tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-438942112364524044.post7184852545653602134..comments2024-03-24T08:48:20.786-07:00Comments on Biology of Distributed Information Systems: « The Lean Architect » - Do we need Abstraction and Planning « on the Gemba » ?Yves Caseauhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04812034190333969728noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-438942112364524044.post-17725995732462637552018-11-12T04:39:08.564-08:002018-11-12T04:39:08.564-08:00It is amazing that you have finally reached this p...It is amazing that you have finally reached this point. i think that you had to overcome many obstacles that require the good physical availability.<br />ivanka hot pictureshttps://www.viraltrench.com/ivanka-trump-pictures/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-438942112364524044.post-35103161444510936342013-04-13T23:18:16.830-07:002013-04-13T23:18:16.830-07:00I very much agree with most of what you wrote :)
I...I very much agree with most of what you wrote :)<br />I am currently reading "Lean Architecture" by J. O. Coplien and G. Bjornvig, which is a truly great book on this very topic. I will return to this in a future post ... and I will adress some of your comments.<br />Coplien writes about the combination of lean (Toyota-style, e.e., Liker's) and agile in a way which is very similar to "my" 'Lean Software Factory" ambition. One especially interesting idea is that lean is more focused on long term than "agile", with a nice complementarity (lean to build a long term solution, agile to adapt continously). I hope, therefore, to be able to revisit my previous writing with a deeper view once I have finished this book :)Yves Caseauhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04812034190333969728noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-438942112364524044.post-76016475382084924952013-03-22T07:07:27.748-07:002013-03-22T07:07:27.748-07:00It's more an understatement 'une litote...It's more an understatement 'une litote' or a paraphrase, than oxymore; <br />Without trying to offend purists, i would replace lean by architecture, in the software environment:<br /><br />The architect is required before even think about how to manage: he thinks primarily on the feasibility of the system, designs, challenges choices, he plans tasks, selects the profiles and before conception, he wondered how to improve ‘standards’ without affect existing, he defines the load test scenarii , he continues to refine, asks everyone why, even if he knows the answer, he lets others give it (this is perhaps the reason why we like reading the work of architect, but much less frequent : because of his questions and our duty to respond: he's 'soualant') ...same thing as the lean? <br /><br />As we can't claim to know lean, we should not proclaim to be architect: we become architect, becoming is continuously performed, never reached..<br />It's surprising to see 7 years duration for training a building architect, but anything similar anywhere for information-IT architect; hence architect has an undefined place in our IT environment (no record exists in the cigref nomenclature about design architect, only the OS profile is mentioned..)<br />We get however a great pleasure when meeting a good architect: he is often who uses the right sentence to describe the right topic with alternative options, the precondition to achieve a pretty advanced system, but if he's often followed, he's rarely heard.. <br />Why?<br />I believe this is a good question to be analyzed…in order to not agree either with 'providence': even if the architect is employed at this position when disaster occurs (often unfortunately). Such providential savior role is antagonistic with the character of the architect to provide a quality solution and an efficient code design..<br />About this intervention of savior, the architect can enjoy (his ego is well developed..) but if he is cunning he may enjoy much more since he enhances quality at every step in the set of software life cycle.<br /><br />The senior manager has to learn to recognize architect, and to promote their fulfillment, by promoting search environment, to diversify 'standards' that may sometimes inhibit the creative designers...<br />As you said, standards tend to make the world better organized, and because i have to share this view, i propose a couple of architects: who has head in the stars and whoever feet on the ground.<br />In fact i think these are the only profiles needed to make software development: an abstract / an implementer or business/ technical or logical / pratical... to reduce the whole set of developer, designer, integrator, architect, tester, manager...<br />Is it ambitious or unnecessary this double profile? i see it close to 'simplify to improve' , <br />This is how the 2 attributes -architect and lean- are joined together, in my view.Sasoukyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15295614953146024275noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-438942112364524044.post-82324561365844914252013-03-22T03:59:03.721-07:002013-03-22T03:59:03.721-07:00This comment has been removed by the author.Sasoukyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15295614953146024275noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-438942112364524044.post-38431243033520393782013-01-13T06:09:57.354-08:002013-01-13T06:09:57.354-08:00Absolutely !
Standardization is a cornerstone of l...Absolutely !<br />Standardization is a cornerstone of lean ... and architects are well positioned to play a role. This would be worth a development, since "standardization" has two different meanings in the world of software architecture (the promotion of standards) and lean management (capitalization and continuous improvement through a well-documented and shared representation of how the work is done). These two meanings have a strong intersection, which makes Benoit's first point so interesting.<br />I obviously agree with your second point as well. <br />One way to summarize your contribution would be:<br />(1) As always with lean manufacturing, a standard is needed to promote capitlization, continuous improvement, training and flexibility (through faster training)<br />(2) in the world of lean software, architecture is part of the standard (in the lean sense), and should include as much standards as possible (in the SW sense)<br />Yves Caseauhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04812034190333969728noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-438942112364524044.post-66447623772517382412013-01-07T01:06:24.322-08:002013-01-07T01:06:24.322-08:00Two complementary ideas :
- One of the key elemen...Two complementary ideas :<br /> - One of the key elements of the lean culture is to promote standardisation. The lean architect could be the one that generalises those good ideas coming from the "gemba".<br /> - Architecture and standards may help in another goal of the lean approach : "develop flexibility"; especially when key ressources or teams are changing or when transfering to run teams that may have to operate various information systems in parallel.Benoît Déhaisnoreply@blogger.com