Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control
and
Southern Methodist University
Product Development Process Improvement Report
Final Report
Prepared for:
Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control
Prepared by:
Southern Methodist University
School of Engineering
Engineering Management, Information and Systems Department
Systems Engineering Program
Dr. Jerrell T. Stracener
Dr. Richard S. Barr
Dr. Stephen A. Szygenda, P.E.
Dr. Mitch A. Thornton, P.E.
Dr. George W.Choller, P.E.
Dr. Susan G. Vandiver, P.E.
May 31, 2006
Table of Contents
1.0
Executive Summary
2.0
Statement of Tasks and Deliverables
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
2.6
3.0
Task 1
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
4.0
Objectives
Methodology
Results
Conclusions
Task 2
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
5.0
Survey of CMMI and Lean Enterprise Modeling Techniques
Recommendations
Recommendations for Further Study and Analysis
Execution of Tasks
Final Report
Deliverables
Objectives
Methodology
Results
4.3.1 Tailoring Activity Research Results
4.3.2 Additional CMMI Related Research
4.3.2.1 Information Technology Infrastructure Library (ITIL)
4.3.2.2 General Motors Cycle-Time Improvements
Conclusions
Task 3 and 4
5.1
5.2
5.3
5.4
Objectives
Methodology
Results
5.3.1 Requirements-Based Cost Modeling Process
5.3.2 Program Architecture Development Process
Conclusions
6.0
Summary
1.0
Executive Summary
This project is the first step for collaboration between LMMFC and Southern Methodist
University to develop strategies for achieving effective productivity levels while
2
maintaining compliance with the Capability Maturity Model, Integrated™ (CMMI). The
effort of this project consists of five tasks as described in the following paragraphs.
Task 1
The goal of Task 1 is to explore methods for optimizing the benefits gained from
investment in CMMI based organizational standard process through intelligent
application of productivity enhancement initiatives already existent within the LMMFC
business enterprise and exploration of other potential initiatives which are not yet part of
the LMMFC culture.
Southern Methodist University Systems Engineering program personnel (SMU SE)
developed a process and flow chart to investigate and document initiatives, which have
potential to apply to CMMI Level 5: optimizing. The process includes identifying
initiatives, performing literature survey, documenting the information, relating the
initiative to CMMI Level 5 practices, identifying whether the initiative is current or
emerging, adding the results and references to the CMMI Identification Table
spreadsheet, and providing recommendations.
Task 2
The goal of Task 2 is to explore program types and characteristics that will lead to a
classification scheme for tailoring the LMMFC Organizational Standard Process (OSP)
for specific programs and/or projects. Also included in the tailoring algorithm are
program dominant factors and weighting according to the desired program objectives.
Southern Methodist University systems engineering program personnel performed
extensive research of tailoring activities using the internet and other resources including
company private documents. The research findings are invaluable for knowledge of
tailoring activities and future study; however, they provide no specific guidelines,
algorithms, or processes for tailoring program functions based upon program
classifications and weighting. SMU SE developed a tailoring process flow diagram,
which includes the LMMFC OSP as the input and the tailored OSP as the output. The
project type and project characteristics determine the program classification scheme. The
tailoring algorithm is determined by the program classification, dominant program
factors, and weighting criteria. Excel spreadsheets are used as examples of the program
classification scheme.
Task 3
Recommendations for further study include, but are not limited to, a Requirements-Based
Cost Modeling Process and a Program Architecture Development Process.
Task 4
3
The effort to complete Task 3 and other LMMFC/SMU collaboration projects shall be
mutually agreed-to including analyses and reports to convey the findings and status of the
research.
Task 5
This document completes Task 5, the final report.
2.0
Statement of Task and Deliverables
2.1
Survey of CMMI and Lean Enterprise Modeling Techniques
Task 1
LMMFC shall provide initial CMMI and Lean Enterprise references to SMU SE to for
use as a point-of-departure body of knowledge to initiate this effort. LMMFC’s
experiences with CMMI compliance and lean analysis techniques (including Axiomatic
Design theory as applied to manufacturing operations) will provide a baseline of
information to form a shared picture of the problem domain. SMU SE shall add those
information resources deemed pertinent and useful to this effort where applicable. It is
the intent of this task to raise the knowledge level of both SMU SE and LMMFC on
current and emerging theory, practices and approaches to system design, development,
support process modeling and improvement.
Task 2
LMMFC shall provide examples of process tailoring and program characteristics for
existing programs. From this baseline, SMU SE shall perform a study to determine a
program classification scheme and the dominant factors that should be used in tailoring
the application of the LMMFC Organizational Standard Process (OSP) to specific
program types. Where applicable, the recommendations shall be accompanied by
techniques to be used in determining the extent of effect associated with each
discriminating factor.
2.2
Recommendations
Task 1
SMU SE shall conduct a study to analyze the Specific Practices that constitute the CMMI
Level 5 Process Areas of Organizational Innovation and Deployment and Causal
Analysis Resolution and make specific recommendations as to the application of LEAN
methods in the development of LMMFC organizational processes to satisfy the
requirements.
Task 2
4
SMU SE shall develop and propose a set of program classifications and weighting criteria
used for guidance in OSP tailoring activities.
2.3 Recommendations for Further Study and Analysis
Task 3
SMU SE shall provide suggestions for further study and analysis, including estimations
for resource needs and time durations, in order to define further the research tasks and to
communicate to LMMFC the direction(s) of focus. The culmination of this task shall be
a formal acknowledgment by LMMFC of SMU intentions and plans. Agreed-to tasking
shall not exceed allowable funding or time constraints for the effort detailed in this
Statement of Work.
2.4
Execution of Tasks
Task 4
SMU SE shall execute the mutually agreed-to plans and tasks from 2.3, above,
developing required analyses and reports as required for LMMFC’s use to convey the
findings and status of the research effort.
2.5
Final Report
Task 5
SMU SE shall develop a final report detailing the findings of the research tasks and
recommendations for increased performance in product development process
management and improvement practice.
2.6
Deliverables
Task
Task/
Subtask
Description
Deliverables Quantity
Task
Start
Percent
Delivery Total Effort
SOW
Schedule
Reference
1
Task 1 Outbrief
Briefing,
informal
report
1 Hard
Copy
15 Nov
2005
9 Mar
2006
50
2.1, 2.2
2
Task 2 Outbrief
Briefing,
informal
report
1 Hard
Copy
20 Feb
2006
14 Apr
2006
30
2.1, 2.2
3
Recommendations Briefing
for further study
1 Hard
Copy
3 Apr
2006
4 May
2006
5
2.3
4
Execution of
Study tasks
Briefing
1 Hard
Copy
8 May
2006
26 May
2006
10
2.4
5
Final Report
Briefing,
1 Hard
formal report Copy, 1
CD ROM
15 May
2006
31 May
2006
5
2.5
3.0
Task 1
5
3.1
Objectives
An objective of Task 1 is to raise the knowledge level of both SMU SE and LMMFC on
current and emerging theory, practices and approaches to system design, development,
support process modeling and improvement. SMU SE shall provide a study and
recommendations for the application of emerging initiatives applicable to CMMI Level 5
Process Areas of Organizational Innovation and Deployment, and Causal Analysis
Resolution requirements.
3.2
Methodology
The SMU research team used systems engineering principles and practices. They
developed a process for performing the research on the initiatives and their application to
CMMI Level 5 Optimization. Thus, LMMFC could use this process for further
investigation of alternative initiatives. The application of this process is demonstrated
through examples of identified initiatives.
3.3
Results
The flowchart shown in Figure 1 represents the SMU process to identify and document
initiatives, which are applicable to Innovation and Deployment and/or Causal Analysis
Resolution.
Identify an initiative that has
potential to apply to Maturity
Level 5: Optimizing
Perform literature survey of
initiative – web, books,
magazines, conferences,
professional organizations,
corporate literature
Document using the
Documentation Tab
Format
Does initiative relate
to a CMMI Level 5:
Optimization Practice
No
Yes
Identify the status of
initiative: current or
emerging
Add Results to the
CMMI Table and Add
Pertinent References
No
Document Results and
Provide Recommendations
Yes
Literature
survey complete
Figure 1 Flow Chart of the SMU Process
The selection criterion for an initiative, which has potential to apply to Maturity Level 5,
includes the following items.
6
•
•
•
May provide incremental and innovative improvement of the organization’s:
– Processes and/or
– Technologies
May provide guidelines and recommendations for identifying causes of defects
and other problems
May provide guidelines and recommendations for defect prevention
The spreadsheet developed by SMU SE includes all of the following:
•
•
•
•
•
Identified initiatives
References
Process flow chart
Documentation completed for each initiative
Quality Function Deployment (QFD) flow-down of the initiatives to CMMI
Level 5
SMU SE provides the initiative documentation by entries into the CMMI Level 5
Documentation tab of the spreadsheet. The tasks for the researcher and items, which are
entered into the spreadsheet, include the following elements.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Determine the main category, in which the initiative is representative, i.e., quality,
management, production, design, reliability, etc.
Describe the central idea of the initiative.
History
– Start year
– Created by
– Companies who have used it successfully
List of key elements of initiative
– Describe key element
– Describe benefits of each key element
Describe how the initiative relates to a specific CMMI Level 5 Goal and Practice.
– Specify which CMMI Level 5 Goal and Practice to which it relates.
Document whether the initiative status is current or emerging.
Document the group reference number and reference information.
If the information relates to a CMMI Level 5 practice, enter the reference number
in the Excel spreadsheet, CMMI Level 5 Initiative Identification Table.
Enter the reference data in the Reference tab data sheet.
Flow-down of the identified initiatives to the Goals and Practices to meet the
requirements of CMMI Level 5 is performed by the QFD sheets of the spreadsheet.
3.4
Conclusions
7
SMU conducted the study and determined that the following initiatives have application
to Specific Practices of CMMI Level 5 Process Areas of Organization Innovation and
Deployment and Causal Analysis Resolution.










Lean
Six Sigma
Axiomatic Design
Systematic Innovation
Systems Engineering Innovation
Systems Engineering Leading Indicators
Prognostic Health Maintenance
Enterprise Systems Engineering
Intrapreneurship and Innovation
Product Development Analysis & Optimization
SMU SE documents the initiatives identification with a CMMI Level 5 Specific Practice
in a spreadsheet format. The enclosed Excel® spreadsheet file labeled “CMMI Level 5
and Initiatives with QFD” contains the data. The summary CMMI Table and References
sheets, QFD sheets, and detailed initiative information are linked within the spreadsheet.
The results of Task 1 provide a systems engineering process for further investigation of
initiatives, which are applicable to CMMI Level 5 Optimization. SMU SE demonstrates
the use of the process in the examples of the initiatives identified previously. This is by
no means an exhaustive list nor have the initiatives been thoroughly examined in this
task.
4.0
Task 2
4.1
Objectives
The objective of this task is to explore program types and characteristics that will lead to
a classification scheme for tailoring the LMMFC Organizational Standard Process (OSP)
for specific programs and/or projects. Also included in the tailoring algorithm are
program dominant factors and weighting according to the desired program objectives.
4.2
Methodology
The Southern Methodist University systems engineering research team performed
extensive research of tailoring activities using the internet and other resources including
company private documents. SMU SE used a systems engineering top down approach
for developing the tailoring process flow diagram.
4.3
Results
4.3.1 Tailoring Activity Research Results
8
The tailoring process flow diagram developed by SMU SE, shown in Figure 2, includes
the LMMFC OSP as the input and the tailored OSP as the output. SMU SE uses the
project type and project characteristics to determine the program classification scheme.
The tailoring algorithm is determined by the program classification, dominant program
factors, and weighting criteria. The enclosed Excel® spreadsheet entitled “Program
Classification” illustrates the program classification scheme. The enclosed Excel®
spreadsheet entitled “Acquisition Phase vs. Program Activities” provides examples of
opportunities for tailoring program activities based upon the life cycle phase of the
program.
Project
Project
Type
Type
Project
Project
Characteristics
Characteristics
Program
Program
Classification
Classification
Tailoring
Tailoring
Algorithm
Algorithm
OSP
OSP
Dominant
Dominant
Factors
Factors
Tailored
TailoredOSP
OSP
With
With
Recommended
Recommended
Program
Program
Function
Function
Tasks
Tasks
Weighting
Weighting
Criteria
Criteria
Figure 2 Tailoring Process Diagram
SMU SE identified the project type by the phase of the project life cycle in which it
resides. These types include the following:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Research
Concept Refinement
Technology Development
System Redesign
System Demonstration and Test
Production & Deployment
Operations & Support
Retirement
Project characteristics used to determine tailoring include:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Type of Contract (Cost Plus, Fixed Price)
Sole Source/Competitive
Project or Contract Duration
Program Budget
Product Type
9
6. Number of Systems
7. Customer
8. Measure of Priority
The program classification scheme will be based upon the project type and project
characteristics. Previous LMMFC programs may be used as case studies. LMMFC will
determine the dominant factors for each program/project. The dominant factors may
include cost/budget, schedule, available talent/staffing, and risk assessment. A weighting
criteria will be developed based upon the desired program objectives such as future
business considerations, schedule versus cost trade-offs, and available personnel. The
weighting criteria will include a correlation of independent and dependent factors such as
contract type and customer, program type and number of systems, and program budget
and duration, just to name a few.
The tailoring algorithm, to be developed will use the LMMFC Organizational Standard
Process (OSP) as the starting point for tailoring. Program classification, dominant
factors, and weighting criteria will be factors used in the algorithm for tailoring the OSP
for a specific program/project. The goal of the resulting tailored OSP is to meet the
objectives of the enterprise.
4.3.2 Additional CMMI Related Research
During the performance of Task 2 addition information was obtained which was deemed
pertinent to CMMI Level 5 requirements. The first of these is the Information
Technology Infrastructure Library (ITIL) and General Motors cycle time improvement as
explained in the following paragraphs.
4.3.2.1 Information Technology Infrastructure Library (ITIL)
ITIL® (the IT Infrastructure Library) is the most widely accepted approach to IT service
management in the world. ITIL provides a cohesive set of best practice, drawn from the
public and private sectors internationally. A comprehensive qualifications scheme,
accredited training organizations, and implementation and assessment tools support it.
The best practice processes promoted in ITIL support, and supported by, the British
Standards Institution's standard for IT service Management (BS15000).
About ITIL
•
•
ITIL is the only consistent and comprehensive documentation of best practice for
IT Service Management. Used by many hundreds of organizations around the
world, a whole ITIL philosophy has grown up around the guidance contained
within the ITIL books and the supporting professional qualification scheme.
ITIL consists of a series of books giving guidance on the provision of quality IT
services, and on the accommodation and environmental facilities needed to
support IT. ITIL was developed in recognition of organizations' growing
dependency on IT and embodies best practices for IT Service Management.
10
•
•
The ethos behind the development of ITIL is the recognition that organizations
are becoming increasingly dependent on IT in order to satisfy their corporate aims
and meet their business needs. This leads to an increased requirement for high
quality IT services.
ITIL provides the foundation for quality IT Service Management. The widespread
adoption of the ITIL guidance has encouraged organizations worldwide, both
commercial and non-proprietary, to develop supporting products as part of a
shared 'ITIL Philosophy'.
What is ITIL?
•
•
•
•
ITIL is best practice in IT Service Management, developed by OGC and
supported by publications, qualifications and an international user group.
ITIL intent is to assist organizations to develop a framework for IT Service
Management. Worldwide,
ITIL is the most widely used best practice for IT Service Management.
The Information Technology Infrastructure Library (ITIL) is a set of rules for how
to deliver IT services more efficiently by improving management processes across
IT departments that support networks, applications, databases and systems.
Developed in 1992 and maintained by the U.K.'s Office of Government
Commerce, ITIL originally served as a set of standards that service providers had
to follow to deliver IT services to the British government. After its inception,
public companies realized the benefits and implemented parts of ITIL in their
internal IT departments.
Who is ITIL for?
•
•
ITIL is aimed toward:
– IT service providers
– CIOs
It will also inform:
– Business managers
– Customers & end-users involved in building good relationships with their
IT service providers
What are the benefits of using ITIL?
•
ITIL provides a systematic and professional approach to the management of IT
service provision. Adopting its guidance can provide such benefits as:
– reduced costs
– improved IT services through the use of proven best practice processes
– improved customer satisfaction through a more professional approach to
service delivery
– available standards and guidance
– improved productivity
– improved use of skills and experience
11
ITIL Users
•
•
Proctor & Gamble representatives told about 1,000 attendees at the International
IT Service Management Summit in Boston last week that the global company has
saved about $500 million across multiple departments since beginning to
streamline processes with ITIL four years ago.
IT managers with tight budgets and growing demands might want to check out a
set of best practices that have enterprises such as Proctor & Gamble and the U.S.
Navy talking about its promise to cut costs and optimize services.
4.3.2.2 General Motors Cycle-Time Improvements
Obtained through contacts at General Motors, information is included regarding the
cycle-time improvements achieved though increasing standardized assemblies granularity
and centralized infrastructure.
Information during a meeting with C. Triplett, global officer for manufacturing and
quality at GM, it was learned that historically, new auto models were subject to a total redesign and re-use of sub-assemblies was minimal (unlike Toyota). Two key changes
resulted in dramatic improvements in cycle-time.
1.
2.
4.4
Increase Standards Granularity
• Instead of standardizing and re-using components
• Design and standardize larger assemblies
• Increase reuse of those assemblies that had been through rigorous
process
• Results:
– Provisioning: from 4 months → 3 weeks
– Utilization (reuse): 15% → 30%
Centralize Infrastructure
• Take infrastructure pieces away from application people and centralize
• Application engineers focus on their core competencies
– Not platform, architecture issues
• Result: big improvements in cycle time and utilization
Conclusions
SMU SE conducted extensive research of tailoring activities using the internet and other
resources including company private documents. The research findings are invaluable
for knowledge of tailoring activities and future study; however, they provide no specific
guidelines, algorithms, or processes for tailoring program functions based upon program
classifications and weighting. The results of the research include the types and
characteristics of programs, which lead to a classification scheme. By combining the
classification scheme, dominant factors and weighting criteria based upon desired
program objectives, an algorithm can be developed in the future for tailoring the LMMFC
Organizational Standard Processes.
12
5.0
Tasks 3 and 4
5.1
Objectives
The objective is for SMU SE to provide suggestions for further study and analysis.
5.2
Methodology
Systems engineering principles and practice provide a high-level viewpoint enabling
CMMI Level 5 (Optimizing) alternatives and activities. The purpose of Organizational
Innovation and Deployment is to select and deploy incremental and innovative
improvements that measurably improve the organization’s processes and technologies.
The improvements support the organization’s quality and process-performance objectives
as derived from the organization’s business objectives.
5.3
Results
SMU SE recommended to LMMFC two areas of study for further research to support
CMMI Level 5: Optimizing. Since process optimization requires quantitative modeling,
the recommended research focuses on the development of models for designing and
customizing organizational processes: a Requirements-Based Cost Modeling Process and
a Program Architecture Development Process.
5.3.1 Requirements-Based Cost Modeling Process
A federal Small Business Innovative Research initiative called for proposals as follows,
but made no award. This research directly addresses one of the three fundamental
process-design metrics: cost, schedule, and performance.
The ability to collect operation and maintenance cost data across the life of a weapon
system or other military product will also provide far greater visibility into total cost of
ownership and other measures of life-cycle cost. This will enable the user community to
identify quickly major areas of operations and support expense that can be modeled and
analyzed for potential improvement, allowing upgrade and replacement decisions to be
made with confidence that the savings promised will be the savings delivered.
The model-based approach to product and process cost modeling, leading to enterprise
wide cost management, is the proper solution path. Although most manufacturers rely
heavily on modeling applications (i.e., spreadsheets or discrete financial models) to
develop cost estimates, companies must begin to use integrated model-based systems.
These systems will enable all the components of the enterprise to communicate the
critical information needed to understand cost factors and impacts in a collaborative, realtime fashion to support business decisions.
The objective of this project is to develop an open framework for a requirements-based
cost modeling system suitable for application to complex product families. This
13
framework will include mechanisms for associating requirements to solution options and
cost data sources, including material costs, labor costs, and process costs in the design,
development, production, and operations phases of the life cycle. The framework will
identify the components for use in the system, including existing assets such as
taxonomies, feature definitions, and cost models. Innovative aspects of the system design
shall be demonstrated in a series of selected LMMFC use cases.
5.3.2 Program Architecture Development Process
There is a need for the corporation architecture to be adapted and molded to program
architectures for different program types. The program architecture is adaptable to the
rapidly changing global business environment. In response to this need the architecture
provides a framework that is responsive to the customer’s requirements. A systemsengineering approach provides forward-looking high-level principles and practices to
guide the development of program architectures. One drawback to this approach is that it
is less reliant on previously acquired program data for analysis and outcome. Figure 3
shows a conceptual diagram of the flow-down of corporation architecture to the program
architecture.
Corporation Architecture
Goals
Mission Statement
Organization & Personnel
Infrastructure
Flow down to Program with Tailoring
- Type of Program
Program N
Family of Programs
Program N
Program Architecture
Program Mission Statement
Organization & Personnel
Infrastructure
Program A
Program Architecture
Program Mission Statement
Organization & Personnel
Infrastructure
Figure 3 Program Architecture Concept
5.4
Conclusions
SMU SE has provided for further study and analysis. The culmination of this task shall
be a formal acknowledgment by LMMFC of SMU intentions and plans.
6.0
Summary
The first phase for collaboration of LMMFC and SMU SE is complete. The provided
strategies and recommendations assist LMMFC in performing the requirements for
Capability Maturity Model, Integrated™ (CMMI) Level 5.
14
The SMU Research Team includes the following members:
Dr. Jerrell Stracener
Director of the Systems Engineering Program
Scholar in Residence
Dr. Stephen Szygenda, P.E. Cecil B. Green Chair in Engineering
Previous Dean of the School of Engineering
Professor
Dr. Richard Barr
Chair of the Engineering Management, Information
and Systems Department
Associate Professor
Dr. Mitch Thornton
Associate Professor
Dr. George Chollar, P.E.
President, Statistical Design Institute, LLC
Adjunct Professor
Dr. Susan Vandiver, P.E.
Research Assistant
15