Skip to main content

Nav Continuity Layer: Value Stream Map

VALUE STREAM MAP
════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════

  [SESSION START]
       │
       ▼
  ┌───────────────────────┐
  │ 1. Start AI Agent     │   C/T: 10s   Wait: 0s   %C&A: 100%
  └────┬──────────────────┘
       │ ░░░░░░░ (wait for human to gather context)
       ▼
  ┌───────────────────────┐
  │ 2. Find/Read Docs     │   C/T: 120s  Wait: 30s  %C&A: 80%
  └────┬──────────────────┘
       │ ░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░ (bottleneck: human synthesis)
       ▼
  ┌───────────────────────┐
  │ 3. Write/Paste Brief  │   C/T: 60s   Wait: 60s  %C&A: 60%
  └────┬──────────────────┘
       │
       ▼
  [PRODUCTIVE MESSAGE 1]

  Flow Efficiency = Cycle Time (190s) / Lead Time (280s) x 100 = ~67%
  *Note: The actual wait/context gathering time varies wildly, dropping efficiency significantly when context is lost.*

════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════

Metrics​

  • Cycle Time: 3-5 mins currently for human to gather context. Target: under 5s for script compilation.
  • Wait Time: Human context switching. Target: 0s.
  • Lead Time: Time from terminal open to first productive action. Target: under 30s.

Waste Categorization​

  • Motion: Context switching between repos and issue logs to find current state.
  • Over-processing: Re-writing context for the agent every single session.
  • Rework: Agent hallucinating due to missed context leading to corrective loops.

Questions​

  • Which single bottleneck, if removed first, creates the biggest lead-time drop?
  • What metric drift would signal this map is no longer accurate?