Mastering Queuing States: Strategies for Optimising Workflow
Streamline your process, reduce delays, and boost efficiency by mastering queuing states in your workflow.
Deep Dive podcast generated with Notebook LM.
Queuing states slow down workflows and hide inefficiencies.
Visualising queuing states on a Kanban board reveals process issues.
One-way ticket flow prevents backward movement and highlights root causes.
Strategies like WIP limits and swarming reduce delays and improve flow.
Queuing states are unavoidable pauses in every game development workflow, often presenting challenges and opportunities for improvement. Not paying attention to queueing states, especially early on in a feature or event's lifecycle, can cause a crunch for the people near the end of the line.
One of the most effective ways to address the issue is visualising these queuing states on a Kanban board. This enhances visibility and allows real-time tracking of where work gets stuck. In this article, we’ll explain everything you need to know about queuing states, from understanding their impact to actionable strategies for mastering them.
Understanding Queuing States
Every workflow has moments where work stops moving. These are queuing states — stages where tasks sit idle, waiting for something to happen. For game development teams, these could include “Awaiting Approval,” “Ready for QA,” or “Waiting for Deployment.” During these periods, no active work is being done, but the task still counts as ‘in progress’ — a misleading metric if not accounted for.
Queuing states matter because they reveal hidden inefficiencies. While it may seem like everything is moving forward, sitting at work in these queues wastes valuable time. Making them visible and understanding their causes opens the door to more intelligent, efficient workflows.
The Impact of Queuing States on Workflow Metrics
Flow Efficiency
Flow efficiency measures how much of your total cycle time is spent actively working on a task versus waiting in a queue. For example, if a game feature takes 10 days to complete, but 7 of those days are spent in ‘Waiting for QA,’ then only 3 days were actively spent on development, resulting in a flow efficiency of 30%.
Cycle Time
Cycle time is the total time it takes for a task to move from start to finish. Time spent waiting in queues adds directly to this metric. A task with minimal queuing states will move faster through the workflow, while one that spends most of its time in queues will increase its cycle time. Managing queuing states is a direct way to improve cycle time.
Visualising Queuing States on a Kanban Board
A Kanban board is a visual workflow management tool that can make queuing states obvious. By explicitly labelling queues on the board, teams can spot real-time bottlenecks.
How to Visualise Queuing States
Create dedicated columns for queuing states such as “Ready for Review” or “Waiting for QA.”
Visual signals like colour-coded task cards or icons indicate which tasks are in a queue.
Tracking the time tasks remain in queuing states gives you precise data on where to focus your process improvements.
By seeing where work is stalled, teams can decide on actions to get things moving. This transparency is a game-changer for process improvement.
Strategies for Managing Queuing States
Effectively managing queuing states requires deliberate planning and action. By applying targeted strategies, teams can reduce delays, prevent bottlenecks, and maintain a steady flow of work. The following methods provide practical ways to keep your Kanban board moving efficiently.
If you want to take control of your workflow, here are five key strategies for managing queuing states effectively:
Explicit Modelling of Queuing States: On your Kanban board, add dedicated columns for queuing states (e.g., “Ready for QA”). This way, everyone can see exactly where work is being delayed.
Defining Clear Exit Criteria: Set specific, unambiguous rules for when tasks can leave a queuing state. For instance, “Code must pass automated tests to leave ‘Ready for QA’.” This prevents work from lingering longer than necessary.
Setting Aggressive WIP Limits: Implement work-in-progress (WIP) limits on queuing states to prevent large backlogs. If a queue is complete, the team must focus on clearing it before starting new work.
Encouraging Team Collaboration and Swarming: If a queue becomes too full, encourage team members to swarm on it, clearing it quickly. This approach prevents individual tasks from getting stuck for too long.
Continuous Monitoring and Improvement: Review data on queuing states using retrospectives. Identify which queues are slowing things down and work on long-term fixes.
First steps towards a pull system
Pull systems are used in workflow management, where work is initiated based on demand. Rather than pushing tasks to the next stage, tasks are "pulled" as needed, which helps to reduce overproduction and limits work-in-progress. This approach optimises efficiency and flow by aligning output closely with actual demand.
In pull systems, queuing states serve as vital pull signals to downstream processes. They indicate when a new task should start based on the capacity of the following process. This queuing effectively communicates demand downstream, ensuring that each stage begins work only when there is a clear need. Thus, balance and continuity are maintained across the workflow.
The Importance of a One-Way Ticket Flow
One often overlooked principle of effective workflow design is ensuring that tickets flow in one direction. Allowing tickets to move backwards from “QA” to “In Development”—can mask process issues that must be addressed.
Why One-Way Flow Matters
Visibility of Process Gaps: When work moves backwards, it can hide the root cause of the problem. A failed QA check might be seen as “just another review” but may signal unclear requirements or poor initial development. Keeping the flow forward encourages teams to address the root cause.
Avoiding Rework Loops: Backward flow often results in repetitive rework loops, which slow overall progress and distort cycle time metrics.
Clear Accountability: A one-way flow establishes clear accountability at each stage. If a task moves to QA, it should meet the agreed-upon definition of “ready for QA.”
How to Implement One-Way Flow
Set Exit Criteria: Make sure each stage has strict exit criteria that must be met before moving forward.
Use Policies to Prohibit Backward Movement: Teams can adopt rules that prevent cards from moving backwards, requiring them to create a new task if further work is needed.
Focus on Root Cause Analysis: If a task fails later, conduct a retrospective to determine how to avoid it happening again rather than moving it backwards.
Criticisms and Caution
Implementing changes to workflow processes requires critique and caution. While visualising and managing queuing states can drastically improve workflow efficiency, potential pitfalls exist. Awareness of these challenges can help teams avoid setbacks and maintain momentum.
Risk of Overcomplication: Too many queuing columns on a Kanban board can create visual clutter, making it harder for teams to see the bigger picture. As a general guideline, try to limit queues to no more than 2-3 columns to maintain clarity and focus.
WIP Limit Resistance: Team members may resist WIP limits, mainly if they restrict their ability to stay “busy.” To counter this, frame WIP limits as a tool to speed up overall delivery rather than a constraint.
Misinterpreting Queuing Data: Time spent in a queue is not always a negative sign. For example, time in “Ready for QA” may reflect QA resource availability. Focus on recurring bottlenecks, not every minor delay.
Overemphasis on Speed: Reducing queue times is valuable, but be cautious not to sacrifice quality for speed. Rushed tasks can create rework later, slowing the overall flow.
Reluctance to Change: Team members may resist the idea of a one-way flow, especially if they’re accustomed to moving tasks backwards to “fix” issues. This can feel counterintuitive but is essential for highlighting process flaws.
Fear of Accountability: When tickets can’t move backwards, it becomes clear which stage failed to meet its exit criteria. This level of visibility can make team members uncomfortable and drive process improvement.
Need for Strong Policies: Without strict policies to enforce one-way flow, teams risk reverting to old habits. Clear rules and accountability are necessary to make this shift successful. While visualising and managing queuing states can drastically improve workflow efficiency, there are potential pitfalls.
Conclusion
Queuing states are a normal part of any workflow but don’t have to be a roadblock. You can keep your team's work flowing smoothly by visualising them on a Kanban board, tracking their impact on key metrics like cycle time and flow efficiency, and using targeted strategies to manage them.
Reducing queuing times leads to faster delivery, more predictable schedules, and happier development teams. Make these changes today, and you’ll see the impact on your next sprint.