Shmula

My favorite quantitative metrics for engineering teams: - Avg time from code review requested to code review picked up - Avg time to complete code review - Avg time from eng done to first customer using it - Avg time from eng done to full production release - Fraction of tasks started that never reach a customer These are loosely based on the Japanese concept of Muda (waste), as personified in the physical logistics world via the acronym TIM WOOD (or TIM WOODS)[0] and are similar but not identical to the DORA metrics. The time to complete a code review is there (for example) not to focus on the amount of time actually spent performing the code review but to focus on all the waiting around the actual code review, which is typically much much longer than the time spent doing the review itself. It's not uncommon to see organizations where an engineer will submit code for review and then have to wait a day or more for someone to pick up their request and then another day or more for that other person to get around to reviewing it. If there are comments on the commit that need to be responded to, you can see additional delays. These "minor inefficiencies" can have huge impacts on the poor dev who is trying to get their code merged, and cumulatively they result in significant increases in feature latency, the total calendar time required to ship a feature. [0] https://www.shmula.com/28695-2/28695/

It's not that simple. Modern (just-in-time) practices have created a situation where a single change in customer demand leads to widespread supply shocks. Take a look at the beer game[0] for a smaller version of real life. That's what happened here - lockdowns led to a single change in customer demand for a wide variety of goods both on the personal side(more people at home -> snacks, food, toiletpaper that would have been used up at work started being needed at home), and on the commercial side (no people in the office: no ongoing bulk papertowels/toiletpaper/vending machines/office supplies). [0] https://www.shmula.com/the-bullwhip-effect/310/

"The water spider is a term that refers to a specific person whose main job is to make sure that materials are supplied to where they are needed. While this is mainly a material replenishment position, it offers a bit more flexibility, and some additional benefits if well-implemented. The rationale behind having such a person is to allow the rest of the personnel to devote their full attention to tasks that add value to the process. This also highlights how much transportation waste and inefficiency exists in the process by isolating it all into one or more positions." https://www.shmula.com/what-is-the-role-of-the-waterspider-in-lean-man…

Not a book, but this was mentioned in some comments section on HN recently: https://www.shmula.com/the-bullwhip-effect/310/

There's a bunch of tools that Amazon customer service reps have, and procedures, that have come directly out of Jeff doing customer support work every now and then, e.g. the Andon Cord (any customer service rep can pull any item from sale worldwide, instantly, through the andon cord process, from which a team of dedicated staff evaluate the product and why the cord was pulled). http://www.shmula.com/customer-service-andon-cord-jeff-bezos-and-custo…

Jeff Bezos and Root Cause Analysis http://www.shmula.com/jeff-bezos-5-why-exercise-root-cause-analysis-ca…

Tangentially related. Asking "Why 5 times" "Taiichi Ohno is known to have said that "having no problems is the biggest problem of all." He viewed problems not as a negative but as a "Kaizen opportunity in disguise." Whenever problems arose, he encouraged his staff to investigate the problem at the source and to as "ask ‘why’ five times about every matter" http://www.shmula.com/382/ask-why-five-times-about-every-matter http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5_Whys

Here's an interesting example of the insights and changes he's made as a result his time spent at the fulfillment centers. http://www.shmula.com/987/jeff-bezos-5-why-exercise-root-cause-analysi…

Jeff Bezos also practices this at Amazon, http://www.shmula.com/987/jeff-bezos-5-why-exercise-root-cause-analysi…

70 years sounds pretty good, but it doesn't tell the whole story. Toyota was supported by the Japanese government (through subsidies, capital controls and trade restrictions) for quite a few years after it switched over from textile manufacturing to automobiles in 1933. It was even bailed out in 1949 when it had major liquidity problems. So while the 70 years of no operating losses is technically true, there was a period of time where Toyota was practically propped up by the Japanese government. References: (1) http://www.shmula.com/291/toyota-motor-corporation-company-history (2) The economist Ha-Joon Chang also has some good discussion on the Japanese government's involvement with Toyota (eg. http://www.prospect-magazine.co.uk/article_details.php?id=9653)