+

- Product Development Processes

ESD.36J System & Project Management

System Project Managementand

Instructor(s)

Prof. Olivier de Weck

Lecture 11

10/9/2003

+

- 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 Crawley Prof. Steve Eppinger Dr. Joyce Warmkessel Dr. Darian Unger

10/9/2003 - ESD.36J SPM 2

+

-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

+

- Preparation versus Planning

� “Preparation” address the who, what and why issues � Who are the major stakeholders? � Why we are doing the project? � What do the stakeholders expect in exchange for

their participation (“value”)? � Time frame for “Preparation” is prior to

project initiation � “Planning” is the “how” the project will be

conducted

10/9/2003 - ESD.36J SPM 4

+

-

Management Leverage is Greatest Early

10/9/2003 - ESD.36J SPM 5

I

+

- Preparation Actions

e

Res

Identify program

processes

Dd eOS ten et rI S raN t gd mtt i aoS fe reeed y U

n in u ut E na it rces

c z enik s tf aunde y tri-ho

iqU oeu nsl ede rrs

Planning

no p eiss

Mi

t

c o

St c t

tse nec

j yuB/ekaM

j fyoce o r sserddA

ariir tPy

secruoseR

orPpo

j nedI

Pe

puen

snoCt

escif an tt

n fneme

m i

n g

L iredeeveDl

e r

tmi

t nIe T&

iat

D ItS

10/9/2003 - ESD.36J SPM 6

i

+

- Planning Actions

DDeveleP teo A rp p muS o pl p Pr

iD t a r nr t oe u e Re Ov aceR t cou Sl h igo re sr t rgq p P r k Mae aa uu m Sn cir r i tze o uam d nr ct e W

hu aie o ec gn n dt et a us mBl leS en Executable

Program Plan

t

esiar nla ordn P n t

nt &m f c en

anm eou ioes csm b ti ite geassm

et mc s rai ty hl i ni e s or enea acb&

M oe Tn Ma

mmus i rf sse rn eac pPlponn p A pf

e Co ioe es ne es AD inetd r rat i

m uf i ole rn efu Dan D nta sfi orPe efD Mn CoI

10/9/2003 - ESD.36J SPM 7

+

- Program Management Plan Topics

� Summary -program description and major objectives

� Assumptions & constraints

� Deliverables � Work breakdown

structure � Major milestones

with associated exit criteria

� Staffing& training plan

� Spending/budget profile

� Project organization � External interfaces � Program plans: list

with summary description

� Product documentation tree

10/9/2003 - ESD.36J SPM 8

+

- Other Lower Level Plans � Control plans

� Schedule/budget � Requirements � Configuration � Technical Parameters � Interface

� Risk Management � Subcontract

Management � Contract

Management

� Reviews and Audits � Quality Assurance � Safety � Reliability � Problem resolution � Information

Management

10/9/2003 - ESD.36J SPM 9

+

-

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

+

- 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

+

- Characteristics of PDP Always involves at least:• Marketing core • Design functions

Challenges of the PDP • Manufacturing

1. Tradeoffs2. Dynamics3. Details “A PDP is the unique sequence4. Time Pressure of steps or activities, which an5. Economics enterprise employs to conceive,

design, and commercialize a product”

10/9/2003 - ESD.36J SPM

Ulrich and Eppinger 12

- ESD.36J SPM10/9/2003 13

+

-

1

Beginningof Lifecycle

- Mission- Requirements- Constraints Customer

StakeholderUser

ArchitectDesignerSystem Engineer

ConceiveDesign

Implement

“process information”

“turninformation

to matter”

SRR

PDR CDR

iterate

iterate

The EnvironmentThe Environment: technological, economic, political, social, nature

The EnterpriseThe Enterprise

The SystemThe System

creativityarchitectingtrade studies

modeling simulationexperiments

design techniquesoptimization (MDO)

virtual

real

Manufacturingassembly

integration

choose

create

Conceive, Design, Implement

- ESD.36J SPM10/9/2003 14

+

-

End of Lifecycle

1

The SystemThe Systemreal

AR

virtual

CustomerStakeholderUser

EOL

testdeploy

service

monitor

OperateUpgrade

Liquidate

degrade

ArchitectDesignerSystem Engineer

accept

controlusage

testing validation

verificationThe EnterpriseThe Enterprise

monitor

controlusage

The EnvironmentThe Environment: technological, economic, political, social, nature

System IDbehavior

prediction

Operate, Upgrade, Liquidate

+

- Generic PDP Process

Need Assessment

Define Requirements

Concept Evaluation

Internal and external needs.

Future needs

DevelopDesign Test Implement

Trade-off Studies

Materials, Geometries

Tooling, Detailed Specifications.

Manufacturing Techniques

Formulate and Translate Customer Wants

Evaluate and Needs into Engineering

Concept Requirements.

Alternatives Top down System to Components.

System to System Requirements

Prototypes, Verify, Validate Design

Build and and Qualify Completion .

Integrate Transition to

Subsystem Test Operations.

Lessons Learned

10/9/2003 - ESD.36J SPM 15

Roles in PDP*+

-

*Ulrich,K. and Eppinger,S. “Product design and development”, McGraw-Hill, 1995, p15.

10/9/2003 - ESD.36J SPM 16

+

- 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

+

-

PDP In the SMALL v. In the LARGE

Product:

Org

Product

Process

SIMPLE Countable interfaces

Process: Parts identifiable

COMPLEX Very many interfaces Parts abstracted

STATICGoals & resources

EVOLVING Goals & resources

changingOrganization: constant

LARGE SMALL Big team

Team 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

+

-Example: Global Telecommunications Services Development Process

� Multi-national telecommunications company � “Document-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 don’t live it.

Ref: Eppinger 10/9/2003 - ESD.36J SPM 19

+

-

Telecommunications Development: The Planned Process

Concept Approval CONCEPT

SPECIFICATIONS

Network Plan

Req’ts

Eng’g Specs

Specification Approval

OPERATE

�Four-Phase Development Process �150 Documents in DSM Model

Business Req’ts

Ops.

Implem. & Billing

Cust. Service

Eng’g DETAILED DESIGN

Launch Approval

PLANNING AND

System

AND BUILD

10/9/2003 - ESD.36J SPM 20

+

-

Telecommunications Development: The Actual Process

Concept Approval CONCEPT

SPECIFICATIONS

Network Plan

Req’ts

Eng’g Specs

OPERATE

Business Req’ts

Ops.

Implem. & Billing

Cust. Service

Eng’g DETAILED DESIGN

Launch Approval

Critical Problem:

PLANNING AND

System

AND BUILD

Ongoing Iterations after Specifications Phase

10/9/2003 - ESD.36J SPM 21

+

-

Telecommunications Development: An Improved Process

�

�

�

� Financial analysis

Concept ApprovalCONCEPT

SPECIFICATIONS

Network Plan

Req’ts

Eng’g Specs

Specification Approval

OPERATE

Business Req’ts

Ops.

Implem. & Billing

Cust. Service

Eng’g DETAILED 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 Phase X-Functional Resources in Specs Formal Spec Approval Gate

Specification Approval

Frozen technical specifications

10/9/2003 - ESD.36J SPM 22

+

-Phased vs. Spiral PD Processes

Phased, Staged, or Waterfall PD Process(dominant for over 30 years)

LaunchDefinition Level Design

Detail Design and Test

Product Planning

Product Product System- 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 SPM

When to conduct gate reviews? 23

Stage Gate PD Process +

-

-10/9/2003 24

Release

Planning

Design

Design

Detailed Design

Integration & Test

Reviews

Iterations (planned)

Cross-Phase Iterations

(unplanned)

Refs: Robert Cooper, Winning at New Products 3rd ed., 2001.

ESD.36J SPM

Concept

System-Level

Within-Phase

Spiral PD Process+

-

10/9/2003 - ESD.36J SPM 25

Risk Analysis

Prototype 1

Concept of operation

Requirementsvalidation

Design validation andverification

Release

Acceptance test

Integrationand test

Unittest

Code

Software

Softwarerequire-ments

Requirementsplan, lifecycle plan

Development plan

Integration and test plan

Plan the nextiteration

PartitionReview

Commit to an approach for the

next iteration

Determineobjectives, alternatives,

and constraints

Identify and

resolve risks

Evaluatealternatives

Develop the deliverables for theiteration and verify that

they are correct

Cumulative cost

Detailed design

benchmarksmodels,

Simulations,

Prototype 2Prototype 3

Operational prototype

Risk Analysis

Risk Analysis

Risk Analysis

START

product design

Steve McConnell, Rapid Development, 1996, pp. 136-39.

Barry Boehm, A Spiral Model of Software Development and Enhancement, 1988.

Adapted from:

+

- 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

Spiral PD Process+

-

Design

Design

Integration & Test

Release

Reviews

Planning

Concept

System-Level Design

Detailed

Time

10/9/2003 - ESD.36J SPM 27

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

+

-Other PD Processes

� Evolutionary delivery � Evolutionary prototyping � Extreme programming (software only) � Modified stage gates � Set-based concurrent engineering � Short-term solutions, i.e. acquisitions

Ref: Steve McConnell, Rapid Development, 1996, pp. 136-39.

10/9/2003 - ESD.36J SPM 29

(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 important exceptions � Software subprocess

� Internal experiments and waivers

� Risk – emphasis on controlling schedule

10/9/2003 - ESD.36J SPM 30

+

-Xerox Time-to-Market (TTM) Process

Define market attack plan & technology

Define product & deliver

Design Demonstrate Delight

technology product product

Deliver product customers

Software Development Sub-Process

10/9/2003 - ESD.36J SPM 31

+

-

Product Development Process Design

� There are many possible PD processes to choose from. � Spectrum from staged to spiral processes

� PD processes should be designed to address project risks by � Planning iterations in the process

� Can be within or across phases

� Scheduling reviews to control the process � Cross-functional review � Generally reviews end phases (no backtracking)

10/9/2003 - ESD.36J SPM 32

+

- 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 of

each phase. Review ReviewReview Phase Phase Phase

Risks Risks Risks

10/9/2003 - ESD.36J SPM 33

+

- Key similarities between PDPs

� Attempt to meet customer needs � Discrete phases of development � Iteration in some form � Existence of reviews or gates � Attempt to control development risks

10/9/2003 - ESD.36J SPM 34

+

- 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

+

- Identification of key risks

Risk Profile

Category of risk

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

+

-Iteration parameters �

�

�

10/9/2003

Breadth of iterations1 2 3

Narrow Comprehensive(Within 1phase) (Across 3 or more phases)

Number of inter­phase loops

0 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 planning1 2 3 4 5

None Planned but Planned (Unexpected)

- ESD.36J SPM & schedulednot scheduled

37

+

- Review/Gate parameters

Format of stage

gate

� Rigidity

Final standard Phase check ( igi

� Frequency

Frequent Sporadic (After each phase) (After 3 or more phases)

1 2 3 4 5

1 2 3 4 5 Outputs

Review /OK?

Next stage

Deliverables

Yes

NoRigid criteria) (Less r d criteria)

Action stage

10/9/2003 - ESD.36J SPM 38

+

-Parameterized theoretical PDPs

Parameter Waterfall/ Design to Evolutionary Spiral Stage-gate Sched/Budget prototyping

Start End

Iterations

Breadth 1 2 1 3 3

# of inter­phase loops

0 Unspecified 0 Unspec­ified

Unspecified, but many

Planning 2 3 2 3 5

Rigidity 1 2 3 3 5 Review gates

Frequency 1 2 2 1 Unspecified

Risk Profile of Manages tech Manages Manages Manages key risks risk well sched./budget market risk well market risk

risk well well

10/9/2003 - ESD.36J SPM 39

IDeSat. Rad.

s

Ref: D. Unger+

- Parameterized actual PDPs

Market risk dominates

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 market ambi

ProfileRisk

gates

Iterations

1 21

3 41Rigidity

1 2 phase loops

1 22

ITTParameter

guity Unknown

Review

Frequency

Unknown # of inter­

Breadth

Sikor ky

10/9/2003 - ESD.36J SPM 40

+

- “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 risk

10/9/2003 - ESD.36J SPM 41

+

- IDEO Product Case

� What are the characteristics of the IDEO product development process? � …

10/9/2003 - ESD.36J SPM 42

+

- 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