SDOE – 780: Quick Reaction Capable (QRC) Integrated Product Teams (IPTs)
System Design and Operational Effectiveness
Stevens Institute of Technology
Hoboken, NJ07030
Project Developed by:
Ronald Freitag
Teresa Schuster
Steve Turman
Advisor:
Rick Dove
Industry Professor
Table of Contents
1.Introduction
2.Response Ability Model
3.Metaphor Story
4.Detailed Conceptual Design Documentation
4.1Problem/Opportunity
4.1.1Formation of the IPT, personnel and tools, is slow
4.1.2Need to change personal behavior
4.1.3Need to change company culture
4.1.4Program IPTs are not using common processes
4.1.5Many Program Managers (PMs) are under-qualified
4.1.6Many IPT leads are not leaders
4.1.7Lack of a common ontology between Customer, Suppliers, and IPTs
4.1.8Functional Organizations too involved in program execution
4.2Response Objectives
4.2.1Framework - Strategic Objectives
4.2.1.1Living Requirements
4.2.1.2Within Budget and On Schedule
4.2.1.3Just In Time Resources
4.2.1.4Accountability
4.2.1.5Rapid Prototyping
4.2.1.6Product Improvement
4.2.2Key Proactive Issues and Responses
4.2.3Key Reactive Issues and Responses
4.3Response Issues/Metrics
4.3.1Reactive response metrics
4.3.1.1Cost
4.3.1.2Time
4.3.1.3Quality
4.3.1.4Scope
4.3.2Proactive response metrics
4.3.2.1Cost
4.3.2.2Time
4.3.2.3Quality
4.3.2.4Scope
4.3.3Qualitative Analysis
4.4Solution Strategy Map
4.4.1Key Activities
4.4.1.1Resource Management
4.4.1.2Define IPT versus Functional Organization Responsibilities
4.4.1.3Obtain / Maintain Technical Expertise
4.4.1.4Risk and Opportunity Management
4.4.1.5Cost Management
4.4.1.6Schedule Management
4.4.1.7Technical Management
4.4.1.8Requirements Management
4.4.1.9Performance Based Requirements
4.4.1.10Business Requirements Review
4.4.1.11Identify Core Requirements
4.4.1.12Customer Participation
4.4.1.13Supplier Participation
4.4.1.14Continual Process Improvement
4.4.1.15Knowledge Management
4.4.1.16Training
4.4.1.17Product Configuration Management
4.4.1.18Demonstrated Milestones
4.5Reality Factors and Applying the Principles of the Agile IPT
4.5.1Human Behavior
4.5.2Organizational Behavior
4.5.3Technology Pace
4.5.4System Complexity
4.5.5Globalization
4.5.6Creeping Agile Practices:
4.5.7Agile Competitors
4.5.8Human Resources
4.6Closure Matrix
4.6.1Reusable
4.6.1.1Self Contained Units
4.6.1.2Plug Compatibility
4.6.1.3Facilitated Re-Use
4.6.2Reconfigurable
4.6.2.1Flat Interactions
4.6.2.2Deferred Commitment
4.6.2.3Distributed Control & Info
4.6.2.4Self Organization
4.6.3Scalable
4.6.3.1Elastic Capacity
4.6.3.2Redundancy & Diversity
4.6.3.3Evolving Standards
4.7Operational/Integrity Management
4.7.1Integrity Management
4.7.2Operational Management
4.7.2.1Framework Evolution
4.7.2.2Module Evolution
4.7.2.3Inventory Evolution
4.7.2.4Real Time Configuration
4.7.3Plug and Play IPT Components
4.7.4Agile IPT Structure
5.Conclusion
5.1Project Observations
5.2Class Observations
NOTES
Table of Figures
Figure 1 Budget Analysis using EVMS
Figure 2 Integrated Master Schedule (IMS)
Figure 3 Earned Value Management
Figure 4 Critical Path Analysis
Figure 5 Defect Containment Chart
Figure 6 Risk Graph Example
Figure 7 Radar Chart of IPT Agility Characteristics
Figure 8 IPT Strategic Objectives and Key Activities
Figure 9 Closure Matrix
Figure 10 Agile IPT Modules
Figure 11 Agile IPT Environment
Figure 12 Optimum IPT Structure
List of Tables
Table I Strategic Objectives and Framework for the Agile IPT
Table II – Key Agile IPT Proactive Issues
Table III – Key Agile IPT Reactive Issues
Table IV Agility Characteristics
Table V Agility Characteristic Scoring
Table VI Reality Factors of the Agile IPT
1.Introduction
This group project is being completed for credit at Stevens Institute of Technology as part of a Masters in Engineering – System Engineering Degree course SDOE 780 The Engineering of Agile Systems and Enterprises. In the process of the project, we will apply the concepts and tools of Agile Systems learned in our class and provide Evidence of study including knowledgeable reference to the literature and readings.
In order to accomplish this objective, this report is divided into five sections.
Introduction – This section defines the task to be accomplished and the purpose and organization of this case study.
Response Ability Model – This section along with the Metaphor Story make up the Drag and Drop Metaphor Model. This section addresses the response issues and key metric, the basic framework and module architecture, the manifestation of the RRS principles, and the operation and integrity management of the quick reaction capable IPTs.
Metaphor Story - This section shall provide an operational story that verbally animates the configuration and management of the elements of the Response Ability Model. It provides clear evidence of our quick reaction Capable IPT agile system which demonstrates response objectives, requirements, values, response enabling principles, and operational/integrity management.
Detailed Conceptual Design Documentation – This section will articulate the QRC IPT agile system and provide a comprehensive description of conceptual design: response objectives, issues, and enabling principles; strategic themes and activity web along with a closure matrix and descriptions. It shall also address Agile IPT operational management and responsibilities. The following sub-sections are included:
a. Problem/Opportunity – This section describes the problem to be addressed and what opportunities are available to solve the problem. It will describe how and what benefits are achieved when IPTs are used in an agile workplace.
b. Response Objectives – This section identifies what agile characteristics are achieved when IPTs are incorporated. It looks at both proactive and reactive dynamic response.
c. Response Issues/Metrics –This section looks at the response metrics and issues of Agile IPTs with respect to cost, schedule, quality and scope. What metrics are used to measure IPT Agility?
d. Solution Strategy Map- This section describes how it all comes together through the integration of all the parts into a working solution. How do the resources (components) come together to solve the problem or objective? How do the individual IPT pieces fit together to achieve agility? How is capacity-demand achieved?
e. Applied Principle – This section explores how the IPT structure would be applied across an organization with respect to agility?
f. Closure Matrix – This section illustrates the relationships between Activities (functions), Issues (Requirements) and RRS Principles and provides a narrative to their relationships.
g. Operational Management – This section answers the questions: Who is responsible for the IPT framework? Who manages the resources? Who is responsible for acquisition of the resources? Who assembles the IPTs? What are the levels of maturation? How is Risk Management controlled?
Conclusion – This section will discuss what conclusions can be drawn from this study. What things worked? What did not work? What level of success was achieved in this effort?
Our group, consisting of Ronald Freitag, Teresa Schuster and Steve Turman, has expanded on our class project by adding detailed analysis to the concepts of Agile Integrated Product Teams. It is not our intention to define an IPT or discuss its merits, but rather to provide evidence that the IPT structure is indeed an Agile System and its formation and execution can be modeled as such. We do not want to attempt to implement the “ideal” IPT environment, just an agile one. We want to concentrate on corrective behaviors that restrict the IPT from functioning in an agile manner.
QRC Integrated Product Development Teams
2.Response Ability Model
Key Proactive IssuesCreation
- Efficient Work Force
- Capable Work Force
- The Right Team
- The Right Environment
- Agreed Expectations
- IMS
- Trade Studies
- Demo Milestones/Metrics
- Product Success Focus
Improvement
- Process Improvement
- Work Product Output
-Streamlining / KISS
-Training / KM / Learning
Migration
- New Technologies
- Hiring New People
- New Engineering Tools
- New Skill Sets
Modification
- Changes at Design Reviews /
Framework Evolution:
- Business Area Program Manager - Polices, Directives, Mission, Vision
Module Evolution:
- IPT Leaders – Enhances talent, selects tools
Inventory Management:
- Functional Manager – Maintains Resources, Processes (data) & Training
Real-Time Configuration:
- Project Engineer – ongoing program execution
/ Key Reactive Issues
Correction
- Functional Management Involvement
- Technical Barriers
- Schedule Delays – Material
- Employee Attrition
Variation
- Personnel Skills
- Personnel Issues
- Diversity
- Suppliers
- Changing Process Requirements
Expansion
- Increased or Changing Scope of Requirements
Reconfiguration
- Contract Cancellation
- Technology Obsolescence
- Security Clearances
Selected Observations of System Design Principles
Self-Contained Units (Modules)
•People
•Facilities
•Tools
•Data / Evolving Standards (Framework)
•IPT Rule-set
•Directives Policies
•Standards
Plug Compatibility
•SMEs, Data Templates, Centers of Excellence. Standardized Engineering Tools / Unit Redundancy & Diversity
•Two deep training, Mentorship, Personnel Diversity, Overlapping IPTs
Facilitated Reuse
•SW Code Reuse, Hardware Design Reuse, Reconfigurable HW, TeamCenters, Knowledge Management / Elastic Capacity
•Outsource, Contract Labor, TemporaryWorkCenters, Security Administration
Flat Interaction
•Peer Reviews, Standup meetings, Action Request Database, Horizontal IPTs Collaboration / Distributed Control & Information
•All disciplines involved, Full
Lifecycle responsibility
Deferred Commitment
•Disciplines added time phased / Self Organization
•Empowerment of individuals
Does Not contain export controlled technical data subject to ITAR Regulation
Quick Reaction Capable IPTs – Agility Now!
3.Metaphor Story
By Ronald Freitag , Steve Turman, & Teresa Schuster, L-3 communications Integrated Systems, GreenvilleTexas
Does Not contain export controlled technical data subject to ITAR Regulation
“You must select the right people, for the right job, at the right time.”
You are sitting at your desk, rejoicing the success of delivering the final aircraft to your overseas customer. Earlier in the day was a frantic scramble to conduct the final flight checks prior to the aircraft’s delivery. You recall the relaxing view of the aircraft as it disappeared into the sunset, with only its fading contrail remaining.
Just then, a familiar sound is emitted from the PC on your desk. An email has arrived informing you the contract you have been bidding and re-bidding for the last four years will receive go-ahead next month. It is your task to guarantee the startup of the program happens on time and in an efficient manner. A slow start could give rise to morale problems with the employees and pressures to generate sales numbers from upper management. Your customer also expects you to start executing the program right after contract go-ahead. You must also provide the program with the people, tools, facilities and data required to execute the program. You find yourself needing “Agility Now!”
You choose to create a Quick Reaction Capable Integrated Product Team (IPT) Organization. Some key aspects to creating your IPT structure include assembling the right team of people with the appropriate capabilities working in an efficient team environment. You need a plan. From your set of management tools, such as MS Project, you accomplish this by generating an Integrated Master Schedule (IMS) that clearly defines various project activities and demonstration milestones at various points in the program.
Various functional plans need to be created. Your experience is limited, but you recall that a template data library exists from which you can access various examples of plans such as a program management plan, configuration management plan, engineering management plan or software development plan. Filling in the blanks makes your job easier and will allow you to easily design and tailor your program processes for optimum execution.
The high-level plans are completed, but the detailed plan information still needs to be generated, the System Architecture needs to be designed and the requirements need to be captured from the customer’s Concept of Operations.
You are overwhelmed by the number of tasks to be completed. Help is needed. It is time to assemble a trained and talented workforce. You must select the right people, for the right job, at the right time. You establish a collaborative Requirements Development Team choosing participants with diverse perspectives with interest and knowledge as subject matter experts made up of Program Management, Contracts, Finance, Systems Engineering, Airworthiness, Product Development, Supportability, Aero Engineering, and Software Development. You assemble the key components of the IPT structure; the program manger, project engineer and customer representatives. The remaining team resources shall be provided in a just in time manner to provide an efficient management of resources through coordination between functional management and project engineering with a goal of minimizing resource lead time and insuring the resources are available when needed. The organization must be scalable to expand and contract as workflow varies. You assemble a diverse group of individuals with a wide variety of experience as Subject Matter Experts (SMEs).
You also consider contracting or outsourcing certain aspects of the work. Finally, the team is assembled, made up of a variety of individuals with their own ideas and agendas for accomplishing their new job assignments. Chaos and hysteria ensues, panic sets in. It is time you react by providing a clear framework for the team.
The team must have accountability for project cost, schedule and performance. They must complete within budget and on schedule providing the best technical solution available for the cost. They must be agile to the living requirements by responding to the customer’s constant evolving project requirements. Program execution is essential in creating an agile team. The ability to demonstrate milestones early and often and provide a flexible systems integration lab will identify and correct errors. The team must have full responsibility for the Life Cycle of the product.
You realize that the teams of people you have assembled are extremely smart but they need common vision, goals and processes. The team needs proper training both specific to their program and generally in the processes defined within their functional organization. You provide them an IPT Rule-set, appropriate company directives policies and applicable data standards for the project. It is obvious that it is important to have a motivated, quality work force, but even the best people cannot perform unless the process for which they conduct their work is understood and is efficient. Two deep training must occur in order to provide a stable and agile workforce. Mentorship helps employee morale and provides guidance to new inexperienced employees.
Efficiency is key to meeting schedules and milestones. You have done this before 18 months earlier, and now you have data repositories to tap into including SW code reuse, hardware design reuse, library of Commercial off the Shelf (COTS) proven hardware, and knowledge management databases. Efficiency can also be achieved through streamlining the process and design by keeping the architecture and design simple, providing effective peer reviews and a productive environment for the collaboration of ideas.
Product and process improvement also must not be forgotten in this agile working environment. Tools must be in place to provide access to new technologies and processes. Engineering Tools shall have the flexibility and expandability to allow product growth and maturation. Agility is also achieved through process improvement by improving schedule and budget predictability, improving cycle time metrics, increasing customer satisfaction, increasing return on investment, decreasing the cost of quality and improving employee morale.
The program should allow for the empowerment of both their IPT teams and the individual IPT members. The project IPTs shall act together similar to a System of Systems (SoS) where the program has the ability to adapt to unanticipated and unforeseen situations, react to individual points of failure, and remain continuously functional while being constantly affected by the changing customer requirements. The program shall exhibit emergent behavior that provides new innovative solutions to complex problems.
Based on the lessons learned from your last project, you realize that there exist many behaviors that impede agility in an organization. Human behaviors such as empire building, individual egos, lack of knowledge or unmotivated individuals, postponed decisions and inability to make decisions, organizational stovepipes, inability of organization to change cultures, and poor employee morale act as barriers to agile organizations.
From experience on your previous project, the agility of your organization was affected by the interaction with your international customer. Special security measures were required to isolate company proprietary and ITAR (International Traffic in Arms Regulations) information from your company and the customer. In addition to security, communication and cultural differences exit which can impede the agility of the organization. Without face-to-face communications, words and phases can take on many different meanings.
Agility will also be affected by the pace of technology and its effects on the technology obsolescence of your organizations’ development tools. When the FPGA vendor on your last project changed die processes and it caused your detailed hardware development timing analysis to become invalid, new development tools were required.
By efficiently pulling together the various components of your IPT, identifying key proactive and reactive issues and identifying the reality factors that impede progress, you successfully completed your objective of creating a Quick Reaction Capable Integrated Product Organization that responds to rapidly changing program environments including Quick Reaction Capability (QRC) efforts. You did this by efficiently managing project resources and requirements, by providing focused product ownership, leveraging rapid system prototyping, and fostering communications – delivering working products within budget, and on schedule.
It is now time to sit back, kick of the shoes and let the program execute.
Does Not contain export controlled technical data subject to ITAR Regulation
4.Detailed Conceptual Design Documentation
4.1Problem/Opportunity
Forming a project team can bechallenging and arduous task. A project organization should respond to rapidly changing program environments including Quick Reaction Capability (QRC) efforts by efficiently managing project resources and requirements, by providing focused product ownership, leveraging rapid system prototyping, and fostering communications – delivering working products within budget, and on schedule.
It is not enough to say that you are going to create an Agile Integrated Product Team (IPT); one must understand all the problems associated with the formation of the team. The formation of the team, including people, process and equipment, must be agile in nature. Agility refers to the speed of operations, in this case the speed at which a team (with its resources) within an organization is formed to begin and sustain responsiveness to the customer.