
Eric Ries Tells Lean Startups: “Stop The Line So That The Line Never Stops” - grigy
http://techcrunch.com/2011/09/25/founder-stories-eric-ries-lean-startups-stop-the-line-so-the-line/
======
DanielRibeiro
This is actually part 3. For those who missed it:

part 1: [http://techcrunch.com/2011/09/23/founder-stories-eric-
ries-l...](http://techcrunch.com/2011/09/23/founder-stories-eric-ries-lean-
startup/)

part 2: [http://techcrunch.com/2011/09/24/founder-stories-eric-
ries-v...](http://techcrunch.com/2011/09/24/founder-stories-eric-ries-vanity-
metrics)

------
praeclarum
Snake oil salesman. Read the quick bio: everything revolves around him
teaching how to do development, not actually leading any real projects.

I worked at GM during the lean craze and read my fill of these "we should be
doing it like the Japanese" articles back then. If the Japanese pooped in a
paper bag and left it by the door, then our managers thought there must be
genius in that bag and would force us to do the same. It was insanity.

Lean == Snake Oil

~~~
sarbogast
Hum... just saying... the guy was a co-founder at IMVU. That's at least one
real project. You should really read his book.

~~~
praeclarum
He's relating auto manufacturing (something I have experience with) to
software development and startups (something I have experience in).

No. I will not read the book, because all information in it will be stretched
analogies.

Trust me when I say this, the two fields are different.

~~~
plinkplonk
"He's relating auto manufacturing (something I have experience with) to
software development and startups (something I have experience in)."

I haven't read Ries's book but the "Lean Software" book by the Poppendiecks
was full of over-stretched analogies and feel-good management book style
anecdotes. There was a push to make "Lean Software" into an enterprise
software fad to succeed "Agile", but it never really took off. I hope "Lean
Startup" doesn't become the new "Agile" (lots of consultantware and
repackaging of simple and old concepts and not enough "meat" for working
devs/PMs). It does have that fad-of-the-day smell though. Lots of marketing
and glibness and sizzle. How much steak? Time will tell.

PS: I don't agree with the folks downvoting you. You have a valid point worth
considering. If you could post a few lines on what you see as the specific
differences between the two fields and the "snake oil" bits that you perceive
that would be cool.

~~~
sarbogast
Lean Software and Lean Startup are two different things. I have experienced
lean software first hand and I can tell you it is no fad. I have set up Kanban
in companies a couple of times and the results were excellent, even better
than Scrum.

And when you say "it never really took off", please show your facts. Kanban
has been around for a couple of years really, and I don't see it decreasing in
interest.

It would be good if people who talk about fads and buzzwords actually knew
what they are talking about before criticizing. Just saying...

~~~
plinkplonk
"Kanban has been around for a couple of years really, and I don't see it
decreasing in interest."

this doesn't show it "taking off" which would mean an _increasing_ rate of
adoption with something like a "hockeystick" curve.

"lean software" got a few early adopters who tried visualising software
production as an asembly line analogue, (with all the accompanying "kanban",
"muda" etc bullshit, _without_ ever having worked on or designed an assembly
line. fwiw I am an Industrial Engineer, though I work in sw these days and I
daresay I have seen more real world assembly lines than most lean software
evangelists have) but it never became anything like mainstream. In contrast,
Scrum , though borderline scammy with people sitting through 2 day courses
becoming "scrum masters" became widely adopted. What Scrum, however scammy,
has is "take off". What "lean software" has is an early fizzle.

Lean _manufacturing_ may have been a revolution, but the jury is very much out
on whether lean software has any real impact.

"it would be good if people who talk about fads and buzzwords actually knew
what they are talking about before criticizing. Just saying"

must be lonely, up on that cliff of superior wisdom and snap judgement, where
you are the only one who knows about lean software,agile etc and anyone who
has a contrary view to yours is a clueless moron ;)

~~~
sarbogast
I didn't say anything like that. I never said you didn't know your thing about
industrial engineering, but if you had practiced lean software, you would know
that beyond the name and a few key concepts, it has been greatly adapted and
cleverly tailored to take into account the reality of software engineering
constraints. All I'm saying is that I have seen it work on several SOFTWARE
projects, now have you even tried it for real? (sincerely and humbly
asking...)

~~~
plinkplonk
"but if you had practiced lean software," and "have you even tried it for
real?"

sure. I have (and your assumption otherwise, as evidenced in your "if only
people knew what they were talking about" opinion is revealing).

Here is a war story fwiw I didn't decide the methodology on this project, I
was just part of the team - (the only "methodology" I believe in for sw dev is
"hire bright people and let them figure it out")

On this particular project,there was a "lean and agile coach" (who had a PHB
backing his efforts) who had a card wall where he monitored the "work in
progress" and "queue size" and so on. It was obvious he had zero manufacturing
experience, had never seen a real assembly line (or work cell or kanban card)
and had just read this stuff up in the 'lean software' books (the authors of
whom, in common with the agile gurus have zero credibility as devs or product
designers) .

As expected, the project ran into trouble, the devs revolted at being treated
like assembly line workers, the "coach" eventually got fired (along with the
middle manager who mandated the change) and the team went back to their
previous "we figure what makes sense to us and fits our environment "
'methodology' and software delivery improved, the clients were happy and all
was well again. The lean terminology is a source of team jokes now -eg: "I
just visited the bathroom to get rid of some muda", "Anyone monitoring he WIP
for a coffee?"

And oh yes I expect to hear the "No True Scotsman" defense. "That wasn't
_real_ lean software. Hire me and I'll tell you how to do it 'right' ". Right.

The more important point is, without experience in _both_ manufacturing _and_
software dev, it is terribly easy to get carried away by stories about
Toyota's success in car making (and the 'lean software' authors and
consultants are careful to sprinkle Toyota _anecdotes_ throughout their books
and slides - none of them have worked at Toyota afaik) and adopt random
elements of their assembly line processes, (or to be more precise, what you
THINK is happening in a Toyota factory) into your sw dev.

"cleverly tailored" my ass. "Cleverly marketed" is more accurate. Any
successful "tailoring" would need the tailor to be an accomplished expert in
_both_ sw dev _and_ lean manufacturing and be at the top of their game in
_both_ fields - a combination of Linus Torvalds and Taichi Ohno. I am not sure
such people even exist.

What we have are consultants with mediocre dev skills and zero manufacturing
experience who scramble from RUP to agile to lean software to whatever-fad-is-
next and are always looking for the next fad to ride, the next book to write,
and the next conference to speak at.

~~~
sarbogast
And it's not because you anticipated the "No True Scotsman" defense that I
will refrain from using it as it is totally relevant. Using one specific case
to disprove an entire methodology, be it such a poor counter-example, is
"shaky evidence" at best. But I'm the one who should get a stats education,
right?

Once again, good luck to find any success in your angry little ivory tower, as
luck seems to be the only thing that can save you. End of trolling.

~~~
plinkplonk
"Using one specific case to disprove an entire methodology, be it such a poor
counter-example, is "shaky evidence" at best."

heh but you used equally anecdotal data and equally shaky evidence to support
the snake oil methods. I quote

"I have experienced lean software first hand and I can tell you it is no fad.
I have set up Kanban in companies a couple of times and the results were
excellent"

So you say. Your anecdotes and experience are valid but mine are not. ;) Very
convincing.

This is the standard snake oil salesman defense- when a methodology fails it
is _always_ because people didn't do it right. Nothing intrinsically screwy
with the fad itself.

And when _you_ claim some unverifiable successes that is convincing evidence
about the intrinsic soundness of whatever you are defending. Pathetic. For
every anecdotal "success story" you can find an equally anecdotal "failure
story". Which was the point. And went right over your head. There was no claim
this was evidence. (as someone trained in engineering and stats, I use the
word "evidence" and "proof" _very_ carefully).

"But I'm the one who should get a stats education, right?"

well you are the one who brought in an agile methodologists silly home grown
survey as 'evidence' (when specifically asked for a non vendorware peer
reviewed citation mind you) for some grandiose claims.

This shows (assuming you weren't just trolling) that you don't know how to
judge the statistical validity of a survey or when to use one as evidence. If
you really believe Ambler's marketing spin on agile is some kind of convincing
'evidence' for the validity of "lean software" you definitely need to learn
some stats (among other things).

"End of trolling."

Thank You for finally admitting you were trolling. That clears things up.
Wrong forum. On HN the assumption is that people are being genuine even if
their writing style is abrasive. If I thought you were trolling (vs just being
a bit incoherent) I wouldn't have responded to you at all. Live and learn :)

