Business Matters - Whitepaper How to Improve Your Company’s Program Management Effectiveness BizTech | 800.804.4715 | 3306 Executive Parkway Suite 201 Toledo, OH 43606 | info@gobiztech.com | www.gobiztech.com How to Improve Your Company’s Program Management Effectiveness By Ted Barth, Managing Partner, BNW Manufacturing Associates LLC Program Management Effectiveness Overview One of the largest paradigms in project and program management is the proper use or lack of use of the proper fundamental principles and project technology tools. This paradigm causes laborious effort to plan, track, and be proactive on project schedule, work requirements and capacity, and project costs and prevents quality performance of projects. There are, in fact, a number of best practices that practitioners can utilize to avoid or eliminate laborious effort, simplify the project management process, and greatly improve project and program performance. This whitepaper will summarize the major best practices in five categories—schedule; resource Performance & capacity; integration of projects in master schedules on Management • Schedule major, complex programs; cost; and technology. • Resource & Capacity • Revenue & Budgets Interestingly enough, these best practices are universal to • Engineering Change Technical Stewardship Control the five major, robust technology alternative choices of • Process & Product • Document Management project software manufacturers. Management • Specifications & Requirements PMP (Project Manager Professional) Certification If you view program manager effectiveness in the adjacent skill set pie chart, you will understand that the upper left hand quadrant contains all the aspects of schedule, work, engineering changes, documentation, and cost that pertain to their ability to provide the project driven organization with forecasted outcomes in the most efficient manner. • Engineering Changes Leadership • Forecasting • Recovery • Collaboration/ Meeting Management Effectiveness of Scheduling Functionality The number one project scheduling software application is spreadsheets. Spreadsheets are popular but in reality very ineffective. They are the most popular because they easy to use, require minimal training, and require no company reporting standards. The negatives outweigh the positives- spreadsheets are more laborious for data entry and maintenance by 3:1; rarely have schedule baselines which foster accountability; although they track plan and actual, they cannot forecast; and are impossible to roll up data for executive decision making. 2 0 Finish Plan REVISED Finish Plan B. Thomas 2/26/08 2/26/08 2/26/08 2/26/08 3/26/08 4/3/08 4/7/08 4/2/08 4/14/08 4/9/08 4/21/08 5 E. Frank 10/10/07 10/19/07 10/17/07 10/22/07 11/28/07 12/12/07 12/17/07 12/5/07 2/7/08 2/7/08 12/12/07 3/14/08 12/14/07 12/17/07 12/5/07 2/8/08 2/8/08 12/12/07 3/14/08 Die # Readiness Plan Designer Kickoff Plan Readiness Actual WSP WSP Front Door Inner RH / LH Rear Door Inner RH / LH BS BS WSP Fender RH / LH BS SSP Liftgate Outer SR A A 23 16 Expert Plan D3 RH D3 LH (symm opp) 5 W. Grifka 5 J. Thompson 6 17 PP 3 22 2/26/08 Belt line and mirror flag splits. Add overdraw and finish form. Preliminary automation study completed. Official 11/29/07automation 1/17/08 2/29/08 1/24/08 3/10/08 3/3/08 as 0** 4-28. 1/31/08 study T6-11. 1/17/08 Layout and direct trim at lower2/26/08 corners of Door. "Final" surface model available Surface changing again with E/C "B" release T6-16. DDRM 4-29, DDKO T5-23(draw) and 6-2(line dies) with V5 3DDP. 11/22/07 1/17/08 8-7 there's no mirror pocket issue. Split issues with wheel flare offset formation. Will add overdraw. PDO 11/29/07Ditto, except 1/17/08 1/17/08 2/29/08 2/26/08 1/24/08 3/10/08 3/4/08 Final1/31/08 surface in product model available as 0** 4-28. DDRM 4-29, DDKO T6-12 with V5 3DDP. 4/2/08 11/22/07 1/17/08 3/3/08 11/22/07 1/17/08 improved in many areas with critical thinning2/13/08 remaining at the weld line/mirror, along belt line, in lower rear 11/29/07Formability 1/17/08 1/17/08 2/13/08 1/24/08 2/22/08 2/22/08 1/31/08 corner of window, and forward of latch. ASME to work belt line and window corner areas, BIW concessions required for mirror and inside J-Plane. Will need open hem at B-Pillar under belt molding. Final PDO Surface model available as 0** 4-28 - use to create 3DDP. Additional concessions required. DDRM T6-2, DDKO T6-18 with V5 3DDP. 11/29/07 1/17/08 1/17/08 2/13/08 2/13/08 1/24/08 2/22/08 2/22/08 1/31/08 4/14/08 8-19 Page 1 of 4 Baseline 8/1 2/27/08 4/9/08 4/21/08 Proceeding with 4 die line up run in 144" line. Handle pocket changed to "race track" style copying CS. New data received 4-16 - missing final hinge and spoiler interface formations, and Tail Lamp form. Final PDO surface into product model available as 0** 4-28. Splits remaining at light bar attach points will be addressed by BIW Engineering. New handle pocket design supplied as D% file. Will proceed with E/C "B" for die design with DDRM 6-3 and DDKO T6-19 with V5 3DDP. Any robust Project Technology software tool will do all of the work that spreadsheets do not do--- including the singular most important functions—provide a critical path for exception management (productivity), provide an accurate forecast of Project Scheduling Engine expected schedule outcomes, and provide project schedule Start Variance Critical Path 8/10 8/22 8/30 variances and resulting accountability. Actual Rem. Work There are twelve best practices that all users of robust project technology can learn and utilize in order to achieve good project schedules. These practices primarily have to do with the 12/12/07 Formability issues with finish forming Door Cut Line flange - ASME simulating. Hole along door line return flange is to be a clearance hole. Need: Umix cam design study and V5 development / 3DDP. GO-1 data supplied at D06 is sufficient to proceed with Die Process maturation to design. ASME reverse engineered flare interface - ASME surface was safe, now splitting in the "A" release. Catwalk and fascia flanges designed at "0" degree flange angle with no compensation for springback. Attachment tab at cowl tip causing scrap lock condition. BIW will provide concessions. Need PDO to approve change of cat walk flange to 3 degrees open. Will proceed with DDRM 6-4 and DDKO T6-6 with V5 3DDP. Have notified the Studio, Adv Surfacing Group and BIW of the 3 degree open requested and used the LPT for support this week. Received no feed back. Design study for trim at nose in 1 die in progress.. 8-11 7-22 4/2/08 1/15/08 Need product concessions to address thinning/wrinkle issues. . Latest data shows thinning in the 30% range. Binder raised 6 MM. PPDC representative data available T4-25 received 5-2. Additional concessions required. Will proceed with 3DDP with DDRM 6-2, and DDKO 6-12 with V5 3DDP. 8-9 7-14 6-10 4/7/08 2/27/08 56 1/17/08 8-7 6-6 1/11/08 12/12/07 2/26/08 7-12 12/5/07 57 2/26/08 6-6 12/18/07 58 1/17/08 12/29 12/8 59 12/22 12/1 60 1/16/08 12/15 11/3 61 11/22/07 8-9 4/3/08 62 12/5/07 E. Frank 7-12 3/26/08 Dec 63 B. Thomas 7-7 12/17/07 64 10/19/07 Dies 11/28/07 Nov 65 12/18/07 11/24 66 11/17 2/26/08 67 12/17/07 11/10 68 10/27 69 11/28/07 10/20 70 10/13 11/12/07 9/8 71 11/12/07 72 October 10/6 10/17/07 8/4 73 10/10/07 7-7 6-6 21 X D4 RH D4 LH (symm opp) 74 10/17/07 LD/LX PPDC 10-20 E. Smith 9/1 5 75 WD D2 RH D2 LH (symm opp) 6-2 15 X 8/25 5 8/18 3 D1 RH D1 15 LHX(symm opp) 6-2 76 10/19/07 77 September 8/11 SS - Blank A 78 LX Theme conf. 8-21 7/7 J. Thompson A+D % 79 LD Theme conf. 7-25 5 21 X 80 10/10/07 11/28/07 10/22/07 August 7/28 81 7/21 82 7/14 83 W. Grifka 84 LX PDO input due 7-7 6/9 July 6/30 6/2 D4 RH D4 LH (symm opp) 5 6/23 85 10/17/07 10/19/07 9/29 10/10/07 9/22 E. Smith 6/16 86 D3 RH D3 LH (symm opp) LD PDO input due 6-9 GO-1 Dev 5 Press Line / Automation Build Source GO-1 E/C Level A M55372320-1 A 2 5 June Simulation Status Die Process Engineer CI B/S/A Otr (Mega) DC METD 5 Door Outer RR / RH LH METD Door Outer FR / RH LH WSP METD WSP METD Master Timing D2 RH D2 LH (symm opp) 55112466-7 METD 20011 WK74 WBVP BSA Otr. MBT Ship to PFMEA Risk/Forecast 5 Kickoff Actual DELIVERY 1 2011 WK74 1 0 Pattern Rel. Actual 3 D1 RH D1 LH (symm opp) 1 Die Status REVISED REVISED Pattern Rel Expert Actual Pattern Rel. Expert Plan Plan Plan SS - Blank Part Number 9/15 Part Name PPDC 922 Part Status 8/15 Finish Variance Portions Copyrighted © 2010 BNW Manufacturing Associates LLC 3/18/08 3/3/08 How to Improve Your Company’s Program Management Effectiveness By Ted Barth, Managing Partner, BNW Manufacturing Associates LLC granularity of the tasks with work and the workflow linking of tasks and the limiting of relationships/ schedule constraints that destroy critical path calculations that forecast schedule outcomes that can be acted upon. They also provide project schedule baselines and standard “rollup” rules that promote accountability which when acted upon, produces high performance results. See adjacent diagrams. Effectiveness of Resource & Capacity Functionality A typical paradigm that exists is that resource requirements and capacity are somehow related and capacity can be resolved with a technology “leveling” function—highly promoted by project software manufacturers. This is simply not true-- resource requirements can be effectively developed by utilizing resource and capacity best practices allowing both of them to be independently time phased. These resource requirements and resource capacity are totally independent of each other and are never equal. This principle leads project management organizations to the ten best practices resulting in program manager effectiveness. Granularity of tasks that will accept generic resources (standard skill set resources) and not accept organization roles (too broad and too general) nor named resources (names of individual contributors) which is too detailed are another paradigm. Organizational leadership can assure the project management office (PMO) that Resource Managers will be accountable by providing resource managers the rolled up multiple project schedule tools filtered for their needs and the capacity planning tools. Forecast Capacity by Resource Manager Generic Resource Group XXX Sub System Production Activity Report All ProgramsPrograms- Open Status (2) 4 Die Redraw 7 Day Rolling Date Range xx/xx – xx/xx W/C # xxx (1) 2 Die D1 (6) 4 Die Dates D2 D3 Baseline D4 Part No. Oper. Task Rem. Duration 07JS41 D1-11 xxxxx xxxxx xxx days 08LX xxxxx xxxxx xxx days Prgr. XXX Sub System Die D2-13 Start Finish xx xx xx xx Plan Actual Start Finish Start Finish CP xx xx xx xx Yes xx xx xx xx No Monthly Stacked Generic Resource Requirements (X) X Die (X) 5 Die D1 SRS Purchasing Activity Report (X) 4 Die D2 6 Week Rolling Date Range xx/xx – xx/xx All Programs-Open Status D3 D4 Dates 08 XXXX Sub System Baseline (X) X Die (X) 5 Die D1 (X) 4 Die Alt. Part No. Die xxxxxx D1-11 Oper/Task Pattern Ship Start Finish Start Finish Start Finish xx/xx xx/xx xx/xx xx/xx xx/xx xx/xx CP N xxxxxx Casting xx/xx xx/xx xx/xx xx/xx xx/xx xx/xx N 08 xxxx xxxxxx D2-14 METD METD Supplier #1 Supplier Ship Rec Stamp Plt. #2___ Y N Betz N N Betz D4-16 2D Maching xx/xx xx/xx xx/xx xx/xx xx/xx xx/xx N N Y 08 xxxx xxxxxx D3-17 3D Finishing xx/xx xx/xx xx/xx xx/xx xx/xx xx/xx Y Y Y ATC 08 xxxx xxxxxx D1-13 Home Line T/O xx/xx xx/xx xx/xx xx/xx xx/xx xx/xx N Y Y WSP 07 xxxx xxxxxx D2-31 DieSet Ship xx/xx xx/xx xx/xx xx/xx xx/xx xx/xx Y Y N SSP D2 D3 Plan Prgm 07 JS41 07 xxxx ICC Project Group Sekley D4 Once program management system forecasts the time phased resource requirements, resource managers will utilize the information to schedule project task work within his/ her control. Resource manager own Capacity forecasts then are compared to generic resource requirements and provide intermediate term to long term capacity management tools the organization needs to not allow internal resource capacity constraints to interfere with customer scheduling. These are a few of the ten best practices provide the easiest, shortest path to project performance by providing project managers of multiple projects much a more proactive scheduling and capacity planning by resource managers to supply projects with the right resources at the right time—thus promoting high performance schedule and budgeted work performance. Using robust technology--activity reports, assignment views, and capacity views and data roll up--- provides the resource manager the tools to execute and the project manager the tools to forecast resource bottlenecks causing unfavorable schedule and cost variances. Page 2 of 4 Portions Copyrighted © 2010 BNW Manufacturing Associates LLC How to Improve Your Company’s Program Management Effectiveness By Ted Barth, Managing Partner, BNW Manufacturing Associates LLC Effectiveness of Integrated Master Schedule Functionality Prog Process Subc.Activity Report Part Number Die 08JC49 D_08JC_05076746_DRIFR 08JC49 D_08JC_05076746_DRIFR Task Name D.1.13 Pre-process- Upper & Lower D.2.14 Pre-process Due BASE START BASE FINISH START DATE 1 11/15/2006 11/16/2006 11/30/2006 1 12/7/2006 12/8/2006 FINISH DATE ACT START 12/1/2006 12/7/2006 12/8/2006 Process Advanced Engineer.Activity Feasibility Activity Report Report D.3.15 08JC49 D_08JC_05076746_DRIFR Part Number08JC49 D_08JC_05076747_DRIFL Die 08JC49 D_08JC_05076747_DRIFL D.1.13 08JC49 D_08JC_05076746_DRIFR 08JC49 D_08JC_05076933_RFO D.2.14 08JC49 D_08JC_05076746_DRIFR 08JC49 D_08JC_05076933_RFO D.3.15 08JC49 D_08JC_05076746_DRIFR 08JC49 D_08JC_05076933_RFO Pre-process D.2.14 Pre-process Task Name D.3.15 Pre-process 08JC49 D_08JC_05076747_DRIFL Prog Due D.4.29 Pre-process Pre-process- Upper & Lower D.2.14 Blocking Upper BASE START 1 11/15/2006 Pre-process 1 D.2.14 1 12/22/2006 1/3/2007 12/21/2006 1 12/11/2006 12/12/2006 12/11/2006 1 12/22/2006 BASE START 1/3/2007 FINISH 12/21/2006 ACT 12/22/2006 Blocking Lower -9 11/17/2006 D.2.14 08JC49 D_08JC_05076933_RFO 08JC49 D_08JC_05076933_RFO D.2.14 08JC49 D_08JC_05076933_RFO 08JC49 D_08JC_05076785_DRIRL D.3.29 08JC49 D_08JC_05076933_RFO 08JC49 D_08JC_05076785_DRIRL Blocking Lower D.5.31 Blocking Pad -21 11/17/2006 Blocking Pad D.1.13 Pre-process- Upper &6 Lower11/17/2006 Blocking Pad D.1.13 Blocking Upper 11 11/17/2006 6 11/18/2006 Y 12/15/2006 1/5/2007 12/20/200612/11/2006 12/21/200612/7/2006 12/20/200612/13/2006 Y -8 12/4/2006 11/27/2006 12/6/200612/11/2006 12/12/200612/7/2006 12/6/200612/13/2006 N -8 12/4/2006 0.7 11/21/2006 0.7 0.9 0.9 12/7/2006 0.9 N 0.9 11/29/2006 11/17/200612/9/2006 11/28/200612/14/2006 1 12/8/2006 N 12/15/2006 0.9 N 0.9 CP N Sched. Perf. Var. 0.7 N 0.7 N 0.9 -8 12/4/2006 12/11/2006 12/7/2006 12/13/2006 12/7/2006 Y 0.9 08JC49 D_08JC_05076933_RFO -8 12/4/2006 12/11/2006 12/7/2006 12/13/2006 12/7/2006 Y 11/29/2006 11/14/2006 11/20/2006 Blocking Pad 12/13/2006 12/7/2006 12/7/2006 12/4/2006 12/11/2006 D.1.13 Pre-process- Upper & Lower 1 11/15/2006 11/16/2006 12/11/2006 12/12/2006 N 0.9 D.1.13 Blocking Upper 1 12/8/2006 12/9/2006 12/14/2006 12/15/2006 N 0.9 Process Subc.Activity Report Part Number Die Task Name D.1.13 Pre-process- Upper & Lower D.2.14 Pre-process Due BASE START BASE FINISH START DATE 1 11/15/2006 11/16/2006 11/30/2006 1 12/7/2006 12/8/2006 Y 0.9 -8 08JC49 D_08JC_05076785_DRIRL 08JC49 D_08JC_05076785_DRIRL D.3.15 08JC49 D_08JC_05076746_DRIFR Pre-process 0.9 Y 0.9 Blocking Upper Prog 0.9 0.9 12/7/2006 N 12/12/2006 Blocking Lower 08JC49 D_08JC_05076746_DRIFR Y 11/27/2006 11/21/200612/11/2006 11/30/200612/7/2006 11/21/200612/13/2006 N -8 12/4/2006 11/27/2006 12/9/200611/16/2006 12/15/200612/11/2006 1 11/15/2006 D.5.31 08JC49 D_08JC_05076746_DRIFR 0.9 0.9 Y FINISH DATE 0.9 ACT START 12/1/2006 12/7/2006 12/8/2006 Process Advanced Engineer.Activity Feasibility Activity ReportReport Boeing 787 Program 0.7 N N D.5.31 D.5.31 Y N 0.7 0.7 0.7 12/7/2006 08JC49 D_08JC_05076933_RFO 08JC49 D_08JC_05076933_RFO 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.9 Y 11/20/2006 Blocking Pad 0.7 Y 0.9 1/3/2007 12/21/200611/29/2006 12/22/200611/14/2006 6 11/18/2006 1/4/2007 08JC49 D_08JC_05076933_RFO Sched. Perf. Var. 0.7 N N N 11/28/2006 12/22/2006 Blocking Upper D.5.31 N N N N 11/30/2006 1/3/2007 12/21/200611/27/2006 12/22/200612/9/2006 6 11/17/2006 12/12/2006 12/11/200611/29/2006 12/12/200611/17/2006 11 11/17/2006 1 0 Blocking Pad Blocking Pad CP 12/8/2006 12/7/200611/27/2006 12/8/200611/21/2006 -21 11/17/2006 12/11/2006 Blocking Pad Blocking Upper D.2.14 Y 12/12/2006 12/22/2006 CP Sched. 0 1/4/2007 12/20/2006 FINISH DATE 1/5/2007 DATE 12/20/2006 START 12/21/2006Perf. Var. 11/16/2006 11/30/200611/27/2006 12/1/2006 12/6/2006 N 0.7 -9 11/17/2006 12/12/2006 12/6/2006 1 D.4.30 D.5.31 D.3.29 1 12/7/2006 12/22/2006 Pre-process Pre-process Pre-process D.4.30 Pre-process Blocking Lower D.2.14 08JC49 D_08JC_05076747_DRIFL 08JC49 D_08JC_05076933_RFO D.3.15 08JC49 D_08JC_05076747_DRIFL 08JC49 D_08JC_05076933_RFO D.4.29 08JC49 D_08JC_05076747_DRIFL 08JC49 D_08JC_05076933_RFO D.2.14 08JC49 D_08JC_05076933_RFO 08JC49 D_08JC_05076933_RFO 1 12/22/2006 1/3/2007 12/21/2006 1 12/11/2006 12/12/2006 12/11/2006 12/22/2006 Y Pre-process Task Name D.3.15 Pre-process D.2.14 08JC49 D_08JC_05076746_DRIFR 08JC49 D_08JC_05076933_RFO D.3.15 08JC49 D_08JC_05076746_DRIFR 08JC49 D_08JC_05076933_RFO D.2.14 08JC49 D_08JC_05076747_DRIFL 08JC49 D_08JC_05076933_RFO Pre-process D.2.14 Blocking Lower 1 12/7/2006 12/8/2006 12/7/200611/27/2006 12/8/200611/21/2006 -21 11/17/2006 N 11/30/2006 0.7 11/21/2006 N 0.9 Pre-process D.2.14 Blocking Pad 1 12/22/2006 1/3/2007 12/21/200611/27/2006 12/22/200612/9/2006 6 11/17/2006 Y 12/15/2006 0.7 N 0.9 1 12/11/2006 12/12/2006 12/11/200611/29/2006 12/12/200611/17/2006 11 11/17/2006 N 11/28/2006 D.3.15 08JC49 D_08JC_05076747_DRIFL 08JC49 D_08JC_05076933_RFO D.4.29 08JC49 D_08JC_05076747_DRIFL 08JC49 D_08JC_05076933_RFO D.2.14 08JC49 D_08JC_05076933_RFO 08JC49 D_08JC_05076933_RFO Pre-process D.4.30 Blocking Pad 1 12/22/2006 1/3/2007 12/21/200611/29/2006 12/22/200611/14/2006 6 11/18/2006 Y 11/20/2006 Pre-process D.5.31 Blocking Upper 0 1/4/2007 Blocking Lower -9 11/17/2006 D.2.14 08JC49 D_08JC_05076933_RFO 08JC49 D_08JC_05076933_RFO D.2.14 08JC49 D_08JC_05076933_RFO 08JC49 D_08JC_05076785_DRIRL D.3.29 08JC49 D_08JC_05076933_RFO 08JC49 D_08JC_05076785_DRIRL Blocking Lower D.5.31 Blocking Pad -21 11/17/2006 Blocking Pad D.1.13 Pre-process- Upper &6 Lower11/17/2006 Blocking Pad D.1.13 Blocking Upper 08JC49 D_08JC_05076747_DRIFL Part Number08JC49 D_08JC_05076747_DRIFL Die 08JC49 D_08JC_05076747_DRIFL D.1.13 08JC49 D_08JC_05076746_DRIFR 08JC49 D_08JC_05076933_RFO D.4.30 08JC49 D_08JC_05076933_RFO D.4.29 Pre-process Pre-process- Upper & Lower D.2.14 Blocking Upper Pre-process D.3.29 Blocking Upper D.5.31 Blocking Pad Blocking Pad Due 1 BASE START 11/15/2006 11 11/17/2006 6 11/18/2006 1 12/22/2006 BASE START 1/3/2007 FINISH 12/21/2006 ACT 12/12/2006 0.7 D.2.14 Prog 12/22/2006 CP Sched. 0 1/4/2007 12/20/2006 FINISH DATE 1/5/2007 DATE 12/20/2006 START 12/21/2006Perf. Var. 11/16/2006 11/30/200611/27/2006 12/1/2006 12/6/2006 N 0.7 -9 11/17/2006 12/12/2006 12/6/2006 1/5/2007 12/20/200612/11/2006 12/21/200612/7/2006 12/20/200612/13/2006 Y -8 12/4/2006 11/27/2006 12/6/200612/11/2006 12/12/200612/7/2006 12/6/200612/13/2006 N -8 12/4/2006 0.7 Y 0.7 0.9 N 0.9 Y 0.9 0.9 12/7/2006 Y 0.9 0.9 11/27/2006 11/21/200612/11/2006 11/30/200612/7/2006 11/21/200612/13/2006 N -8 12/4/2006 0.9 12/7/2006 Y 0.9 11/27/2006 12/9/200611/16/2006 12/15/200612/11/2006 1 11/15/2006 N 12/12/2006 0.9 N 0.9 11/29/2006 11/17/200612/9/2006 11/28/200612/14/2006 1 12/8/2006 N 12/15/2006 0.9 N 0.9 11/29/2006 11/14/2006 11/20/2006 N 0.9 08JC49 D_08JC_05076933_RFO D.5.31 Blocking Upper -8 12/4/2006 12/11/2006 12/7/2006 12/13/2006 12/7/2006 Y 0.9 D.5.31 Blocking Lower -8 12/4/2006 12/11/2006 12/7/2006 12/13/2006 12/7/2006 Y 0.9 Blocking Pad 12/13/2006 12/7/2006 D.5.31 0.7 Y N N 08JC49 D_08JC_05076933_RFO -8 12/4/2006 12/11/2006 08JC49 D_08JC_05076785_DRIRL D.1.13 Pre-process- Upper & Lower 1 11/15/2006 11/16/2006 12/11/2006 12/12/2006 N 0.9 08JC49 D_08JC_05076785_DRIRL D.1.13 Blocking Upper 1 12/8/2006 12/9/2006 12/14/2006 12/15/2006 N 0.9 08JC49 D_08JC_05076933_RFO N 0.7 0.7 0.7 12/7/2006 12/7/2006 Y Air Management Systems Bombardier C Series Program Electrical Power System Program management effectiveness has the tendency to be worse organizations with very large programs that have multiple systems and sub systems due to the complexity of linking workflow processes between these complex, large programs. The best practice to improve program management effectiveness is to have all project, sub system, system, and program data in a single, central database and provides the ability to build integrated data toolsets that provide program managers the program information they need to more effectively manage a complex program. See adjacent diagram showing multiple projects of systems and subsystems on the left feeding data reporting on the right showing resource manager information discussed in resource and capacity functionality section. 0.9 Effectiveness Cost Functionality Cost (PMM5) Material Cost & Subcontractors have Unique Project Costs have a unique set of criteria that will Granularity allow an advanced level of project management Biz Intelligence is Ultimate Goal maturity and yet keep it simple. There are five Cos ts-K now nO nly best practices that allow this result. Man hours in T otals Cos t to Rev Co e nu forecasted and progress tracking from resources e Ga sts p -Kn Kno wn T ow ooli ni n nD g should be extended by standard generic rates to M ar eta ket Valu il es provide man hours- human resource investment “Vital Few” costs. This cost best practices leverages the resource functionality best practice of a previous section. Purchased costs should be grouped in material packs in the ERP system through organization of Engineering bills of materials structure and those material costs transferred with line of business integration to the central project database. Planned costs should not necessarily be assumed to be the same as baseline cost since baseline costs may or may not be achievable compared to historical experience. These are some of the cost best practices that promote program manager effectiveness. Start ResourceCapacity Mgt Project Finish- Next Month In Process Close & Forecast # 28% Man hour ResourceCapacity Mgt Single Db Scheduling 04 05 06 07 08 Budget Var. Project Start 68% EAC Cost Forecasts 09 10 Program Management Effectiveness Best Practices—Functionality- Technology Page 3 of 4 Top Down: Bottom Up: Project & Program Management Database Portfolio Management DataBase Plan Enterprise Resources Tracking Gantt Project Finish Date Baseline Plan Project Finish Date Baseline Project Plan Data All Projects View Tracking Gantt User Accout Permissions Report Data All Resource View One of the little understood advancements in Technology has been available from all the manufacturers of robust project software tools since the year 2000- 2002 period. This technology is the web based access to a central database, otherwise known as enterprise technology. This technology has opened the Project A- Project Manager A Web Parts Project B- Project Manager B Sharepoint Document Management- Overall or Project/ Portfolio Workspace FilesCatia XLS, DOC Issues Photos & Pictures Engrg Changes Rev B Portions Copyrighted © 2010 BNW Manufacturing Associates LLC How to Improve Your Company’s Program Management Effectiveness By Ted Barth, Managing Partner, BNW Manufacturing Associates LLC door to a host of program manager and engineering productivity opportunities. Having all project data in a single data base and having it web accessible to all users—project managers, resource managers, and operational and financial executive is the single most powerful best practice of all. There are five best practices in this area. That startling fact that to achieve this powerful functionality that 90% of the total functionality is contained in that project scheduling standalone functionality that everyone already has—the enterprise system capability just unleashes these functional best practices. There are several best practices – which is not available with all the robust technologies—is an integrated document management database that allows document “space” with the project and programs. Another one with the Bottom up technology now has Top down technology “Portfolio Management” technology---- all integrated into the same central database. This technology allows organizations that formally plan “pipelines” of planned project with full time equivalent (FTE) manpower resources. Source of Productivity resulting in Program Manager Effectiveness Most program management organizations who Integrated TechnologyStandalone Tools do not use many of the above thirty best Single Database practices, cannot break their paradigms of how Project Schedules Project Schedules a central database can automatically produce Resource Reqmts Resource Reqmts program manager effectiveness improvements Capacity Planning Capacity Planning to a significant degree. The reason is that Budget - Costs Budget- Costs Managers and Executives cannot visualize the EVMS wasted effort and laborious effort of their EVMS Master Schedules utilization of spreadsheets and project tools in Master Schedules order to justify the investment of technology and structure to eliminate these inefficiencies. The adjacent diagram demonstrates how this is possible. Note in the diagram on the left that with standalone technology and tools the data transfers are both redundant and laborious—as demonstrated by the “spaghetti chart”. Also note the size of the data effort is quite large represented by the width of the yellow bars. Note that when all the data is entered into a single database, as shown on the right, that all the data is entered only once—as represented by the blue bar. This drastically reduces effort, eliminates redundancy, increases accuracy and produces huge gains in program manager effectiveness. About the Author: Mr. Barth’s use of the BNW Project Management Maturity Model and best practice approach using principles and technoloy is considered one of the most accelerated and ease of adoption approaches in U.S. Industry today. BNW is considered to be a subject matter expert and leader in the development of schedule, resource capacity management and cost management use for complex projects and programs. Mr. Barth currently is a guest speaker at PMI chapters and industry groups nationally on these topics. Page 4 of 4 Portions Copyrighted © 2010 BNW Manufacturing Associates LLC Together With You Your organization will benefit from our team’s commitment and hands-on experience. You’ll gain a competitive advantage with a manufacturing software solution that delivers end-to-end functionality, low cost of ownership and ease-of-use to meet the complex needs of your manufacturing business.You’ll agree that the combination of Infor ERP VISUAL and the BizTech Team is the right choice. Your solution choices include: Business & ERP Software Systems Implementation Planning End-User Training Best Practice Consulting Data Conversion & Importing Version Upgrades & Migrations Custom Programming Disaster Recovery & Business Continuity Virtual Workplace Computer Network Support BizTech is your single-source Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) software provider. With strategic technology solutions and a seasoned implementation team, your company will benefit from centralized accountability, a simplified project plan and the most efficient implementation of Infor ERP VISUAL. About BizTech Founded in 1999, Business Technical Consulting, LLC (BizTech) is dedicated to providing complete Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) and Information Technology (IT) solutions that deliver long-term benefits to small and mid-sized manufacturing companies. Like our 500+ clients throughout North America and 4,000 VISUAL customers worldwide, you can rest assured that your projects are in the right hands. BizTech is an Infor ERP VISUAL Channel Partner, a Microsoft Certified Partner, Comptia A+ Certified and a Citrix Authorized Solution Advisor. BizTech offers industry-leading technologies such as Infor, Microsoft, Dell, HP, Citrix, Cisco, Symantec, Sonicwall, ThinPrint, Wyse, Epson, Lexmark, and Xerox. The BizTech Team has one simple goal: to partner with your company in a joint effort to improve your business processes and increase your profitability. BizTech | 800.804.4715 | 3306 Executive Parkway Suite 201 Toledo, OH 43606 | info@gobiztech.com | www.gobiztech.com
© Copyright 2024