Interview with Marin Niehues – projects with Kanban

We asked Marin Niehues, Consultant for Organisational Development & Delivery Management, what experiences he had with the Kanban method in projects and what challenges he encountered.

In your opinion, what is the best way to define the Kanban method?

Marin Niehues: The Kanban method is a highly adaptive framework for process optimisation that primarily comes from lean management. The central idea is to visualise work processes and control the flow of work in order to identify and eliminate bottlenecks at an early stage.

I would particularly like to emphasise the modular approach that makes Kanban so attractive for companies in a wide range of industries. By visualising the workflow in the form of a board, teams can organise their work flexibly and are able to react to changes in real time. This allows seamless integration into existing processes and ensures that the method can be scaled, from individual projects to the entire organisational structure.

The adaptability of Kanban is also demonstrated by the ability to gradually introduce and adapt rules and policies. By introducing WIP limits (work in progress limits) and other methods, teams can optimally adapt the method to their own needs and continuously work on improvements.

Kanban is not a static framework, but a living system that evolves with the needs of the team and the organisation. The integration of feedback loops and retrospectives promotes a learning organisation and enables a continuous increase in added value.

Please give us an overview of the project and its objectives in which you have used Kanban.

Marin Niehues: The main objective of the project was the explorative implementation of a decentralised energy supply system in a small village to develop new renewable prosumer products. The aim was also to reduce dependence on centralised energy suppliers, open up a prosumer market and increase energy efficiency.

What were your tasks and what tools and metrics did you use?

Marin Niehues:

As a consultant for organisational development & delivery management, I was responsible for setting up a meaningful process landscape for effective coordination between the technical teams, stakeholders, suppliers and management. Another focus of my work was to create transparency in the progress of the project and to identify and eliminate process bottlenecks. A particular focus was on embedding the project in the company's existing programme and portfolio structures using multi-level Kanban.

For project management and monitoring, we used Atlassian Jira to visualise and measure the process and Confluence as a support tool for knowledge storage. The digital Kanban board in Jira was specially configured for multi-level requirements.

We tracked various metrics on the Kanban board:

Lead time: Measures the time from recording to completion of a task.

Cycle time: Refers to the time that a task requires within a specific process stage.

Blocking time: Records the time during which a task cannot be processed, for example due to external dependencies.

Influence on decisions: The metrics helped us to recognise bottlenecks at an early stage and reallocate resources. Systemic problems could be identified by tracking blocking times. These metrics significantly influenced our decision-making and enabled agile, dynamic project management. Thanks to the multi-level Kanban structure, we were able to optimise both day-to-day operations and the long-term corporate strategy.

What challenges have teams faced when introducing Kanban and how do you deal with these challenges?

Marin Niehues:

Challenges in the introduction of Kanban were, for example:

Insufficient customisation to your own needs: A common pitfall when introducing Kanban is the assumption that you can use a standard template and be efficient straight away. The reality is more complex: every team has its own processes and challenges.

Cultural resistance: The introduction of an agile framework such as Kanban is often met with resistance within the team or even at company level. Employees tend to stick to established processes and changes can cause uncertainty and fear.

Unrealistic expectations: Sometimes teams think Kanban is a magic formula. Unrealistic expectations are then placed on the speed and quality of the results.

Underestimating the method: In some cases, Kanban is implemented too superficially because people think it is simply a "board with tasks". This leads to poor adaptation and low effectiveness.

Lack of value and customer orientation: The focus is often only on internal optimisation and the perspective of the end customer is neglected. Teams concentrate on moving tasks instead of looking at the actual value of the work delivered.

I see solutions to these challenges in the use of specialised advice from an experienced agile coach/consultant. They can guide the introduction of the Kanban system and ensure that it is adapted to the specific needs of the team and the organisation.

Change management and leadership support: Cultural change must be supported and accompanied by the management level. A targeted change management strategy can help to overcome resistance.

Education and awareness: A training or workshop can help to set the right expectations within the team. It is important to emphasise the long-term benefits and the continuous improvement process.

Embedding a corporate function for process optimisation: In order not to take Kanban lightly, a corporate function should be established that takes care of the continuous improvement and adaptation of processes.

Value stream mapping and customer focus: Value stream mapping can help to view the entire supply chain from the customer's perspective. This allows teams to focus on the actual value creation activities. Customer satisfaction metrics and continuous feedback should be integrated to ensure that teams are truly creating value and not just completing tasks.

Can you give an example of a project where you had to adapt the Kanban process to take account of changing requirements or priorities? How did you deal with the change and what were the results?

Marin Niehues:

In a software development project that I managed, we naturally had to deal with bugs - this is almost unavoidable in software development. To accommodate these special requirements, I set up a separate, prioritised "swimlane" exclusively for bugs. This change to the Kanban board allowed us to focus on these critical tasks without disrupting the overall flow of the rest of the work. Since bugs are often urgent and require quick fixes, this special swimlane helped the team to react quickly and handle the bugs efficiently.

In another project that involved several cross-functional teams, I introduced "team swimlanes" to better visualise the specific workflow of each team and thus improve coordination.

In yet another case, a regulated project in the medical services industry, I had to introduce additional events to fulfil compliance and audit requirements. Here, reviews and audits were integrated as part of the Kanban process without undermining the agile nature of the project.

Each of these adjustments was an organic result of the ongoing improvement and reflection that Kanban enables, helping to accelerate project progress and minimise risk.

Are there other tools that you would recommend instead of Kanban or that you would combine?

Marin Niehues:

Firstly, it is important to emphasise that Kanban is first and foremost a framework and not a software or a tool. It offers flexible guidelines for process optimisation that can be supported by various tools.

Lean management: Lean principles can be seamlessly combined with Kanban to focus on value streams and minimise waste in processes. This is about continuous improvement and maximising customer benefit.

Scrum: Scrum as an alternative to Kanban is particularly suitable for explorative and complex projects in which the scope is not easy to define. The structured framework of Scrum can help to organise iterative and incremental developments more effectively.

Standardised methods: In less complex areas such as manufacturing, standardised working methods can be helpful to ensure process efficiency. These methods are less flexible than Kanban or Scrum, but can be more effective in certain contexts.

Combination with OKRs: When using multi-level Kanban, Objectives and Key Results (OKRs) can be a valuable addition. They help to clearly define overarching company goals and achieve measurable results that can be incorporated directly into the Kanban system. The choice of supplementary or alternative methods depends heavily on the specific requirements and context of the project.

What do you think are the most important lessons learnt from your Kanban project experience, and how have these lessons influenced your approach to subsequent projects?

Marin Niehues:

The visualisation of inadequate processes does not lead to their improvement: the beauty of Kanban lies in its transparency. But if the underlying process is inefficient, this inefficiency is merely visualised. It is our task to then systematically address and improve these weak points.

All roads lead to the customer: It is crucial that every process step, every decision and every action is geared towards creating added value for the customer. If an activity does not contribute in any way to the ultimate goal of customer-orientation, its necessity must be questioned.

Flexibility is more than just a "nice to have": In a market that is constantly changing, flexibility is a basic requirement. The ability of a team to adapt to changing conditions without losing focus is not only desirable, but essential for long-term success.

No two teams are the same, and therefore no two Kanban frameworks should be the same: Every team has its own culture, its own challenges and its own strengths. A standardised Kanban board does not do this justice. It must be tailored to the specific team and its needs in order to be effective.

Is there anything else you would like to mention?

Marin Niehues:

Of course, I would like to conclude by emphasising a few important aspects. The successful implementation of Kanban requires much more than simply setting up a board and moving cards around. It is a question of customer-centricity, where it is crucial to create added value for the end user. Furthermore, the professional institutionalisation of process and management frameworks is essential for long-term success. You cannot simply introduce a method and expect it to function autonomously. It must be integrated into the organisational structure and supported in order to realise its full potential.

Ultimately, Kanban is a "living process" that should be constantly adapted and improved. It is not static, but flexible and adaptable, just like the teams that use it. Process optimisation via Kanban or other frameworks is therefore not simply completed on day X, but is a continuous process of optimisation and adaptation. And that is precisely what makes this and other agile frameworks so valuable and effective.

We would like to thank Marin Niehues for the exciting and very informative interview and the deep insight into the challenges you can face as a Consultant for Organisational Development & Delivery Management.