Re: Re: SIP is not Takt Time

Hi Ron,

I have no disagreement with your fine post. Reviews are extremely helpful 
for me.

>Software isn't or chocolate cherries. In chocolate cherries, it probably
>matters how long it takes to make one, and how often we have to stop the
>line because someone discovers a cherry pit in the cherry feeder. The
>issues of cycle time, lead time, takt time make sense.
>
>Do they make sense in software development? I'm not sure. I'm here to
>report that, to me, the discussion is getting further and further from
>Software In Process, and I wish it would come back. I don't like chocolate
>cherries.

I do disagree that the discussion got away from SIP. Where the discussion 
went and where you would bring us back to are both important, but 
different. A shortened feedback loop typically found in lean manufacturing 
is solid and a sound and sound way to build software, particularly as you 
carefully articulated it. Where the discussion went for me asks a 
complementary question: what is the greater goal within which a proposed 
SIP is a part?

Imagine XP software that is being built on the shortest possible SIP 
cycles. Would that tell the buyer of software that the right software being 
built? It may, but I don't believe it necessarily does. Something more is 
needed. My argument is that there is an issue of a greater whole that is 
complementary to and an essential part of the XP and SIP facts. A sound 
bookkeeping framework creates a real time whole image of a project in which 
the story cards are elements of a language that in due time tell this 
greater story. The stories that are not yet in process are represented by 
estimates. There are many examples of this both from building and 
manufacturing that I could share.

Dan