.

The project was executed in a manner where I had a general plan of the desired state but wanted a collaborative approach in getting there. Knowing that the departments were involved in the daily execution of the tasks of this process, I personally didn’t think it would be received appropriately or effectively if a desired state was just implemented without their input. I took an adaptive approach with an overview roadmap of milestones, goals, and tasks that needed accomplished from a planning perspective. However, in the phase of information gathering, I made sure to keep plans flexible knowing that some task-level components may not be known until during execution or implementation. While the project had minimal risk in terms of the outcome, there was a higher risk that the new process might not be received or adhered to, potentially leading to failure.

While it can be argued that Excel is not the most optimal technology or tool out there, shifting from paper driven to more advanced tools (like Jira, for example) would not have proven useful as there would have been a learning curve to the process and the technology. This presented multiple opportunities for project failure and deviating back to the old process. Using a tool like Excel, which was something that stakeholders throughout the organization were familiar with, the likelihood of adhering to the new process using what they had from a technology standpoint was greater. Obviously, this would be a tool that could be evolved or advanced in time as the new process is adopted and adhered to.

?

Benefits

Supply Corporation would greatly benefit from the use of a hybrid approach. While I personally approached the project with that mindset, actually implementing it through that project and then transitioning it into externally driven projects would have proven beneficial. The hybrid approach would have needed to be adapted for externally driven projects, however, that’s the benefit of a hybrid agile approach; there’s flexibility and agility in it. The hybrid approach within this organization would have brought about four key benefits:

1. Value-driven, but Adaptive. Although there would be structure brought about by the traditional side of the hybrid, there would be a value-driven adaptive perspective that focuses on the value of the output.
2. Collaboration. Through a collaborative approach, changes would be encouraged as team members (both internal and external) would contribute to narrowing down requirements of the output. This helps to not only approach projects with executing what’s needed, but also reduces risk as the project unfolds. Along with that, adoption of agile is iterative in itself, driving buy-in as each project successfully is executed collaboratively.
3. Cross-Functional Alignment. While Supply Corporation was a siloed environment, collaboration helps to break down departmental barriers and increase communication, which are key in project executions.
4. Risk Management. Briefly touched on, by approaching with a value-driven delivery, risk is reduced as the project is executed. The level of flexibility associated with the outcome allows for the project to shift as risks occur or changes in the project environment occur.

Agile benefits are also farther reaching than just within project settings. By adapting to a new way of thinking that is centered around continuous improvement, increased communication and collaboration, and the willingness to change, operations and processes within an organization see reduced risk, increased efficiency, reduction of costs, and higher productivity. Within Supply Corporation, those results were already garnered through simply approaching the project with this mindset. Should it have been implemented and adopted, a direct positive result would have been produced.

Recommendations for Change

Within any organization, the benefits of agile will only be received if there is the desire to change. The first recommendation would be to educate on project management and the agile methodology to understand what it is. This isn’t just for one person either. This must be an organizational wide effort. There would then need to be the identification of business and use cases where the methodology would prove useful. Methodologies aren’t prescriptive and some do not fit in certain operations. The benefit of agile is that it can be adapted and applied with other approaches to create a solution that works for project management execution.

The second recommendation for change would be to start with a hybrid approach and slowly transition to agile over time. “A good Project Manager knows that you must adapt the project management approach to fit the problem rather than force-fitting every problem or project to a single approach (Cobb, 145).” Therefore, as a project manager trying to implement agile, there would need to be an understanding of the organizational structure, the leadership, the core competencies, processes, technologies, and types of projects being executed to understand what methodologies or tools can be applied to support making this transition. Do I personally feel that organizations can fully shift or transition to agile? Not in the strict sense of the methodology. However, I do feel that they would be able to evolve and keep evolving applying different methodologies, which is an agile approach and concept in itself.

The final recommendation would be to understand the interconnectivity of processes within the organization as a means to understand how things are flowing on an operational basis. The reason for that is because it will highlight the potential flow within a project setting as well. As projects are processes in themselves, they also typically are intertwined with processes within the organization during execution and post implementation. Understanding flows will support a better agile project execution in that there will be a greater view of how change in the project will impact the project itself and the project environment.

So ponder on this… are you agile?

?

References:

1. Cobb, C. G. (2015). The project manager's guide to mastering Agile: Principles and practices for an adaptive approach. John Wiley & Sons
2. Pinto, J. K. (2020). Project Management: Achieving Competitive Advantage.
3. Project Management Institute (PMI) (2017). A guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK guide). Sixth Edition.
4. Project Management Institute (PMI) (2021). A guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK guide). Seventh Edition.

Do you want a one-on-one Caseysplination? As a valued newsletter reader, you're invited to register for a complimentary intro consultation meeting. This is your chance to kickstart your process improvement or supply chain initiatives aimed at streamlining operations, boosting efficiency, and elevating your supply chain performance with expert guidance. Reserve your time here.

??

Casey Jenkins, owner and CEO of Eight Twenty-Eight Consulting LLC, is a supply chain and process improvement advisor and educator. Offering advisory, educational, and project-based services, she adeptly combines education and experience to solve complex supply chain problems. Reach out today to find out how to Take Your Company to the Summit.