@holzer @stevefenton Not entirely true.
If you shorten Cycle Times, you get value sooner, Feedback earlier, can adapt to change, etc.
That just doesn't necessarily mean, you raise throughput.
@bbak @holzer The crucial question is throughput of what?
Features? not necessarily... you might pivot by doubling down on a feature, so you develop fewer features overall, potentially spending more time on them (or the reverse if you find a better path).
Value? Certainly. We can all agree that the idea of changing direction is to stay where the value is.
As for cycle times. They are useful, like a thermometer, but batch size is where I'd focus.
Value "faster" refers to the economic effects.
@stevefenton @holzer Value, yes, in theory.
But value can only be determined AFTER something was delivered.
Hence preserving optionality is key: Ability to deliver lots of small'ish things with rather short Cycle Time.
@stevefenton @holzer I think you started this with asking 'Throughput of what?'
But nevermind. Indeed, no need to dig deeper.
Steve Fenton ➜
Holzer
Bruno Baketarić