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