From the push-perspective, “Flow” is defined by the state that the subsequent process (or process step within a process) is ready to process the output of its preceding process.

From the pull-perspective, it is the other way around - “Flow” is defined by the state that right at the time when a process (or process step within a process) is ready to process input, the preceding process/process-step hands over its output.

It is a common understanding that flow can be created much easier by using a pull-concept.

It can be assumed that not all processes work all the time perfectly; hence process-owners have to expect disruptions along with the execution.

One preparation is that any process further down the chain is designed to have slightly greater capacity than the preceding processes. This ensures that aafter a disruption has been rectified, each process has the “strength” to get back in sequence with the upstream processes. Such a setup helps particularily, after a complete stand-still when the process-chain shall get back into "flow" without much intervention.

If a process cannot always accept the output of its preceding process and the whole process chain shall not come to a complete stop for certain reasons, a buffer needs to be set up. This is illustrated in the following chart:

Further considerations are the no defective piece of work shall come down the chain – however, it can happen. Once it is being identified it a separate re-work is used to make use of the defective part – it is not the duty of the process-step to do the re-work.

Any piece of work is accompanied by the necessary information about what kind of work needs to be done.

Monitoring of the performance of each process step is vital and not for the reason that the team cannot be trusted – on the contrary, measuring performance creates trust if it’s done in the right way.  A drop in the productivity of a process does (if no other reasons are known) mostly indicate a change of workload.

Interviews with the team can be used as an early indicator. Statements that the work can “still be handled – but it’s tougher than ever before” are warning signals. Only in very rare cases, the team has collectively decided to slow down – the reason is, in m ost cases, that the process step is at the brink of being overburdened, and if nothing is done will slow down the entire process.