Product Development Value Stream Mapping Manual (PDVSM) Presented By Hugh McManus Metis Design 10/8/03 Acknowledgements • Joyce • Lt. Rich Millard, USAF • • • • Tyson Browning Jim Chase David Slack Joshua Bernstein • • LAI Faculty and Staff LAI PD contributors web.mit.edu/lean ©Massachusetts Institute of Technology McManus- 100803 2 PDVSM: A Practical Guide to PD Value Stream Mapping • A “Rother and Shook” for Product Development • More details necessary for the complexities of PD • Details and background for lean experts • Practical advice for in-the-field use • Repository of LAI knowledge • Four+ years of PD team experience • References and attributions • Not an academic product • Member Best Practices • Suggested “cookbook” • Options and resources • Running examples and other aids web.mit.edu/lean ©Massachusetts Institute of Technology McManus- 100803 3 Contents • • • • • Focus on PD Process (Local Lean) Primer on Lean Engineering • Applying basic lean concepts to PD Basic Process Mapping Techniques • Not rocket science Member Best Practices • Bounding problem • Defining Value • Sources and uses of data • Finding waste • Improvement heuristics Running examples and other aids web.mit.edu/lean ©Massachusetts Institute of Technology McManus- 100803 4 Example with Value Assessments NVA Requirements and Constraints Global Aero. Environment 1 Choose Configuration Config Review I WT: 12 CT: 24 IPT: 8 CT: 4 IPT: 2 Value Key: CT: 40 IPT: 24 4 Create Mechanical Drawings NVA Non-valueadded task Bad Incorrect Informaiton Form Badly Formatted Informaiton 24 8 2 Create Moldline Drawings CT: 40 IPT: 24 Information Gathering CT: 24 IPT: 4 6 Weight Analysis I CT: 8 IPT: 4 3 Aerodyn. Analysis Review CT: 8 IPT: 2 Form 7 Stability Analysis CT: 40 IPT: 32 NVA Drawing Material Properties WT: 8 WT: 40 CT: 16 IPT: 8 5 Define Structural Requirements CT: 40 IPT: 24 9 Develop FEM WT: 16 Bad Bad A CT: 40 IPT: 32 8 Loads Analysis I CT: 16 IPT: 4 Reformat Drawings and Models I I WT: 104 CT: 16 IPT: 4 Global Loads Environment 12 24 4 4 2 Product or Process Spec. Value 40 24 40 32 40 24 8 2 8 4 8 16 8 16 4 40 16 40 24 16 4 40 32 104 Risk / Uncertaintly Reduction Value Enabling Task Should add Formatting value but doesn't A 10 SSL Analysis CT: 16 IPT: 8 SSL Review CT: 8 IPT: 4 11 Create Manufacture Plan CT: 24 IPT: 16 to 1, 4, 5, 8, 9, or 10 16 8 web.mit.edu/lean 8 4 Manufact. Review CT: 8 IPT: 4 12 Develop Report CT: 40 IPT: 12 Form I WT: 32 to 1, 4, or 11 24 16 8 4 Final Review Report and Presentation CT: 8 IPT: 4 to ANYWHERE 40 12 32 8 4 Total CT:392 hr (9.8 wks) Total IPT: 178 hr (4.5 wks) ©Massachusetts Institute of Technology McManus- 100803 5 Lean Now Initiative Engineering Development VSM Global Hawk Alpha Contracting web.mit.edu/lean ©Massachusetts Institute of Technology McManus- 100803 7 Lean Now…Supporting and Accelerating the Lean Transformation of Government • • • • • A Government Initiative…a Total Enterprise Team Facilitated Through The LAI Venue Leverages Collective Knowledge To Eliminate Barriers…capitalize On Government And Industry Teamwork Industries Experience In Large Scale Change Cadre Of Coaches… Subject Matter Experts Spiral Approach Accelerate Value Creation And Eliminate Non-essential Activity – Apply Lean Principles To Governmentindustry Critical Processes: 1.User-SPO-industry Program Interfaces 2.AF-industry Business Processes 3.AF-industry Operating Processes The right context web.mit.edu/lean ©Massachusetts Institute of Technology McManus- 100803 8 ACTD Legacy System OLD ORD/REQ Test Plan Budget Position Program Plan A OSD ACC Air Staff Requirements & Funding Program Planning Phase ORD Formal Reqmt. Other User Reqmts (OSD,Air Staff, JAT, Congress) I SPO Ranking & Prioritization of Reqmts Slate Risk IMS HVMS EVMS CMCTS ETMD Livelink Program Management I AITS PIOS MRP CRM ECMS OURS LANS SAP Develop Program Strategy & Cost Plan for (DAB) Technical Capability Studies DAB Approves Program Plan (IPR or Milestone Review) Budget Approve d ACC & OSD New Reqmts Adjust DAB Direction Budget Released to Program (Budget Authority) Alpha Contracting (ACT 1 – 4) Spiral Reqmts Contract Spiral Definitized Product: Global Hawk Refer to Global Hawk Program Roadmap Execution Customer: USAF Value: Deliverables Alpha Contracting (ACT 5 - 8) Proposals Production Development Support JCCB RFP, Contract Award Acquisition Strategy (ASR) Support Original Plan / Budget Program Management Baseline (PMB) Contract Award ACT (9 – 15) Production (Long Lead) Development Support BOA Contract OSD OIPT WIPT AF/PEO XO, XI Revisions ORD Updates ACC / AF Budget Changes ADM Program Baseline (APB) Alpha Contracting Spiral Specific Planning SPO B As Of February 2003" PPBS Process POM 2 Year Plan Inputs to ACC for POM Global Hawk – Enterprise Value Stream Map (Tier 1) Current" State Congress Build Cost Baseline for DAB Baseline ACQ / Support Strategy TEMP Test Evaluation Master Plan Plan Con Ops Requirements Planning – – – – – – NGC / SPO CDRL’s / SDLR’s Manage Requirements Manage To Budgets Manage Performance Manage Data & Change Manage Risk Integrate Plans Change & Schedules Process SPO / OSD DAES Def. Acq. Exec. Summary Chief Eng. Provides Technical Assessment Report SPO / Congress SAR Selected Acq. Report Global Hawk Program Roadmap Execution - Persistent ISR Capability - Affordability - Rapid Fielding - Range Endurance - Supportability SPO / PEO SAF/AQ MAR Monthly Acq. Report Etc. C D SPO Produce & Deliver System Systems Reqmts. Analysis from ORD & Contract Reqmts. Flowdown Lengthy Process SPO I EMD Development & Test Contract TurnOn for Long Lead Funding Subcontract Supplier Management Definitized Funding Provided Prime Begins Work Supplier Long Lead Turn-On I Technical Manuals E Training Field The System (Operations & Support) Budgets Released Support Equipment Spares Aug. 03" GOLD System Field Services A web.mit.edu/lean 24 Months Detailed Design Critical Design Review EMD Build Fab/Assy 4.0 Provide Material Acquisition Services 7.0 Define Product 2.0 Provide Financial Services & Control 5.0 Manage Program 8.0 Produce Product 3.0 Provide Internal Services & Facilities 6.0 Acquire Business 9.0 Support Product Provide/Update/Revise Type 1 Training Courses Engineering Source Data Developed I Event Focus Here Process Architecture 1.0 Direct the Enterprise Provide/Update/Revise Production Tech. Manuals ACC Preliminary Design Reqmts. Flowed to IPTs/Groups SRR System Reqmts. Review Deliver Manuals / TCTO’s and Kits Operations Continuation Training Sustainment Acquire New/Add. GFP Design New Support Equipment Revise/Update Support Equipment Procure Spares Contractor Item Management Spares SORAP Process Deliver Courses TEST (ATP) Flight Test FCA Execution Execution Refer to TIER II Value Stream Map Deliver GFP Contract Closure Execution S.E. & GFP Sustainment ACC & EAFB ACC (Beale) B 18 Months B C 38 Months C D Noted:" Repair Management Peculiar Items 41 Months DD250 User Feedback AFTO 22 & DR’s This view is mapped as shown from the enterprise" event depicting (5) major elements in “swim lane” view." Timelines are estimates and run/overlap each element. " Tier II & Tier III VSM’s represent greater fidelity for times." TSSP Process A DT / OT ACC (Beale) FAB & Deliver S.E. Deliver Spares Production Supply Chain Cycle Time Tech. Manual Sustainment ACC & EAFB System Integration Inspect & Test Subsystem Inspect & Test D E 15 Months E Through Put Time = See Each Element Processing Time = N/A Tier I ©Massachusetts Institute of Technology McManus- 100803 9 Release #1A" 03-31-03" R.J. Goetz" x5220" Event Description and Objectives • • • Conduct a collaborative event involving Government, Northrop Grumman, and Key Suppliers to review the Global Hawk Engineering Development Process; Focusing on Preliminary Design Requirements and Detailed Design Processes by Defining Current State Via Value Stream Mapping Simplify Process, Reduce Cycle Time and Improve Cost • Use Global Hawk Tier I VSM as Baseline for Event • Document Process “Current State” VSM (Select Areas) • Determine Improvement Initiatives for Cycle Time Gains • Develop “Future State” Value Stream Map for Process • Create 9 Block Chart Closure Plans to Achieve Targeted • Goals for both Cost & Schedule Improvements Two teams - Component A design package (w/o sub); component B design/build team (with sub) web.mit.edu/lean ©Massachusetts Institute of Technology McManus- 100803 10 PDVSM part of Integrated Training • PDVSM manual was prep-work for participants • First afternoon was kick-off and training: • LAI Lean Engineering lecture (review) • PDVSM review • Lean PD Simulation (the GAME) • Value Stream Mapping Exercise • Value Definitions from key stakeholders • Completed the “Getting Started” part of the PDVSM process An integrated training/kick-off package web.mit.edu/lean ©Massachusetts Institute of Technology McManus- 100803 11 Training with Lecture, Game, and Value Stream Mapping web.mit.edu/lean ©Massachusetts Institute of Technology McManus- 100803 12 Game/PDVSM training featured VSM for a simulated systems Unplanned Rework Waiting Wait DT: 12" 12 CT: 4" IPT: 2" 4 2 Wait Time web.mit.edu/lean Review Work CT: 4" IPT: 1" 57% fail" 0 4 1 Done! Untimely Information 20 - Total CT 3 - Total IPT Cycle Time In-Process Time ©Massachusetts Institute of Technology McManus- 100803 13 Building the VSM web.mit.edu/lean ©Massachusetts Institute of Technology McManus- 100803 14 Data collection • • • Process flow (in declining order of accuracy and usefulness) • Participating personnel • Floor walking • Calls Task cycle times from existing data base • key personnel “went and got it” • Wait and process times NOT separated out - approximated Capacities, rework probabilities from participating personnel (and call-ins) Good data key USEFUL effort scoped by the data Needed data emergent web.mit.edu/lean ©Massachusetts Institute of Technology McManus- 100803 15 Results • • • • • Component A drawing release value stream maps One of three maps created - only one that stuck to LAI PDVSM process closely Names and numbers removed Capacity calculations not shown 3 panels web.mit.edu/lean ©Massachusetts Institute of Technology McManus- 100803 16 Swimming-pool lanes INPUTS EXTERNAL. CHANGE REVIEWS A ECB VL STRESS web.mit.edu/lean Never EARLY Happen FEM WORK s low % STRESS. "START" (20%) OUTPUTS TIMELINES 0 low % EXISTING PREDESIGN FEM AND ANALYSIS CONTINUE DESIGN PRELIM. DESIGN QUALITY DESIGN Times - VL very long! L long, M medium, S short! Hard data on timelines shown in a box ELAPSED TIME CONTINUE DESIGN Weeks SUB. REVIEW LEAD DESIGN REV R1 CONTINUE. DESIGN LEAD DESIGN REV TO SUBS No Visibilit y weeks On schedule ©Massachusetts Institute of Technology McManus- 100803 17 Incomplet e data MATL. DATA LOADS. L CHECK M Slow iterations, waiting CHECK. M 14+ S High % mid % M STRESS. VL Late start FEM? FEM. MODEL Y S VL high % S ETC.(!) N CHECK MARGIN. CALC A Y BLESS? N S Big bad loop Y S FIX FORMAT S B FIX STRESS REDLINES FIX. FORMAT 2 S N Y B OFFBOARD MORE FEM? REVIEW REDLINES MAJOR PROB? N M Designer moves to next round of drawings, returns for fixes as required M VL M S S web.mit.edu/lean M S S VL M S S totals: weeks days totals: M S Behind Schedule weeks ©Massachusetts Institute of Technology McManus- 100803 18 Could be better REVIEW. CYCLE CM RELEASE Times - VL very long! L long, M medium, S short! Hard data on timelines shown in a box FIX PROBLEMS TO SUBS M S M (small) Behind Schedule web.mit.edu/lean ©Massachusetts Institute of Technology McManus- 100803 19 Observations on map • • • Map reveals some problems at a glance • Complexity • Inefficient batch and queue iterations • Big loops DATA reveals more • Early stress analysis NOT DONE • Stress is the long pole - sequential process and insufficient capacity • Inefficient/NVA-looking final review process NOT critical Yet more revealed by digging a little • R1 release problems • Remaining (unavoidable) uncertainty requires flexibility that isnt there • Supplier involvement (missing!) PDVSM a good tool for Globalhawk web.mit.edu/lean ©Massachusetts Institute of Technology McManus- 100803 20 Observations on process • • • • • • • Method works - gets you there • Best results with team that stayed “on method” Preparation helpful (but inadequate) Training helpful (but not sufficient) Facilitation and mentoring necessary Right participants necessary (scoping) • Can’t map areas where there is no knowledge Right data is key • Best if organization is responsive to evolving needs • Data allows correct focus, makes it credible Method adapted/improved • e.g. Swimming pool lanes, Constraint ID Globalhawk a good test of PDVSM web.mit.edu/lean ©Massachusetts Institute of Technology McManus- 100803 21 ORD Formal Reqmt. Other User Reqmts (OSD,Air Staff, JAT, Congress) ACTD Legacy System OLD ORD/REQ Test Plan Budget Position Program Plan A OSD ACC Air Staff Requirements & Funding Program Planning Phase I SPO Ranking & Prioritization of Reqmts Slate Risk IMS HVMS EVMS CMCTS ETMD Livelink Program Management I AITS PIOS MRP CRM ECMS OURS LANS SAP Develop Program Strategy & Cost Plan for (DAB) Technical Capability Studies C EMD Development & Test D SPO Produce & Deliver System Alpha Contracting (ACT 1 – 4) Spiral Reqmts Systems Reqmts. Analysis from ORD & Contract Reqmts. Flowdown Lengthy Process Contract TurnOn for Long Lead Funding Subcontract Supplier Management Definitized Funding Provided Prime Begins Work ADM Program Baseline (APB) Contract Spiral Definitized Refer to Global Hawk Program Roadmap Execution Customer: USAF Value: Alpha Contracting (ACT 5 - 8) Proposals Production Development Support JCCB RFP, Contract Award Acquisition Strategy (ASR) Support Original Plan / Budget Program Management Baseline (PMB) Contract Award ACT (9 – 15) Production (Long Lead) Development Support BOA Contract – – – – – – Muda Preliminary Design Reqmts. Flowed to IPTs/Groups SRR System Reqmts. Review Event Focus Here Process Architecture 1.0 Direct the Enterprise Detailed Design Critical Design Review 4.0 Provide Material Acquisition Services EMD Build Fab/Assy NGC / SPO CDRL’s / SDLR’s Manage Requirements Manage To Budgets Manage Performance Manage Data & Change Manage Risk Integrate Plans Change & Schedules Process Muri Subsystem Inspect & Test SPO / OSD DAES Def. Acq. Exec. Summary Chief Eng. Provides Technical Assessment Report System Integration Inspect & Test TEST (ATP) SPO / Congress SAR Selected Acq. Report Global Hawk Program Roadmap Execution I Technical Manuals Flight Test FCA DT / OT Execution 7.0 Define Product 2.0 Provide Financial Services & Control 5.0 Manage Program 8.0 Produce Product 3.0 Provide Internal Services & Facilities 6.0 Acquire Business 9.0 Support Product Provide/Update/Revise Production Tech. Manuals ACC Training Field The System (Operations & Support) Budgets Released Provide/Update/Revise Type 1 Training Courses Support Equipment Engineering Source Data Developed I Spares Aug. 03" GOLD System Field Services A web.mit.edu/lean 24 Months Deliver Manuals / TCTO’s and Kits Operations Continuation Training Sustainment Acquire New/Add. GFP Design New Support Equipment Revise/Update Support Equipment Procure Spares Contractor Item Management Spares SORAP Process Tech. Manual Sustainment ACC & EAFB Deliver Courses Execution Refer to TIER II Value Stream Map Deliver GFP Contract Closure Execution S.E. & GFP Sustainment ACC & EAFB ACC (Beale) B 18 Months B C 38 Months C D Noted:" Repair Management Peculiar Items 41 Months DD250 User Feedback AFTO 22 & DR’s ACC (Beale) FAB & Deliver S.E. Deliver Spares Production Supply Chain Cycle Time This view is mapped as shown from the enterprise" event depicting (5) major elements in “swim lane” view." Timelines are estimates and run/overlap each element. " Tier II & Tier III VSM’s represent greater fidelity for times." TSSP Process A - Persistent ISR Capability - Affordability - Rapid Fielding - Range Endurance - Supportability SPO / PEO SAF/AQ MAR Monthly Acq. Report PDVSM is necessary but not sufficient Supplier Long Lead Turn-On E Revisions ORD Updates ACC / AF Budget Changes Product: Global Hawk Deliverables OSD OIPT WIPT Mura SPO I New Reqmts Adjust DAB Direction Budget Released to Program (Budget Authority) Alpha Contracting AF/PEO XO, XI Etc. DAB Approves Program Plan (IPR or Milestone Review) Budget Approve d ACC & OSD Spiral Specific Planning SPO B As Of February 2003" PPBS Process POM 2 Year Plan Inputs to ACC for POM Global Hawk – Enterprise Value Stream Map (Tier 1) Current" State Congress Build Cost Baseline for DAB Baseline ACQ / Support Strategy TEMP Test Evaluation Master Plan Plan Con Ops Requirements Planning D E 15 Months E Through Put Time = See Each Element Processing Time = N/A Tier I ©Massachusetts Institute of Technology McManus- 100803 22 Release #1A" 03-31-03" R.J. Goetz" x5220" Overall Assessment of PDVSM • Not the answer to all questions • “Not rocket science” - common sense, practical guide • Lean Engineering, Data and Metrics parts called out as particularly useful • Some local improvement possible • Value definitions, improvement heuristics need work • Most useful as an integrated tool • Game plus lean engineering material for training • Lean Now or other process framework for execution web.mit.edu/lean ©Massachusetts Institute of Technology McManus- 100803 23 PDVSM Completion Plan • Open to input (now) • One more field test (Fall) • Finish PDVSM 1.0 (December) • Part of an integrated tool set web.mit.edu/lean ©Massachusetts Institute of Technology McManus- 100803 24 Toolkit Concepts • • • • Top Level • EVSMA (guided for PD?) • Enterprise TTL Roadmap plus many • Learning to develop concepts • MATE-CON for front end • CMMI or other assessment tools Mid Level • Warren Seering building on PDVSM • Learning to develop/member tools for project management • PD TTL Roadmap Low Level • PDVSM • Game concepts Training Material to support all of above others Do these address your stress? web.mit.edu/lean ©Massachusetts Institute of Technology McManus- 100803 25 Development of PDVSM Manual • March: Alpha Release Early Reviews Presentation/critique at LAI Plenary meeting • April: Provided as supplement to GAME training; distributed at Boeing as supplement • Summer: MIT critique and use • August: Global Hawk Lean Now event Full integration with GAME and Lean Engineering training Facilitated use for process improvement web.mit.edu/lean ©Massachusetts Institute of Technology McManus- 100803 26 Approximate Event Agenda (in half days) • • • • • • • Intro and Training Team formation and high level mapping Begin detail mapping and needs determination Data collection, floor walking Complete local mapping Future state determination Formalize next steps (action plans) Adapted to meet needs of teams More iteration than planned web.mit.edu/lean ©Massachusetts Institute of Technology McManus- 100803 27