Fears about the use of flow metrics by people outside the team - what should be done?

This is an english translation of my recent take but in french here : https://www.dhirubhai.net/pulse/craintes-sur-lutilisation-des-m%25C3%25A9triques-de-flux-par-%25C3%25A0-jose-coignard-mb3ie/?trackingId=B9%2BWd2Q4SaioFo1jwGs2%2Bw%3D%3D

(sorry for all the mistakes in english :)

I recently had a discussion with Scrum Masters about the high likelihood of adding to the business unit strategy and framework for product teams the need to collect and use Kanban flow metrics:

• Throughput
• Cycle Time
• WIP (Work in Progress)
• Age of Work in Progress

This decision, to be made by management, aims to encourage the implementation of the Kanban strategy for optimizing the flow of value within teams. However, it raises concerns among Scrum Masters about the potentially detrimental use of these metrics by individuals external to the teams, such as management.

These concerns are entirely understandable and can arise in many corporate contexts where the Kanban strategy is implemented.

NB1: Throughout the article, the term "optimization" implies finding the optimal balance between efficiency, effectiveness, and predictability.

NB2: When I refer to "metrics," I mean the four fundamental metrics of the Kanban strategy mentioned above or described in the Kanban Guide [here](https://kanbanguides.org/ ).

This article aims to provide guidance on mitigating, if not eliminating, the risk of negative use of these metrics, such as micromanagement or undue pressure on teams:

1) Educate on essential metrics for flow optimization:

• Ensure that Scrum Masters, teams, and external stakeholders (sponsors, managers, etc.) clearly understand the utility of these metrics and how they are crucial for continuously optimizing the flow of value.
• Emphasize that flow metrics are tools for self-assessment and continuous improvement rather than levers for external counterproductive pressure.

Example: "Your throughput is significantly lower than Team X; if you don't address this, you won't receive a bonus."

This could have a devastating effect, causing psychological safety to plummet and hindering the establishment of a culture of innovation, crucial for a company's survival or development.

2) Create a visual management of the value stream and metrics:

• Use visual management techniques to make the value stream and associated metrics transparent to all stakeholders. Visuals help create shared understanding, educate, and trigger constructive discussions.

Example: Display a chart specifying the age of current issues so that the team can discuss what is most important to advance today. Another example is displaying the evolution of cycle time, allowing those in charge to question and delve into obstacles that hinder the team's progress.

3) Encourage experimentation and learning:

• Foster a mindset of experimentation and learning. Encourage teams to experiment with different approaches to optimize the flow and regularly inspect and adapt their processes based on lessons learned. Flow optimization is a perpetual process to address new challenges the team will face.

In a Kanban strategy, if a significant change seems appropriate, conduct a substantial experiment. Don't limit yourself to small iterative and incremental changes. It's up to you to determine what works best in your context!

4) Anchor regular and frequent retrospectives, not just at the team level:

• Ensure that retrospectives, relying on these metrics, are regularly and frequently organized, providing factual data on the state of your value creation process. Analyze the impacts of improvement actions taken by tracking the evolution of these metrics.

Example: Has a change in the number of ongoing issues (usually better if it decreases) had a positive impact on cycle time and throughput? Or did the action taken to enhance pairing have an influence on the number of issues resulting in cycle times significantly exceeding the 85th percentile?

• Establish a continuous feedback loop between the team(s) and sponsors, managers. Regularly review and discuss metrics collaboratively to ensure everyone shares a common understanding of the insights they provide into the value creation process and their concrete utility for flow optimization in the team and company context.

"Feedback at all levels."

5) Set realistic expectations:

• Ensure realistic expectations are set regarding the time required for optimizations or the scope of optimizations.

Example: If the team's cycle time is twice as high as desired, forcing the team to reach the desired level in one week when they believe they don't have all the necessary requirements (frequent external dependencies slowing them down), and it would require six months or more, would be highly counterproductive. Remember that optimization is a balancing act between efficiency, effectiveness, and predictability, and you certainly don't want to maximize one aspect at the pronounced expense of the other two.

• Ensure that no pressure is exerted on teams to achieve unrealistic goals and recognize that continuous improvement is an endless journey that can be long and fraught with obstacles and failures. Take the time to learn from them.

"Failure is only a real failure if it provides no learning."

6) Emphasize a culture of trust:

• Promote a culture of trust and transparency within the organization. Emphasize that these metrics are not intended for blame but to identify areas for improvement to optimize the flow of value. You want to hear questions like:

"How can we help you eliminate the bottleneck you're highlighting, which is increasing cycle time?"

Rather than:

"25 days at 85%, that's high; Team X is at 15 days, Team Y is at 13 days, you need to perform like the others; I demand an action plan!"

• Encourage open communication between teams and leadership to address concerns and share clarifications about how the work process functions, thanks to the metrics.

"The whole is greater than the sum of its parts." - Aristote

7) Provide support and resources:

• Ensure teams have the necessary support and resources to address identified issues or optimization areas revealed by metrics. This helps avoid a punitive approach and fosters an improvement-friendly environment. It also demonstrates the utility of these metrics as a crucial element for optimizing the flow of value.

"Transparency, inspection, ignorance is a significant enemy of team motivation. Support must be sufficient for ignorance to turn into adaptation systematically."

There's no necessary order of importance in these suggestions; it's up to you to determine what is most relevant to work on first in your context. However, I recommend the first suggestion as the starting point. Without it, it seems challenging for everything to go well and for these metrics to serve in the continuous optimization of the flow of value.

Certainly, not a single element from this list (which I don't claim to be exhaustive) should be overlooked for the feared or proven detrimental effects to become a thing of the past. I'm even convinced of this.

By using these action points, I hope you can leverage these metrics as a valuable tool for the continuous optimization of your value stream and that you won't give up doing so because the negative effects outweigh their usefulness.

I also imagine the worst-case scenario, which would be intentional falsification of these metrics by the team(s) to protect themselves from these detrimental effects. These metrics could become "watermelon metrics" (green as expected by management but red for flow optimization if investigated), leading to a high risk of poor decisions. (Example here in this short video : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K3axU2b0dDk )