2-pizza teams
Amazon and Zappos Sitting in a Tree
As most you know by now, Zappos has entered into a definitive agreement with Amazon.com and will become a wholly owned subsidiary of Amazon. This is exciting and, after speaking with my friends both at Amazon and at Zappos, they are all quite excited too. Congratulations to Amazon, Zappos, Tony Hsieh, and Jeff Bezos 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9.
As most you know by now, Zappos has entered into a definitive agreement with Amazon.com and will become a wholly owned subsidiary of Amazon. This is exciting and, after speaking with my friends both at Amazon and at Zappos, they are all quite excited too. Congratulations to Amazon, Zappos, Tony Hsieh, and Jeff Bezos 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9.
The Source of Dirt
In Amazon’s 2008 letter to shareholders, Jeff Bezos shares about a Kaizen event he participated in:
At a fulfillment center recently, one of our Kaizen experts asked me, “I’m in favor of a clean fulfillment center, but why are you cleaning? Why don’t you eliminate the source of dirt?”
I’ve spoken numerous times about Bezos on Lean Thinking, some of which are here, here, here and here but there are many more — just browse shmula.
In Amazon’s 2008 letter to shareholders, Jeff Bezos shares about a Kaizen event he participated in:
At a fulfillment center recently, one of our Kaizen experts asked me, “I’m in favor of a clean fulfillment center, but why are you cleaning? Why don’t you eliminate the source of dirt?”
I’ve spoken numerous times about Bezos on Lean Thinking, some of which are here, here, here and here but there are many more — just browse shmula.
Jeff Bezos and Root Cause Analysis
unrelated update:
I’m always impressed when CEO’s demonstrate Deming-like behavior as they lead; it’s rare, but there’s almost a magical, mobilizing, and inspiring force that happens when CEO’s or corporate leaders behave in a respectful, inspiring, common-sense, and thoughtful way.
Today, I’m reminded of an experience back in 2004 while I worked for Amazon.com — something Jeff Bezos did that I still carry with me to this day.
unrelated update:
I’m always impressed when CEO’s demonstrate Deming-like behavior as they lead; it’s rare, but there’s almost a magical, mobilizing, and inspiring force that happens when CEO’s or corporate leaders behave in a respectful, inspiring, common-sense, and thoughtful way.
Today, I’m reminded of an experience back in 2004 while I worked for Amazon.com — something Jeff Bezos did that I still carry with me to this day.
Not Accountable, Not Responsible
Team size can make a big difference in the success of your service or product. What is counterintuitive for most people is that the larger the team size, the lower the likelihood of success for your service or product. Why? Entropy can set in and large teams are inherently bad vehicles for communication. More insipid, however, is that the larger the team, there is a higher likelihood of accountability and responsibility being diffused across the team.
Team size can make a big difference in the success of your service or product. What is counterintuitive for most people is that the larger the team size, the lower the likelihood of success for your service or product. Why? Entropy can set in and large teams are inherently bad vehicles for communication. More insipid, however, is that the larger the team, there is a higher likelihood of accountability and responsibility being diffused across the team.
Lost-in-Translation in Large Teams
Team size can make a big difference in the success of your service or product. What is counterintuitive for most people is that the larger the team size, the lower the likelihood of success for your service or product. Why? Entropy can set in and large teams are inherently bad vehicles for communication. In what follows, I show quantitatively how team size does have an impact on the effectiveness of communication and the eventual success of the service or product.
Team size can make a big difference in the success of your service or product. What is counterintuitive for most people is that the larger the team size, the lower the likelihood of success for your service or product. Why? Entropy can set in and large teams are inherently bad vehicles for communication. In what follows, I show quantitatively how team size does have an impact on the effectiveness of communication and the eventual success of the service or product.
Aza Raskin on Cooperation & Fence Throwing
Aza Raskin is the founder of Humanized, the son of Macintosh inventor, Jef Raskin, and an all-around good guy. A few months ago, Aza Raskin agreed to answer several readers’ questions. In today’s post, Aza Raskin tackles a reader’s question about Product Management, cooperations with other groups, throwing stuff over the fence, why large teams generally suck, and political in-fighting and politics.
Aza Raskin is the founder of Humanized, the son of Macintosh inventor, Jef Raskin, and an all-around good guy. A few months ago, Aza Raskin agreed to answer several readers’ questions. In today’s post, Aza Raskin tackles a reader’s question about Product Management, cooperations with other groups, throwing stuff over the fence, why large teams generally suck, and political in-fighting and politics.
Jeff Bezos on Lean and Six Sigma
It’s been a while now since I was employed at Amazon.com, but I still greatly admire Jeff Bezos and Amazon. Culturally, it was hands-down the most brutal and cut-throat environment, but one that really brought out the best in you — not from a people or relationship perspective, but from an innovation and business-thinking perspective. Indeed, the cut-throat culture invited very heated debates and some bridges would be burned along the way, but the next day people move on. This month’s interview on Harvard Business Review underscores my point and also shares Bezos’ views on Lean and Six Sigma (I can personally share many stories on this topic at Amazon…). Much is also said about how Amazon follows the Start with the Customer and then Work Backwards model, which I’ve also spoken about much on this blog. The article is a good read. Here’s what Bezos specifically says about Lean and Six Sigma and defect reduction:
It’s been a while now since I was employed at Amazon.com, but I still greatly admire Jeff Bezos and Amazon. Culturally, it was hands-down the most brutal and cut-throat environment, but one that really brought out the best in you — not from a people or relationship perspective, but from an innovation and business-thinking perspective. Indeed, the cut-throat culture invited very heated debates and some bridges would be burned along the way, but the next day people move on. This month’s interview on Harvard Business Review underscores my point and also shares Bezos’ views on Lean and Six Sigma (I can personally share many stories on this topic at Amazon…). Much is also said about how Amazon follows the Start with the Customer and then Work Backwards model, which I’ve also spoken about much on this blog. The article is a good read. Here’s what Bezos specifically says about Lean and Six Sigma and defect reduction:
Amazon.com’s 2006 Holiday Performance
Peak Season at Amazon is crazy, fun, and exciting. That is a time when “all hands on deck” really comes into play and everybody is pitching in to help. It’s also a time that really tests the amazon click-to-ship system and overall Operations, to make sure that product flows from warehouses to the customer in a seamless, high-velocity, and defect-free way.
Peak Season at Amazon is crazy, fun, and exciting. That is a time when “all hands on deck” really comes into play and everybody is pitching in to help. It’s also a time that really tests the amazon click-to-ship system and overall Operations, to make sure that product flows from warehouses to the customer in a seamless, high-velocity, and defect-free way.
Why Large Teams Suck
This post is to reiterate what I’ve said many times before: Large teams, for the most part, suck. Large teams are necessary if the product or service requires it, but they genrally suck. Below are my reasons for this very general and somewhat unsubstantiated claim:
I’ve written about the importance of team size before, here, here, and here. Previously, this is what I said:
This post is to reiterate what I’ve said many times before: Large teams, for the most part, suck. Large teams are necessary if the product or service requires it, but they genrally suck. Below are my reasons for this very general and somewhat unsubstantiated claim:
I’ve written about the importance of team size before, here, here, and here. Previously, this is what I said:
Software Development: Agile, Team Size and Dynamics
I’ve long ranted about Amazon’s 2-Pizza Team, which is defined as the following: a team where the team size is no larger than 2 pizzas can feed. Amazon realized early on that in order to cut software development time, the solution was *NOT* to put more people on the project. What is required is a team, where the roles are defined and each member has the right skill for that role, and following a lean, agile, method — all focused on the customer.
I’ve long ranted about Amazon’s 2-Pizza Team, which is defined as the following: a team where the team size is no larger than 2 pizzas can feed. Amazon realized early on that in order to cut software development time, the solution was *NOT* to put more people on the project. What is required is a team, where the roles are defined and each member has the right skill for that role, and following a lean, agile, method — all focused on the customer.
