Osterkamp jeff
- 1. NASA PM Challenge 2007 Corporate Archetype Shifts: Implementing a Life Cycle and Gated Milestone Process Jeff Osterkamp Vice President, Program Management Office Ball Aerospace & Technologies Corp.
- 2. Outline Company Background The Life Cycle and Gated Milestone (LCGM) Vision The LCGM Concept Implementation of the LCGM Effective Practices and Lessons Learned Current Status Summary and Conclusions Page_2
- 3. Ball Aerospace & Technologies Corp. Celebrating 50 years in Aerospace Wide Range of Capabilities ─ Full space missions, spacecraft, payloads, subsystems and components Four Strategic Business Units ─ Serving Defense, Civil, and Commercial Aerospace Markets Demographics ─ Over 600 years of collective Program Management experience ─ 70+ Program Managers, many with over 20 years of experience ─ 2,989 employees with an average tenure of 9 years and average age of 45 ─ 240 active programs generating $700M/yr in sales Culture ─ Highly innovative, creative, and entrepreneurial Page_3
- 4. Diverse Program & Product Environments Commercial Spacecraft & Payloads Civil Spacecraft & Payloads Space Tactical Components Defense Systems, Components Spacecraft & Payloads Page_4
- 5. Life Cycle Gated Milestone (LCGM) Vision A new archetype aimed at improving program planning, execution, and control. Construct and implement a LCGM process and tool to identify and align the products and processes required for pursuit and execution of programs Page_5
- 6. LCGM - Implementation Objectives Provide Mapping of End-to-End Program Processes Clarify Process Interaction Improve Program Planning and Reduce Execution Risk Address Growth Challenges by Improving Execution Performance and Consistency Allow for Analysis of Waste and Streamlining Opportunities Show how Process Owners can Enhance the Quality of Their Products Page_6
- 7. LCGM - Implementation Concerns & Strategies Address the Shift from Informal to Formal Process within a Entrepreneurial Culture Address the Perceived Shift of Control Away from the Program Manager Provide a Standardized but Flexible Tool for Use Across Varied Program Environments Provide a Tool that Satisfies the Various Micro-Cultures in the Corporation Show Connection of Phased Activities Across Organizational Boundaries Develop a Communications Tool that Emphasizes Common Vernacular Page_7
- 8. LCGM Conceptual Model Phased Product Development with Gated Review and Control Periods New Business Planning Implementation Phases Opportunity Pursuit Proposal Planning Requirements Design Fabrication Verification Support Closeout Products/activities Products/ for each gate are activities Gate yes Continue to Products Products next phase chosen specific to are Acceptable? of program. program needs. completed. no Control Gates Page_8
- 9. Anatomy of the LCGM LCGM Profile defines required Categorized activity, time- time-phased products and phased across the lifecycle processes based on program environment Product list tailored to fit specific program profile Control Gates used to assess readiness to Link to process, tool, advance template, and best-practice example Page_9
- 10. Applied Tactics for Implementation Communicate Vision and Objectives ─ Executive management ─ Business units ─ Functional support organizations Establish a Collaborative Working Group ─ Representation from executive management, business units, and functional support organizations ─ Weekly meetings to determine types of programs, requirements flows, maturity levels and other specifics Create a Graphical Model of the Life Cycle and Gate Flows Link to Quality Business System and Align with Other Processes Create a Web Tool for Easy Access and Use Pilot the Process Through Sample Programs Introduce, Train, and Communicate Page_10
- 11. Best Practices / Lessons Learned Allow Sufficient Time for Development ─ Obtain cross-functional corporate support ─ Get stakeholder buy-in (include users in the development process) ─ Provide supporting tools and documents with the process ─ Provide additional instructions and a dedicated resource for questions ─ Clearly define and enforce criteria for gate entry and exit ─ Avoid “polishing the apple”; plan to collect feedback and evolve it Communicate Expectations as Clearly as Possible ─ Ensure vision and need are understood (include program managers) ─ Communicate the expected “maturity” to users, prior to release ─ Establish and publish a schedule of required activities ─ Establish documentation requirements, and approval authority early Page_11
- 12. Best Practices / Lessons Learned Build in Flexibility ─ Provide tailored profiles to suit various program environments ─ Allow for scalability within the LCGM as well as within the required product and process activities to suit the company’s size and types of programs ─ Have a process, template, and example for each product within the LCGM; make them easily accessible to the users Create an Implementation and Change Plan ─ Phase releases by program risk environment and maturity level ─ Identify “change-agents” and champions, and pilot through sample programs ─ Establish an awareness program and training schedule ─ Facilitate way to acquire feedback (i.e. feedback forums, web site, etc.) ─ Define change authority and configuration control methods Consider Timing ─ Establish a sense of urgency ─ Release with other collaborative activities (i.e. new program management office) ─ Avoid introducing too much process…too fast Page_12
- 13. Current Status Use of the LCGM Process and Tool is Becoming Institutionalized ─ Recognized as a useful tool by program managers ─ Supports programs from new business to closeout ─ Well received by customers ─ Improvements continue ─ Communication and training continues Page_13
- 14. Summary and Conclusions Analysis of the End-to-End Program Lifecycle is a Great Exercise for any Company ─ Aids in effective planning by clearly identifying required products / processes ─ Highlights the lack of maturity and standardization in certain areas Integrating the Analysis with Tools and Examples Provides a Great Resource for Program Managers ─ Build in flexibility aligned with program demographics ─ Balance the functional process owners’ desire for quality and operational end users’ need for streamlined processes Match Implementation Methodology with Corporate Culture ─ Get early buy in from stakeholders and engage corporate “champions” ─ The working team must best reflect the company’s structure and cross-discipline interests ─ You most likely cannot over-communicate the Vision, Implementation Plan, or Application Instruction when introducing it into an entrepreneurial culture Page_14
- 15. Questions Page_15