| Date post: | 03-Apr-2018 |
| Category: |
Documents |
| Upload: | samknight2009 |
| View: | 219 times |
| Download: | 0 times |
of 43
7/28/2019 l11_pdp
1/43
+
- Product Development Processes
ESD.36J System & Project ManagementSystem Project Management
and
Instructor(s)
Prof. Olivier de WeckLecture 11
10/9/2003
7/28/2019 l11_pdp
2/43
+
- Introduction Project Preparation and Planning
Importance of Upfront Preparation Contents of Program Management Plan
Product Development Processes (PDP) Waterfall Model Spiral Model
Acknowledgments: Prof. Ed CrawleyProf. Steve EppingerDr. Joyce WarmkesselDr. Darian Unger
10/9/2003 - ESD.36J SPM 2
7/28/2019 l11_pdp
3/43
+
- ESD.36 Framework
Project Project Project
Preparation Planning Execution
Doing the right job
Project
Adaptation
Doing the job right
10/9/2003 - ESD.36J SPM 3
7/28/2019 l11_pdp
4/43
+
- Preparation versus Planning
Preparation address the who, what and whyissues Who are the major stakeholders? Why we are doing the project?
What do the stakeholders expect in exchange fortheir participation (value)?
Time frame for Preparation is prior toproject initiation
Planning is the how the project will beconducted
10/9/2003 - ESD.36J SPM 4
7/28/2019 l11_pdp
5/43
+
-
Management Leverage
is Greatest Early
10/9/2003 - ESD.36J SPM 5
7/28/2019 l11_pdp
6/43
I
+
- Preparation Actions
e
Res
Identify
program
proce
sses
Dd eOS ten et rI S raN t gd mtt i aoS fe reeed yU n in u ut E na it rces c z enik s tf aunde y tri-ho iqU oeu nsl ede rrs
Planningno peissMit
coSt ct tse nec j yuB/ek
aM
j fyoce o r ss
erddA
ariir tP
ysecruoseR
orPpo
j ne
dI
Pepu
en
snoC
tes
cifan tt n fne
memi ng Liredeeve
D
ler tmit nIe T&iat D ItS
10/9/2003 - ESD.36J SPM 6
7/28/2019 l11_pdp
7/43
i
+
- Planning ActionsDDeve
l
eP teo A rpp muS o pl pPr iD t a r nr t oe u eReOv aceR t cou Sl h igo re sr t rgq pP r kM
ae aa uu m
Sn cir r i tze o uam d nr ct eW hu aie o ec gn n dt et a us mBl leS en Executable
Program
Plan
t
esiar nla ordn P n
tnt
&m
f cenanm
eou ioes csm b ti ite gea
ssm
et mc s rai ty hl in
ie s
or enea
ac
b & M oe T n Mammusi rf sse rn eac pPlpon n p A pfe C
o ioe es ne es AD inetd r rat i m ufi ole rn efu Dan D ntasfi orPe efD Mn CoI
10/9/2003 - ESD.36J SPM 7
7/28/2019 l11_pdp
8/43
+
- Program Management Plan Topics
Summary -programdescription andmajor objectives
Assumptions &constraints
Deliverables Work breakdown
structure Major milestones
with associated exitcriteria
Staffing& trainingplan
Spending/budgetprofile
Project organization External interfaces Program plans: list
with summarydescription
Productdocumentation tree
10/9/2003 - ESD.36J SPM 8
7/28/2019 l11_pdp
9/43
+
- Other Lower Level Plans Control plans
Schedule/budget Requirements Configuration Technical Parameters Interface
Risk Management Subcontract
Management
ContractManagement
Reviews and Audits Quality Assurance Safety Reliability Problem resolution Information
Management
10/9/2003 - ESD.36J SPM 9
7/28/2019 l11_pdp
10/43
+
-
Four Basic Tensions (Trade-offs) in
Product/System Development
Performance
Schedule Risk
Cost Ref: Maier/Rechtin
One of the main jobs of the program manager (and architect)is to identify the principle tensions and resolve them
- ESD.36J SPM 10
7/28/2019 l11_pdp
11/43
+
- Factors that Influence the Program Plan
Development Program StructureApproach New Product Single organization
Update Prime with
Platform Product subs/suppliers
Platform Federation of
development associates
Product Strategy Execution New technology Does culture or customer
Significant reuse require specific execution
Integration of existing approach (V, spiral etc)subsystems
Platform based
10/9/2003 - ESD.36J SPM 11
7/28/2019 l11_pdp
12/43
+
- Characteristics of PDPAlways involves at least: Marketing core
Design functions
Challenges of the PDP Manufacturing
1. Tradeoffs
2. Dynamics3. DetailsA PDP is the unique sequence
4. Time Pressureof steps or activities, which an
5. Economicsenterprise employs to conceive,
design, and commercialize aproduct
10/9/2003 - ESD.36J SPM Ulrich and Eppinger 12
7/28/2019 l11_pdp
13/43
- ESD.36J SPM10/9/2003 13
+
-
1
Beginning
of Lifecycle
- Mission
- Requirements
- Constraints Customer
Stakeholder
User
Architect
Designer
System Engineer
ConceiveDesign
Implement
process information
turn
information
to matter
SRR
PDR CDR
iterate
iterate
The EnvironmentThe Environment: technological, economic, political, social, nature
The EnterpriseThe Enterprise
The SystemThe System
creativity
architecting
trade studies
modeling simulation
experiments
design techniques
optimization (MDO)
virtual
real
Manufacturingassembly
integration
choose
create
Conceive, Design, Implement
7/28/2019 l11_pdp
14/43
- ESD.36J SPM10/9/2003 14
+
-
End of
Lifecycle
1
The SystemThe Systemreal
AR
virtual
CustomerStakeholder
UserEOL
testdeploy
service
monitor
OperateUpgrade
Liquidate
degrade
Architect
Designer
System
Engineer
accept
control
usage
testing
validation
verification
The EnterpriseThe Enterprise
monitor
control
usage
The EnvironmentThe Environment: technological, economic, political, social, nature
System ID
behavior
prediction
Operate, Upgrade, Liquidate
7/28/2019 l11_pdp
15/43
+
- Generic PDP Process
Need
Assessment
Define
Requirements
Concept
EvaluationInternal and
external needs.
Future needs
DevelopDesign Test Implement
Trade-off Studies
Materials, Geometries
Tooling, Detailed
Specifications.
Manufacturing
Techniques
Formulate andTranslate Customer Wants
Evaluateand Needs into Engineering
ConceptRequirements.
Alternatives Top down System toComponents.
System to System
Requirements
Prototypes, Verify, Validate Design
Build and and Qualify Completion .Integrate Transition to
Subsystem TestOperations.
Lessons Learned
10/9/2003 - ESD.36J SPM 15
7/28/2019 l11_pdp
16/43
Roles in PDP*+-
*Ulrich,K. and Eppinger,S. Product design and
development, McGraw-Hill, 1995, p15.
10/9/2003 - ESD.36J SPM 16
7/28/2019 l11_pdp
17/43
+
- Key Differences in PDP Number of phases (often a superficial difference)
Phase exit criteria (and degree of formality) Requirement enforcement Reviews Prototyping Testing and Validation Timing for committing capital Degree of customer selling and interference Degree of explicit/implicit iteration (waterfall or not) Timing and degree of supplier involvement
10/9/2003 - ESD.36J SPM 17
7/28/2019 l11_pdp
18/43
+
-
PDP In the SMALL v. In the
LARGE
Product:
Org
Product
Process
SIMPLECountable interfaces
Process: Parts identifiable
COMPLEX
Very many interfaces
Parts abstracted
STATICGoals & resources
EVOLVINGGoals & resources
changingOrganization:
constant
LARGE
SMALL Big teamTeam at a table
Other Factors: clean slate vs legacy components; single product vs platform;
collocated vs distributed team; team in enterprise vs supplier involvement
10/9/2003 - ESD.36J SPM 18
7/28/2019 l11_pdp
19/43
+
-
Example: Global Telecommunications Services
Development Process
Multi-national telecommunications companyDocument-based development environment 100+ documents involved in complex new IP product 15+ internal organizations
technical, billing, product, service, etc. Redundant information and duplicated efforts Too many projects Frustrating and long development cycle
We have the process on paper
but we dont live it.
Ref: Eppinger
10/9/2003 - ESD.36J SPM 19
7/28/2019 l11_pdp
20/43
+
-
Telecommunications Development:The Planned Process
Concept Approval
CONCEPT
SPECIFICATIONS
Network
Plan
Reqts
Engg
Specs
Specification Approval
OPERATE
Four-Phase DevelopmentProcess
150 Documents in DSMModel
Business
Reqts
Ops.
Implem.
& Billing
Cust.
Service
EnggDETAILED DESIGN
Launch Approval
PLANNING AND
System
AND BUILD
10/9/2003 - ESD.36J SPM 20
7/28/2019 l11_pdp
21/43
+
-
Telecommunications Development:
The Actual ProcessConcept Approval
CONCEPT
SPECIFICATIONS
Network
Plan
Reqts
Engg
Specs
OPERATE
Business
Reqts
Ops.
Implem.
& Billing
Cust.
Service
EnggDETAILED DESIGN
Launch Approval
Critical Problem:
PLANNING AND
System
AND BUILD
Ongoing Iterations after Specifications Phase
10/9/2003 - ESD.36J SPM 21
7/28/2019 l11_pdp
22/43
+
-
Telecommunications Development:
An Improved Process
Financial analysis
Concept ApprovalCONCEPT
SPECIFICATIONS
Network
Plan
Reqts
Engg
Specs
Specification
Approval
OPERATE
Business
Reqts
Ops.
Implem.
& Billing
Cust.
Service
EnggDETAILED DESIGN
Launch Approval
Solution: Enables Parallel Design Efforts
!
Gate is Critical:Frozen product requirements
Project plan for detailed design
PLANNING AND
System
AND BUILD
Planned Iterations in Specs PhaseX-Functional Resources in SpecsFormal Spec Approval Gate
Specification Approval
Frozen technical specifications
10/9/2003 - ESD.36J SPM 22
7/28/2019 l11_pdp
23/43
+
-
Phased vs. Spiral PD Processes
Phased, Staged, or Waterfall PD Process(dominant for over 30 years)
LaunchDefinitionLevel
Design
DetailDesign and Test
ProductPlanning
ProductProductSystem-
Integrate
Spiral PD Process(primarily used in software development)
Launch
Define, Design, Build, Test, Integrate
Define, Design, Build, Test, Integrate
Define, Design, Build, Test, Integrate
Product
Planning
Product
Process Design Questions: How many spirals should be planned? Which phases should be in each spiral?
10/9/2003 - ESD.36J SPMWhen to conduct gate reviews?
23
7/28/2019 l11_pdp
24/43
Stage Gate PD Process+
-
-10/9/2003 24
Release
Planning
Design
Design
DetailedDesign
Integration &
Test
Reviews
Iterations
(planned)
Cross-Phase
Iterations
(unplanned)
Refs: Robert Cooper, Winning at New
Products 3rded., 2001.
ESD.36J SPM
Concept
System-Level
Within-Phase
+
7/28/2019 l11_pdp
25/43
Spiral PD Process-
10/9/2003 - ESD.36J SPM 25
Risk
Analysis
Prototype 1
Concept of
operation
Requirements
validation
Design validation and
verification
Release
Acceptance
test
Integration
and test
Unit
test
Code
Software
Software
require-
ments
Requirements
plan, lifecycle
plan
Development
plan
Integration and
test plan
Plan the next
iteration
PartitionReview
Commit to an approach
for the
next iteration
Determine
objectives, alternatives,
and constraints
Identify
and
resolve risks
Evaluate
alternatives
Develop the deliverables for the
iteration and verify that
they are correct
Cumulative cost
Detailed
design
benchmarks
models,Simulations,
Prototype 2Prototype 3
Operational
prototype
Risk
Analysis
Risk
Analysis
RiskAnalysis
START
product
design
Steve McConnell, RapidDevelopment, 1996, pp. 136-39.
Barry Boehm,A Spiral Model of
Software Development andEnhancement, 1988.
Adapted from:
7/28/2019 l11_pdp
26/43
+
- Spiral PD Process (Simplified)
Planning
Detailed
Design
Integration
& Test
System-Level
Design
Design
(Cumulative Effort)
Release
Concept
Reviews
Cost
10/9/2003 - ESD.36J SPM 26
7/28/2019 l11_pdp
27/43
Spiral PD Process+-
Design
Design
Integration &
Test
Release
Reviews
Planning
Concept
System-
Level Design
Detailed
Time
10/9/2003 - ESD.36J SPM 27
7/28/2019 l11_pdp
28/43
Concept
Requirementanalysis
Medium High Priority: Detailed design, test
High Priority: Detailed design, test
Medium Priority: Detailed design, test
Medium Low Priority: Detailed design, test
Low Priority: Detailed design, test
+
-
Design-to-Schedule,
Design-to-Budget PD Processes
Release
s
Planning
Design
Sys-Level
Design
Detailed design, test
Detailed design, test
Run out of time or budget here
Concept
Medium-High Priority:
High Priority: Detailed design, test
Medium Priority:
Medium-Low Priority: Detailed design, test
Low Priority: Detailed design, test
10/9/2003 - ESD.36J SPM 28
7/28/2019 l11_pdp
29/43
+
-
Other PD Processes
Evolutionary deliveryEvolutionary prototypingExtreme programming (software only)Modified stage gatesSet-based concurrent engineeringShort-term solutions, i.e. acquisitions
Ref: Steve McConnell, Rapid
Development, 1996, pp. 136-39.
10/9/2003 - ESD.36J SPM 29
7/28/2019 l11_pdp
30/43
(Hybrid) Case Study: Xerox +-
Hardware (DC 460-ST) and software (Endeavor) Large company and steady platform (variant) products Iterations
TTM process technically a stage gate but w/some importantexceptions Software subprocess Internal experiments and waivers
Risk emphasis on controlling schedule
10/9/2003 - ESD.36J SPM 30
7/28/2019 l11_pdp
31/43
+
-
Xerox Time-to-Market (TTM) Process
Define market
attack plan &
technology
Define product
& deliverDesign Demonstrate Delight
technologyproduct product
Deliver
product customers
Software Development Sub-Process
10/9/2003 - ESD.36J SPM 31
P d t D l t P
7/28/2019 l11_pdp
32/43
+
-
Product Development ProcessDesign
There are many possible PD processesto choose from.
Spectrum from staged to spiral processesPD processes should be designed to
address project risks byPlanning iterations in the process
Can be within or across phasesScheduling reviews to control the process
Cross-functional review Generally reviews end phases (no backtracking)
10/9/2003 - ESD.36J SPM 32
7/28/2019 l11_pdp
33/43
+
-Proposed PDP Design Procedure
1. Identify and prioritize the project risks.2. Assign each risks to a specific phase.3. Plan the necessary iteration cycles within
each stage to address the assigned risks.
4.
Schedule reviews at the completion ofeach phase.
Review ReviewReviewPhase PhasePhase
Risks Risks Risks10/9/2003 - ESD.36J SPM 33
7/28/2019 l11_pdp
34/43
+
-Key similarities between PDPs
Attempt to meet customer needs Discrete phases of development
Iteration in some form Existence of reviews or gatesAttempt to control development risks
10/9/2003 - ESD.36J SPM 34
7/28/2019 l11_pdp
35/43
+
-Key differences between PDPs
Names and number of development phases Type of iteration Type of review
Customer interface points Product complexity Risks addressed
10/9/2003 - ESD.36J SPM 35
7/28/2019 l11_pdp
36/43
+
-Identification of key risks
Risk ProfileCategory
ofrisk
Technical/
Performance
Market/
User
Budget
Schedule
1 2 3 4 5
Low High(Coord./Variation) (Unk-unks/chaotic)
Level of risk
10/9/2003 - ESD.36J SPM 36
7/28/2019 l11_pdp
37/43
+
-Iteration parameters
10/9/2003
Breadth of iterations1 2 3
Narrow Comprehensive(Within 1phase) (Across 3 or more phases)Number of inter
phase loops0 1 2 3 4
planning
Concept
design
System level
design
Detailed
design
System
testing
release
Product
Product
None 4 or more(No iteration) (Multiple iterations)Level of planning
1 2 3 4 5
None Planned but Planned
(Unexpected)- ESD.36J SPM & schedulednot scheduled 37
7/28/2019 l11_pdp
38/43
+
- Review/Gate parameters
Format
of stage
gate
Rigidity
Final standard Phase check
( igi
FrequencyFrequent Sporadic
(After each phase) (After 3 or more phases)
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4 5Outputs
Review
/OK?
Next stage
Deliverables
Yes
NoRigid criteria) (Less r d criteria)
Action stage
10/9/2003 - ESD.36J SPM 38
+
7/28/2019 l11_pdp
39/43
+
-
Parameterized theoretical PDPs
Parameter Waterfall/ Design to Evolutionary SpiralStage-gate Sched/Budget prototyping
Start End
Iterations
Breadth 1 2 1 3 3
# of interphase loops
0 Unspecified 0 Unspec
ified
Unspecified,but many
Planning 2 3 2 3 5
Rigidity 1 2 3 3 5
Reviewgates
Frequency 1 2 2 1 Unspecified
Risk Profile of Manages tech Manages Manages Manageskey risks risk well sched./budget market risk well market risk
risk well well
10/9/2003 - ESD.36J SPM 39
+
7/28/2019 l11_pdp
40/43
IDe
Sat. Rad.
s
Ref: D. Unger+
- Parameterized actual PDPs
Market riskdominates
5
4
4
3
2
Schedule is king
1 2-3
1 4
3 4
0 3
1 3
DC SW
3 3-43Planning
Little marketambi
ProfileRisk
gates
Iterations
1 21
3 41Rigidity
1 2phase loops
1 22
ITTParameter
guityUnknown
Review
Frequency
Unknown# of inter
Breadth
Sikor ky
10/9/2003 - ESD.36J SPM 40
+
7/28/2019 l11_pdp
41/43
+
- Tradeoff in PDP design
Predictability Early spec definition Narrow iteration Frequent, rigid reviews Reduces technical
risk
Flexibility Market tests to
ensure viability
Broad iterations Loose, multi-phase
reviews
Reduces market risk10/9/2003 - ESD.36J SPM 41
+
7/28/2019 l11_pdp
42/43
+
-
IDEO Product Case
What are the characteristics of the IDEO product development process?
10/9/2003 - ESD.36J SPM 42
+
7/28/2019 l11_pdp
43/43
+
-
Conclusions
Preparation and Planning are important PDPs are project plan templates Phase-Gate versus Spiral continuum Hybrid forms in real company contexts PDP design driven by dominant risks
Technical, market, schedule, budget Key distinguishers/PDP design factors
Iterations: breadth, number, planned/unplanned Gates: rigidity (rigor), frequency
10/9/2003 - ESD.36J SPM 43
